From September, World Athletics will introduce a new barrier for elite female athletes: mandatory genetic testing.
Under the latest regulations, women must now prove the absence of the Y chromosome to be eligible for international world-ranking female competitions.
While presented as a matter of fairness, these rules reveal a disturbing, growing trend around the world. One that reduces womanhood to a narrow set of biological traits; policing bodies and eroding rights.
World Athletics’ new rules, explained
From 1 September 2025, World Athletics will require athletes to pass a one-time test for the SRY gene, typically found on the Y chromosome, to compete in the female category for world-ranking events.
This follows World Athletics’ 2023 decision to ban trans women who’ve undergone male puberty and impose strict testosterone suppression rules on athletes with differences in sex development (DSD).
World Boxing introduced similar mandatory sex testing in May 2025, resulting in Algerian Olympic boxer Imane Khelif being barred from competition until she undergoes the test.
Who gets targeted? Not men.
These tests target women, but more acutely women with DSD and trans women whose bodies do not conform to rigid definitions of sex.
There is no equivalent genetic policing of male athletes. No testing for testosterone ranges or chromosomal composition in male athletes. If a male naturally has high testosterone, he is celebrated.
The system assumes male variations are “normal” while ignoring variation among women’s bodies. It means certain women must “prove” their identity, while men are automatically accepted.
Gender policing is a slippery slope
These regulations reflect a deeper discomfort with bodies that challenge traditional sex norms.
History shows that when institutions target the most marginalised, broader attacks on women’s rights and bodily autonomy often follow.
Legal scholars and medical professionals have highlighted how “sex verification” policies often extend state control over bodies, especially for women, queer people, and people of colour.
In the U.S., for example, right-wing lawmakers have increasingly bundled anti-trans bills with legislation restricting abortion, censoring sex education, and undermining broader bodily autonomy—revealing a coordinated effort to control and punish gender and sexual diversity.
What kind of womanhood is being protected?
This isn’t about fairness, it’s about enforcing a narrow ideal of womanhood: one that is white, cisgender, non-intersex, and compliant.
These tests don’t just exclude. They humiliate. They tell athletes that their performance, hard work, and identity don’t matter. Not unless they fit the mould of what a woman should be.
Khelif, Semenya, and others have faced invasive scrutiny, online abuse, and threats to their careers—not because they cheated, but because their bodies defy “easy classification”.
When sporting bodies enforce genetic definitions of womanhood, they set dangerous precedents for society at large.
These rules teach us that policing gender is acceptable, that medical privacy is conditional, and that equality is secondary to comfort. And as history shows, when rights are taken from the most marginalised, they rarely stop there.
So, even those who’ve never felt their identity questioned should take heed: when institutions decide who counts as a ‘real woman,’ no one is safe from scrutiny.
For the latest LGBTIQA+ Sister Girl and Brother Boy news, entertainment, community stories in Australia, visit qnews.com.au. Find us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and YouTube.