FAQ about the IOC Policy on the Protection of the Female (Women’s) Category in Olympic Sport

Updated on 17 April 2026

Following the publication of the IOC Policy on the Protection of the Female (Women’s) Category in Olympic Sport and Guiding Considerations for International Federations and Sports Governing Bodies, the media and the public have asked the IOC a number of questions. This Q&A provides the answers to the most frequently asked questions.

FAQ

    • The IOC’s new policy ensures that participation in the female category at IOC events, including the Olympic Games, is restricted to biological females.  
    • This is applicable for all sports – individual and team – from LA28 onwards and is not retroactive. 
    • Eligibility is determined scientifically, by screening for the SRY gene, typically found on the Y chromosome, which initiates male sex development. It is a once-in-a-lifetime test.
    • Without this gene, sex development proceeds along the female path. Hence, athletes who screen negative for the SRY gene will be eligible for the female category.  
    • There are only a few exceptions, based on rare specific conditions, which would allow athletes with an SRY gene to compete in the female category.

    • A decision was made to adopt the new policy because the prior approach was no longer aligned with the state of the science, the IOC’s goals for the female category, lessons learned and feedback from Olympic Movement constituents.

    • The IOC’s goals for the female category are:

      • Ensuring fairness and reducing safety risks (common to all categories)

      • Promoting equality, enhancing Olympic value and celebrating female athletes on the Olympic podium.

    • The feedback came from across the Olympic Movement, including International Federations (IFs) whose sports have been on the Olympic programme for a long time, as well as athletes from around the world.

    • The policy was adopted by the IOC Executive Board on 26 March 2026 and will be implemented for the first time at the LA28 Olympic Games. It is not retroactive.
    • The IOC considers that competition is fair when all competitors are alike with respect to the characteristics that define the category, e.g. that all competitors are the same age in an age category, the same weight in a weight category, or the same sex in a sex category.
    • Contact, collision and combat sports involve physical safety risks regardless of how athletes are classified.  
    • Sports governing bodies have a responsibility to manage safety risks through various measures, including separating athletes by sex.
    • Transgender athletes are not excluded from IOC events, including the Olympic Games. Like all other athletes, they are eligible to compete in the category that aligns with their biological sex.  
    • Transgender athletes who are biologically female – as per the scientific eligibility requirement – and who meet qualification standards may compete in the female category as long as they have not used testosterone or other androgens.  
    • Transgender athletes who are biologically male and who meet qualification standards may compete in the male category. 
    • Outside the Olympic Games or other IOC events, like all athletes who do not qualify for the Olympics, transgender athletes can participate in all other sporting events available to them.
    • Athletes with an XY-DSD are not excluded from IOC events, including the Olympic Games. Like all other athletes, they are eligible to compete in the category that aligns with their biological sex. 
    • Differences (or disorders) of sex development are genetic conditions that result in non-typical sex development.  
    • In the case of athletes with an XY-DSD, they are born with undescended testes/testicles and ambiguous or female-appearing genitals, but because they typically have testosterone levels in the male range, as they grow, they undergo male sex development. There are rare exceptions.
    • No athlete is excluded from IOC events, including the Olympic Games, if they meet qualification and eligibility criteria. 
    • Those who are biologically female and who meet the qualification standards are included in the female category. Transgender athletes who are biologically male and who meet the qualification standards are included in the male category.  
    • The IOC considers that competition is fair when all competitors are alike with respect to the characteristics that define the category, e.g. that all competitors are the same age in an age category, the same weight in a weight category, or the same sex in a sex category.
    • While we acknowledge the differences in certain aspects between groups of athletes such as gender identity, legal sex and upbringing, the policy applies SRY gene screening to all athletes who want to compete in the female category.
    • Transgender women and athletes with an XY-DSD have the same biological characteristics, namely: both have XY chromosomes, the SRY gene, testes and male-level testosterone, to which their bodies typically respond. These characteristics are responsible for male sex development and result in performance advantage.
    • The SRY gene is responsible for initiating male sex development and is a highly reliable marker of biological sex. 
    • SRY gene screening involves a once-in-a-lifetime, non-intrusive biological sample collection (e.g. a cheek swab) to detect the gene’s presence.
    • A cheek swab is an easy and unintrusive way to collect a biological sample. Most of us are familiar with cheek swabs from having taken a COVID test.

