There are some incredibly ill informed posts on this thread which are many years behind the conclusions of the court of arbitration for sport. This isn't a 'jkr is a witch' thing.
Firstly yes, sex is binary and remains so even with DSDs. Only males can have certain DSD conditions and only females can have certain DSD conditions.
XY DSD conditions confere an unfair advantage in women's sports in most cases. Numerous sports have looked at the science on this and decided to ban these conditions from competitive women's sport in order to protect the sport. What was starting to happen was coaches had begun to actively seek out XY DSD males to compete in women's sport because there were obvious financial rewards to this. This was coming at the expense of women. Caster Semenya is the best known example because Caster took the case to the court of arbitration for sport and they ruled in favour of athletes banning in most situations. There are certain conditions under which DSD male athletes can compete but there hasn't been a takeaway up of this because quite frankly it's not an easy win anymore.
In the case of Olympic boxing the trans issue is relevant not because these two boxers are trans but because of how the IOC chooses to define eligibility as a woman.
The IOC decided that the criteria of eligibility as a woman is an F in your passport. Now this is particularly problematic because of the number of countries who allow XY males with no DSD condition to freely change their passport as they wish. This effectively opens up women's boxing to all males, without exception, provided they have changed their passport. In the UK this could include males who don't have a GRC and merely prepared to change their passport. There's no need to 'live as' anything.
This is problematic because of the specific safety issues in boxing because it's a contact sport which already has concerns about the impact to participants.
The science we have shows that male puberty means that the most elite women can't compete on an even playing field with even below average males because of the difference in strength and women's bodies can not take that without significant levels of harm. They are more at risk from a punch of the same strength as a man taking that same punch.
Hence why contact sports are separated by sex from puberty - for safety reasons.
These advantages are retained by XY DSD males in the vast majority of cases. Hence why it is an issue for these two boxers. It carries significant risk to females boxers to allow them in the same competition. This is well known.
The IOC put inclusion of DSD males AND trans identifying males ahead of the safety of women in boxing despite being fully aware of the known issues with male competing with women. They also know thanks to what happened in the 800m in Rio, that this pushes women out of women's sport.
In these cases we are aware that these are DSD males where it hasn't been fully publicly identified as what type of DSD they have, but there is certainly evidence that in both cases, they are not in the very very tiny group which does not have male puberty. The lack of transparency around this, and the fact that the IOC don't have a policy to filter out cases to protect women from harm IS the major issue here.
And yes JKR is right to talk about this and to state it's unacceptable to be putting identity before physical safety.
Further to that, it then becomes about the very existence of women's sport and how important women sport is viewed. If any male can change their passport, then any male can decide 'i want an Olympic medal' and it's open season on the sport. Women will be edged out at all levels and sport will become closed.
Women were not permitted to even compete at boxing in the Olympics for many many years. It's only a very recent addition. This was cited as being due to safety concerns. Women had to fight for the sport to be included. Nicola Adams has talked about this.
So for the IOC to hold out so long against women's boxing on the grounds that it was unsafe for women, to move to a position just a few years later, where safety in women's boxing is totally overlooked just shows the level of sexism at play here. Women are treated with total contempt.
Even the IOCs position in not wanting to 'return to the bad old days' of 'invasive' sex testing doesn't hold water. The last time female athletes were asked whether they wanted to retain the tests the overwhelming majority supported keeping them. They were ignored. Not only that but the argument about being invasive doesn't hold water because of the number of other much more invasive tests that go on to prevent doping (and should pick up on abnormal testosterone results anyway).
In boxing we have this bizarre situation which I don't quite understand - either there's no dope testing going on (which risks unfairness, risk of harm to innocent opponents and risk of harm to those doping) or in effect, women who doped can be banned for having lower testosterone results than XY males who would not be banned. In other sports which require lowering of testosterone for participation this level is much higher than women can be banned for and occurs even for medical conditions.
In Khelif's case their own coach has talked about lowering testosterone levels. That's inconsistent with fairness in sport and having a level of testosterone which is permitted in all other sports for women. Science has demonstrated that even with lowered testosterone, there would still be an unfair competitive advantages and raised safety issues. That's a problem. Boxing is particularly sensitive to these issues.
The lack of transparency is incredibly concerning. And the future of women in boxing is at stake. There is significant prize money available to DSD athletes and their coaching a staff, if it remains unaddressed. This will also be available to trans competitors.
But time and again, we see on these threads arguments that sex isn't binary (it is), sex is complicated (it may be that it is but it's still definable and there's still science on outlying cases), the outlying cases that are used to argue the point are a tiny minority of DSD cases and the two in question almost certainly don't have those conditions, there is still a total lack of transparency in terms of what's going on and this puts women's sport at risk, there is a total lack of regard for women's safety because the focus is on identity and this is a priority issue which should NEVER happen in ANY sport, women are being silenced when asking questions and are being smeared as bigots rather than being seen as asking pretty basic things about safety, it leaves the door open to ALL males even without DSDs, there's a total abandonment of why women's sport was ever created, it neglects to address rulings in other sports by the court of arbitration for sport which identified real issues with DSDs XY males.
Sex remains important even in DSD cases which are not spotted at birth. DSDs present at some point - they don't remain invisible. They remain taboo but not invisible. And that's important to sport.
There's every accusation possible being leveled at women pointing this out. Including law suits. Women would have a very real case to take the IOC to court over lack of safety though too.
Everything is effectively weighed AGAINST women in this dynamic in favour of men and XY DSDs despite what is known and recognised by science.
But we have a hoard of virtue signalling knowledge it all's on MN who repeatedly demonstrate their lack of knowledge but want to bash women who have made the effort to understand the problems here. And not just bash. Absolutely destroy their careers.
It's funny Sharon Davies competed against women doping so knows a few things on the subject. Martinia Navratilova had a trans coach who she remains friends with so knows a few things on the subject. Nicola Adams was an olympic boxer so knows a few things on the subject. However the way they've been cast aside and treated is inexcusable.
This is a Mens Rights Movement hell bent on destroying women's sport by any means.