The IOC is not backing down ahead of LA 2028. To protect fairness and safety in women’s events, it has announced a new rule: only athletes confirmed as biological females will be eligible to compete in female-category events, effectively barring transgender women from participating. While the decision has sparked criticism worldwide, IOC President Kirsty Coventry, in her first major move since taking office last June, defended the controversial policy as necessary to ensure fair competition.

“This is a sensitive issue, but it would not be fair for biological males to compete in the female category,” Coventry said in a video message. “At the Olympic Games, even the smallest margins can be the difference between victory and defeat, so it’s absolutely clear that it would not be fair. As a former athlete, I passionately believe in the rights of all Olympians to take part in fair competition. The policy that we have announced is based on science and has been led by medical experts.”

Well, this new rule introduces a one-time genetic test to detect the SRY gene, which is linked to male biology. The test will be done via a saliva sample, cheek swab, or blood sample, and each athlete will only need to be screened once. So, athletes who test positive will be barred from women’s events but may compete in male, mixed, or open categories.

But at the same time, Coventry emphasized that athlete dignity and support are central.

“Every athlete must be treated with dignity and respect, and athletes will need to be screened only once in their lifetime. There must be clear education around the process and counselling available, alongside expert medical advice,” she said.

Nonetheless, the announcement is a change of direction for the IOC, which had fought mandatory sex testing. In recent years, the IOC has focused on inclusion and largely left eligibility decisions to individual sports federations, in line with its 2021 framework on Fairness, Inclusion, and Non-Discrimination, which promoted transgender participation and avoided imposing universal testing requirements, instead emphasizing health, autonomy, and evidence-based decisions.

Interestingly, U.S. President Donald Trump has publicly opposed transgender participation in female events, adding political weight to the controversy. With this policy, the IOC is making its stance unmistakably clear: eligibility for female category events at LA 2028, both individual and team competitions, will be strictly limited to biological females. But the decision has ignited a heated global debate.

Experts slam IOC’s policy as discriminatory

The new policy of the IOC has elicited strong condemnation from human rights groups and athletes’ advocacy groups, who allege that the new policy would negatively impact the dignity and welfare of athletes. The National Women’s Law Center stated that the rule creates confusion, stigmatization, and invasive inquiries of women.

“Vague and medically unnecessary eligibility rules do not protect women; they expose athletes to humiliating questioning, coerced disclosures of private medical information, and even traumatizing physical examinations to ‘prove’ their womanhood.”

Dsdfamilies, which is a charity that helps intersex athletes, also objected to the policy affecting DSD athletes:

“Fairness in competition is important, but eligibility rules must also be proportionate and aligned with contemporary standards of DSD care rather than creating foreseeable and avoidable harm to this vulnerable minority group.”

But criticism is not limited to NGOs only.

The UN human rights office, UN Women, the World, and the American Medical Association, a group of UN experts, have several times termed the process as discriminatory, unethical, and extremely harmful, and warned that obligatory sex testing can be detrimental to athletes both physically and psychologically.

Even academic commentators have weighed in. Jon Pike, who is an English scholar in the philosophy of sport, described one letter opposing the policy as “laughable, desperate, and silly,” noting that the working group’s focus is on excluding biological males from women’s events.

“Nothing is fixed, but I’m optimistic because of the pessimism of this group,” he added.

Taken together, these voices show the ethical, legal, and personal challenges posed by the IOC’s decision.