    • The discovery of the SRY gene was a very important scientific milestone. It taught the world what causes the human body to develop as male or female. A person with the SRY gene will almost always develop as male. A person without it will develop as female.

    • The SRY gene is highly accurate evidence of sex—more than 99 per cent of the time an athlete who screens negative will be female, and more than 99 per cent of the time an athlete who screens positive will be male. As a proof-of-eligibility requirement, this is an unusually strong one.

    • The SRY gene alone does not determine who can compete in IOC events. It is used as a screen, not to establish a medical diagnosis.  Further evaluation should be made available to athletes who screen positive to determine whether they have CAIS or another rare XY-DSD that precludes testosterone’s anabolic and/or performance-enhancing effects. If an athlete establishes this, they will be eligible for competition in the Female Category.

    • The IOC policy is based on science, and has been led by medical experts. At the Olympic Games, even the smallest margins can mean the difference between victory and defeat. So, it is absolutely clear that the female category must be reserved for biological females. In addition, in some sports it would also not be safe.

    • The policy has been developed through an athlete‑centred approach that prioritises athletes’ human dignity, physical and psychological health and well‑being, and safety. Their right to privacy and confidentiality should be respected.

    • Athletes may refuse to take the SRY screen but, without proving their eligibility, they will not be able to compete in the female category at IOC events, including the Olympic Games, from LA28 onwards.
    • Based on IF experience, in practice, genetic screening for sex does not create significant legal problems. It is legal in most countries, and athletes from the countries where it is not permitted can lawfully be tested elsewhere.
    • No. It is legal for athletes to be screened in countries where screening is legal. No country bars its citizens from being screened abroad.
    • National laws generally apply only in their national context. When a person goes to another country, the laws of that territory apply.
    • As part of its standard processes, including as described in the IOC Framework on Fairness, Inclusion and Non-discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity and Sex Variations, the IOC administration conducted a broad-based review of its approach to eligibility for the female category from September 2024 to March 2026. 
    • The review included consultations with leadership, experts in medical and sports ethics and international human rights law, and Olympic Movement constituents, including all Olympic IFs and athletes from around the world, including athletes who would be impacted by any policy development.
    • As part of the review, the IOC established a working group comprising independent experts, specifically to examine scientific, medical and legal developments since 2021. The working group members came from all five continents and included specialists in sports science, endocrinology, transgender medicine, sports medicine, women’s health, ethics and law. The group also included IF Chief Medical Officers representing individual and team sports. 
    • In November 2025, based on the learnings from the review, including from the working group, the IOC administration was tasked with drafting the Policy on the Protection of the Female (Women’s) Category in Olympic Sport and Guiding Considerations for International Federations and Sports Governing Bodies.
    • The IOC administration was responsible for the development and drafting of the policy. Confidentiality was often a necessary condition to obtain full consideration and information throughout the review. At this time, the IOC is not releasing the names of the many individuals who provided perspectives and expertise, including the members of the working group.
    • Based on a review of and developments in the scientific evidence, the IOC working group concluded that biological males have anatomical and physiological performance advantage over biological females in all sports and events that rely on strength, power and/or endurance. 
    • Males benefit from the anabolic and performance enhancing effects of 15 to 20 times more testosterone than females.  
    • Testosterone is the primary driver of the performance gap between elite male and female athletes. 
    • There is no evidence that testosterone suppression and gender-affirming hormone therapy eliminates overall male advantage in trained athletes.
    • The scientific evidence is continually growing and includes systematic reviews, longitudinal and cross-sectional cohort studies, case series (both published and available under seal) and mechanistic analyses.
    • Yes, there is an established performance gap before boys begin puberty. 
    • The gap in childhood is not nearly as big as the gap that exists after boys begin puberty, but it is athletically important, i.e. it is almost always more than the margin of victory. 
    • The result is that, in most sports and events, there are more boys than girls in the top 10 and top 100 performances. 
    • This is true even when females outnumber males.
    • There is no evidence that early transition affects the advantages males develop before the onset of male puberty.

