Ask Onix
IOC announces strict eligibility rules for women's events
Starting with the 2028 Los Angeles Olympics, the International Olympic Committee will restrict the women's category to athletes who are biologically female, effectively barring transgender women and most athletes with differences in sexual development (DSD) who have undergone male puberty.
Genetic testing to determine eligibility
The IOC will use a one-time genetic screening to detect the SRY gene, which triggers male characteristics. Athletes who test negative for the gene will be permanently eligible for the female category. The test, conducted via saliva, cheek swab, or blood sample, is described by the IOC as minimally intrusive.
Athletes who fail the test may still compete in male, mixed, or open categories, provided they meet other eligibility criteria.
Policy shift follows years of debate
Until now, the IOC allowed individual sports federations to set their own rules for sex eligibility. While some sports, such as athletics and swimming, had already implemented bans on transgender women and DSD athletes, others permitted participation if testosterone levels were lowered.
The new policy aligns with recent decisions by World Athletics and World Aquatics, which have excluded athletes who experienced male puberty from women's competitions, citing fairness and safety concerns.
Scientific and ethical concerns
The IOC stated that its working group reviewed scientific evidence over the past 18 months, concluding that male biology provides a performance advantage in sports requiring strength, power, or endurance. The committee also consulted over 1,100 athletes and experts, reporting a strong consensus in favor of clear, science-based eligibility rules to protect the female category.
"At the Olympic Games, even the smallest margins can decide victory or defeat. It would not be fair-or, in some sports, safe-for biological males to compete in the female category."
Kirsty Coventry, IOC President
Criticism and support for the decision
Supporters argue the genetic test is more humane than requiring athletes to suppress natural testosterone levels and avoids invasive media scrutiny. However, opponents call the approach outdated and invasive, warning of potential false positives and psychological harm. A group of academics recently described sex testing as a "harmful anachronism" that violates human rights.
The IOC last used SRY gene testing in the 1980s but abandoned it in the 1990s after false positives and concerns about penalizing natural biological variations.
Global reactions and legal challenges
The policy does not apply to grassroots or recreational sports, and test results will not be applied retroactively. Coventry emphasized the need for dignity and respect, stating athletes would undergo screening only once in their lifetime, with counseling and medical support available.
In recent years, several sports bodies, including the Football Association and England and Wales Cricket Board, have adopted similar bans following a UK Supreme Court ruling that defined women based on biological sex. Meanwhile, U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order this year barring transgender women from female categories, including the 2028 Olympics.
Trans rights advocates argue the bans infringe on human rights and prioritize exclusion over inclusion. Legal challenges to the IOC's new policy are anticipated.
Controversies at recent Games
The debate intensified after Algeria's Imane Khelif won gold in women's welterweight boxing at the 2024 Paris Olympics. Khelif had been disqualified from the 2023 World Championships for reportedly failing a gender eligibility test, though the IOC cleared her to compete in Paris. Similar scrutiny surrounded Taiwan's Lin Yu-ting, who was also banned by the International Boxing Association (IBA) but later reinstated after passing a sex test.
At the 2016 Rio Olympics, all three medalists in the women's 800 meters, including champion Caster Semenya, were DSD athletes. Semenya has since challenged World Athletics' testosterone regulations in court, calling them discriminatory.
