The Indelicate Art of Gender Testing

An athlete must either compete as a man or a woman. This seems obvious, but for most of us, so is our sex. A small minority of people are not so blessed. In their case, the genetic and physiological ingredients that determine what makes a person “male” or “female” are all mixed up.

This is the situation that Indian sprinter Santhi Soundarajan now finds herself in. In December, after winning a silver medal in the women’s 800 meters at the Asian Games in Doha, Qatar, she failed a gender test. In the process she lost her medal, and probably her career. Sure, sprinters’ bodies – with zero body fat, no breasts and hips slimmer than a prepubescent boy’s – are hard to call classically womanly, but is Soundarajan really a man? And how do we tell? Even with a whole team of specialists, it is, unfortunately, not so obvious.

Gender testing at official sports events began in the 1960s, when officials became concerned that some of the more beefy female athletes were not as they seemed to be. In those early days, parading naked in front of a panel of gynecologists was the only way to pass the test. Then DNA testing came along, and gender identification was done by looking at the shapes of the sex chromosomes. But even this proved insufficient, as a person could have the XY chromosome combo (male), and yet develop into a female due to a few defective genes. This was the misfortune suffered by Polish sprinter Ewa Klobukowska, who in 1966 was in possession of sufficiently female genitalia to pass the gynecological exam, but then one year later was found to have one chromosome too many to be declared truly female. Her XXY condition gave her no athletic advantage, yet she was still forced to retire and return her medals.

Today’s testers rely on DNA samples from athletes for a more accurate and less invasive answer. The most widely accepted test uses the polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to help look for a gene called “sex-determining region Y” (SRY). This gene is found on the short arm of the Y chromosome, and is responsible for triggering the cascade of reactions that leads to the development of the testes, which in turn secrete the hormones that make men manly.

However, an individual may still fall afoul of even that checkpoint. A faulty version of the SRY gene will cause such a person to test as a genetic male and yet develop as a physiological female. Individuals can also suffer from Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (AIS), where they possess the SRY gene, but not the receptors for the male hormones they’re producing. In the end you get the same thing: genetics say man, body says woman.

It is possible, even likely, that individuals are unaware of these conditions – as they have practically no symptoms, including a zero advantage in a sporting arena of women. Spanish hurdler Maria Jose Martinez Patino failed a gender test in 1985. She was later found to have AIS and was subsequently reinstated.

Compulsory testing was discontinued by the International Olympic Committee in 1999 precisely because of these inconclusive, expensive, insensitive and complicating testing procedures. These days, only a few sporting bodies, including the Olympic Council of Asia, still do it. Even then, gender testing is not a requirement for entry; it’s only used to settle complaints. In Soundarajan’s case, the complaint was made not by a competitor but by an official. Athletes have to supply a urine sample under official scrutiny, to ensure that no switching takes place. It was here that an official registered “suspicions.”

Neither the Olympic Council of Asia nor the Athletics Federation of India have released any kind of official declaration about what sort of test Soundarajan failed. One Associated Press report quotes an anonymous Indian athletics official as saying the culprits were “abnormal chromosomes” and having more Y chromosomes than allowed. Soundarajan has passed gender tests before, so it seems likely that she has some sort of gender ambiguity.

From a practical perspective, her silver-medal-winning time of 2:03.16 would not have placed her anywhere near the leaderboard for the men’s 800 meters, where the bronze medal winner’s time was 1:47.43. Whether this is proof of her femininity or merely motive to conceal her masculinity, we may never know. Until the appropriate tests have been applied to her case, we can only conclude that she has suffered a major miscarriage of sports justice.