Posts by dyan campbell
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
The IAAF will release it's findings to Semenya first and in November, until such time all reports are unsubstantiated leaks.
I stand corrected - my apoolgies. The news reports I (mis) heard on the radio sounded like they had test results that classified her as hermaphrodite.
Moreover the IAAF has policies on intersex athletes and she may have one of the many conditions allowable
None of those would confer anything like the (athletic) advantage of going through puberty with typically male levels of androgens, so I see why they would be allowed.
Intersex people are beginning to reject the idea that they need to be assigned a gender, and the wider acceptance of this is a good thing in society.
However, if someone who is intersex and has gone through puberty with those very high (ie typically male) levels of androgen that give a person physically male muscle:fat composition (to single out only one thing) then I can't see how they can fairly compete against women in sport.
-
__But on the subject of Caster Semenya - there is really no way she can compete against women - as she is not a woman. And she doesn't have a hormone imbalance or any kind of disorder - she is not female.__.
Whoa, where did that info come from?
The International Association of Athletics Federations (IAAF) have (according to the news reports) found her to be intersex.
I'm not familiar with the IAAF or how they operate - are they likely to have falsified test results for some reason?
-
Pitching is about deceiving the batter into swinging for a ball at the wrong time or place, and increased muscle mass isn't going to help that.
Quite the contrary in fact - in both pitching and batting the weight and the strength of the player is enormously important. You have to be both heavy and strong to throw/hit something very fast/hard. A fastball can only be thrown by someone with big heavy bones and strong muscles.
The curve ball is a weird interplay between velocity, lateral deviation and drag: speed (ie strength and weight on the part of the pitcher) is definitely required for the spin to work properly. Inertia and all that. With a curveball it also helps to be a southpaw, assuming the batter is right- handed.
Here's a fascinating article on the physics of pitching -
But on the subject of Caster Semenya - there is really no way she can compete against women - as she is not a woman. And she doesn't have a hormone imbalance or any kind of disorder - she is not female, and yes that different physiology confers much more than a just a genetic advantage.
She seems hearteningly comfortable with herself - the controversy this has stirred up would be hard to take.
-
Dyan and Sam are both causing snerkfests over here. Heh.
Why thank you kindly Danielle. I pride myself in coming from the smart alec capital of the world (Vancouver).
To give Morgan his dueI don't need to be reminded that my wallet is tick tick ticking away the years, you know. I'm already entirely too aware that it's drying up and shrivelling.
MIND YOUR OWN FUCKING BUSINESS. IT'S MY GODS DAMNED WALLET TO DO WITH AS I PLEASE.he had me snerking wildly at this response.
Robyn, I do agree Morgan's a good guy, but gee it's fun to beat him up.
-
MIND YOUR OWN FUCKING BUSINESS. IT'S MY GODS DAMNED WALLET TO DO WITH AS I PLEASE.
Heh, exactly Morgan, we ovaried ones - whatever stage of decrepitude they're in - most heartily understand and agree.
-
As a 41 year old single man I think I can hear a door slamming in the distance.
Well, I wouldn't worry too much - there are many, many examples of older (some very old) men fathering perfectly healthy children that do not go on to have descendants with x-linked recessive genes. Chances are still on the side of healthy offspring and descendants, and medicine offers plenty of help (eg chorionic villus sampling) for the immediate generation at least.
The point I was trying to make is what geneticist Steve Jones said about "the ancient and universal tendency to blame women for the corruption associated with sex."
When men voice their opinions about when women should reproduce - or how females are always the commodity when sex as a commercial agreement - it's only fair these misconceptions are corrected.
What are the biological risks associated with having children at a later age compared to the sociological risks of having children before you're mature/financially stable enough to adequately care for them?
Now this is relevant, and while I don't have any stats to support me, I would hazard a guess that the emotional and financial stability are much, much more important than parental age when it comes to raising happy, healthy children.
Though to be fair, we should remember when we talk of "maturity and financial stability" we all know we mean shallow, unnatural men. Why else would they turn their backs on their masculine imperatives and waste their prime child fathering years?
We must remember that it's BIOLOGY and SCIENCE, and it should be recognised as helpful when women remind you that you risk both the health of your unborn children and the genes of your descendants when you choose to delay fatherhood.
-
Katie - your evolutionary biology bingo card is wonderful, thank you for that.
The evolutionary reason for breast/nipple fixation is pretty obvious though. Which mothers are best prepared for breastfeeding and least likely to get mastitis? Those who have had a lot of breast/nipple attention from their partners.
-
Danielle, congrats. you will be 20 years younger than my mother in law was when she had her last child.
Whoops, I mean 10 years younger. I'd like to plead typo, but to be honest it's really poor math skills.
-
Danielle. Despite how old you may occasionally feel, 34 ain't that old to be a babyz momma
That's for sure!
Danielle, congrats. you will be 20 years younger than my mother in law was when she had her last child. Both mother and child healthy, complication free.
She did, however miscarry another pregnancy at 49.
Isn't it strange how when we established that aged paternity posed a far greater risk to health of subsequent generations than aged maternity, the conversation abruptly changed to mountain buggies? Doesn't anyone want to talk biological clocks anymore?
-
In general, promoting outbreeding is much better for all involved. Having kids over 40 repeatedly over the generations does not multiply the risk, so it's not really in the same basket.
Thank you Lucy. Absolutely correct. If you quantify risk, advanced paternal age carries much greater risk to the general population than advanced maternal age because of x-linked recessive diseases. An old mother won't result in generations of disease afflicting thousands of descendants - but an old father might.
To quote geneticist Steve Jones. describing the study which discovered exactly how and where DNA mutates:
"There is an ancient and universal tendency to blame women for the corruption associated with sex, but the prejudice against females was quite unfounded: most of the mutations in working genes as well as the fingerprints of DNA were overwhelmingly a male affair. Old men like Edward, Duke of Kent [Queen Victoria's father, age 51 at the time of her conception] are the most dangerous partners of all. From the Book of Genesis to the present day, the guilt for polluting the bloodlines was wrongly assigned."
The convention to only refer to females whether talking of either reproduction or prostitution is deeply offensive because it is inaccurate.