Sporting Advantage/Disadvantage

A couple weeks ago in class we covered a story about a female runner that had to under go testing to see if she was a man or not. I want to discuss my opinion on the matter. Whenever something seemingly unheard of happens in sports there is always someone there to question it. Numerous athletes have undergone drug tests and other forms of testing after breaking records or performing miraculous feats. We are always double checking to make sure that there aren't any unfair advantages besides those gained naturally. In the case with the female runner, she had what is deemed as a male physique and beat her opponents by a considerable margin. In normal circumstance I am sure she would have been tested for drugs, but in this case they also tested to see if she was a man based on her appearance. When people hear this part they either despise the idea or agree with it. For me, I am somewhere in the middle. As of this time there is a noticeable difference in the performance of men in sports vs. the performance of women. The two genders do not play on the same level, because it would be seen as unfair. Now if the female runner had performed in such a way that she was on the same level as a men's league then she should have been moved up to that level, regardless of her tested gender. However if tests had shown her to be partly male, this would have to be taken into account and her moving up wouldn't be as big of a first step for women. In the actual situation though, she hadn't performed to that level, and hadn't even beaten the record. In this situation I believe that no testing would be necessary besides the drug test. Any male DNA found would've shown that it doesn't really effect the performance of athletes.