Regarding your contention Semenya "did cheat" because she and her trainers/handlers were allegedly aware of her IS condition, internal testes, etc., this is the crux of the issue- if rules are rules, then what are the applicable rules?
From the IAAF's own website-6. Conditions that should be allowed:http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/imported/36983.pdf.
(a) Those conditions that accord no advantage over other females:
- Androgen insensitivity syndrome (Complete or almost complete - previously called testicular feminization);
- Gonadal dysgenesis (gonads should be removed surgically to avoid malignancy);
- Turner’s syndrome.
(b) Those conditions that may accord some advantages but nevertheless acceptable:
- Congenital adrenal hyperplasia;
- Androgen producing tumors;
- Anovulatory androgen excess (polycystic ovary syndrome).
As I read the above, the *only* bit of wiggle room that might make the cheating accusation stick in Semenya's case is the part about "Complete or almost complete" AIS...it would all fall to the question of whether or not her AIS is complete enough...and the rules don't define that.
Besides that, there's this-
B.Current IAAF Policy
In 1992,the Medical Committee recommended and the Council adopted the current policy on gender veriﬁcation,which states:1.The general “health check ” is strongly recommended,but no longer required.http://www.iaaf.org/mm/Document/imported/42028.pdf
2.Visual examination of the genitalia during the delivery of a urine specimen in the women ’s doping control station is a sufficient method of determining whether the athlete is male or female.The risk of a male being discovered during the doping control procedure is sufficient deterrent to prevent males from attempting to compete as females.
Seems to me that she did everything according to IAAF rules, so I fail to understand why she is being demonized rather than those who wrote those rules...?
Credit and Kudos to Tina.