From what I gather, from the Nature article I keep posting on all the threads (but am on my phone so can’t access it to post) is that a campaign group successfully convinced the IOC in the late 90s to prioritise inclusion. Because of what they position was the human rights violation of these male athletes with DSDs suffering indignities during testing and the outcomes of that testing.
So in the late 90s they removed testing. 82% of female athletes wanted testing to remain.
Then in early 00s they allowed male people who surgically removed their testes to compete in female competition. Because once you allow one group of male people in, you must equally allow the other in or you are discriminating against transgender people.
Then in 2015, a campaign group including Ivy/Mckinnon and Harper, using Harper’s flawed study (see nequals8.com) convinces the IOC that it is unfair discrimination to exclude any male with a transgender identity describing themselves as a woman. The IOC changes the policy to allow them.
Then came the Rio trio in the female 800m and we start to see the testosterone suppression of the male people with DSDs come in. Semenya takes this to court in 2019. Appealed 2020. The evidence presented confirmed 5ARD and testosterone of 21 nmol/L.
2020 Tokyo games held in 2021 was the testosterone suppressed games. Hubbard, a late 40 something male in female event where next youngest was probably a decade and a half younger, shines light on the issue.
The IOC reacts by announcing a review. The new guidelines released Nov 2021 devolve responsibility for policy to each discipline’s international federation.
The announcement by Budgett from IOC was along the line of ‘we know it is unfair to include male people with pubertal advantage, but inclusion at all costs is our aim.’
That is where we are now.