There are numerous issues with your post here.
Firstly, a male person's punch power in general is nearly double that of the average female person. This will mean that even at elite level, a male person's punch is hugely more powerful than a female person's punch at the same weight. There is also different leverage point in the a male skeleton that gives advantage. There is also a significant skeletal mass advantage - which feeds into that punch power too.
There is also a stability advantage thanks to q-angles compared to male people vs female people. Also V02max advantages. There is also likely to be a height advantage.
Then, and this is key, female people have a higher propensity for being injured. And the injuries are likely to be much more serious against any male person.
For instance, it is now documented that female people have weaker necks, and much more delicate brain fibres. Meaning that punch with that male power, causes significantly great damage to a female head than any female punch.
Female bones are more prone to breaking. So that male punch is more likely to break face bones.
The harms are known and they are very well documented by now.
That is the purpose of comparing sexed category to sexed category.
At the moment, the line is whether a male person has physical advantage or not. The IBA has made very clear that these two athletes are male with physical advantage over female athletes.
It simply doesn't matter whether they win or lose or whether they are in a particular weight category. If you want information about this, just ask. there are numerous posters on this thread that would only be too happy to put up the evidence.