    • The policy includes the possibility for an International Federation to request an exception if it can show that a sport or discipline does not depend on strength, power and/or endurance, that its women’s category exists for reasons unrelated to sex differences in anatomy and physiology, and that ignoring sex would not result in diminished opportunities for female athletes.

    • Some sports, e.g. equestrian, do not classify their athletes by sex.

    • The IOC did not consider a new third or open category. It is committed to the existing categories. 
    • Open categories should not be confused with mixed events, where male and female athletes compete together but in sex-designated spots, e.g. a mixed relay comprising two male athletes and two female athletes. If there is a fixed ratio of male and female athletes, the eligibility criteria for the female athletes needs to be met.
    • The IOC will work with its stakeholders to facilitate the implementation of this policy, taking into account the situation of the specific Sports Governing Body (SGB).
    • In principle, IFs and SGBs are responsible for enforcing eligibility rules in line with the IOC policy.
    • They may conduct athlete screening or delegate the responsibility to the relevant SGB (for instance, the national sports federation). 
    • The IOC retains oversight authority for ensuring compliance, and the NOCs are responsible for ensuring that the athletes entered for IOC events, including the Olympic Games, meet the IOC eligibility criteria.
    • As a matter of principle, private Sports Governing Bodies are free to determine eligibility rules for the competitions they organise, as they deem fit.
    • Such rules must serve legitimate purposes, in this case, protection of the female category and fair and safe competition, and should also be necessary and proportionate on balance given the affected interest.
    • Athletes from the few countries where it is prohibited, e.g. Norway and France, are legally able to be screened elsewhere.
    • Minors who hope to compete at elite level may decide to seek proof of eligibility early in their careers so that they can confirm under which category they fall for the entirety of their sporting career.
    • Where screening is lawful in general, most countries require that parents or legal guardians provide consent for medical screening of minors.
    • For the Youth Olympic Games, it will be mandatory from 2030 onwards.
    • We will not speculate on hypothetical situations.
    • It will be implemented by the IOC for the first time at the LA28 Olympic Games and will be part of the eligibility criteria which athletes have to meet when they are entered for the Games by their NOCs.
    • The policy is not retroactive and will be implemented only from LA28 onwards.
    • All athletes participating in the boxing tournament of the Paris 2024 Olympic Games complied with the competition’s eligibility and entry regulations, as well as all applicable medical regulations at the time.
    • There is no retroactive change of eligibility criteria.
    • The IOC’s approach to eligibility, for the female category in particular, has changed several times since 2000, to take into consideration the latest state of the science and scientific developments and the interests of the Olympic Movement and its constituents.
    • In extremely rare cases, an athlete who screens positive for the SRY gene may have Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome (CAIS) or another rare condition that precludes typical male sex development.  
    • SRY gene screening only determines whether or not the SRY gene is present.  It is not a test to establish a medical diagnosis. In the event of a positive screen, the athlete may choose to undergo further evaluation to determine whether they have such an exceptional condition. The opportunity for further evaluation should include counselling and an informed consent process at each step.
    • It is always up to the athlete to decide, having been fully informed, whether they wish to undergo further assessment, including a genetic and hormonal analysis.
    • The IOC distributes its revenue to the global Olympic Movement in order to enable the Sports Governing Bodies to support their athletes in their preparation for the Olympic Games. 
    • We will organise a number of seminars to work on the implementation of this policy with the relevant Sports Governing Bodies and, in that context, best practices will be shared, including about how to finance screening.
    • Athletes who compete internationally often travel abroad. SRY gene screening does not require a developed medical system. If necessary, given local conditions, Sports Governing Bodies should facilitate specialist assessment abroad for athletes who are SRY positive and wish to determine if they are eligible for an exception.
    • There is no plan to create another organisation to conduct this task. In line with the Olympic Charter, this is the legitimate role of the existing Sports Governing Bodies. 
    • The IOC will work with its stakeholders to facilitate the implementation of this policy, taking into account the situation of the specific SGB.
    • This policy applies only to IOC events, including the Olympic Games, and does not apply to any grassroots or recreational sports programmes.
    • The policy has been developed through an athlete-centred approach that prioritises athletes’ human dignity, physical and psychological health and wellbeing, and safety. Their right to privacy and confidentiality should be respected. 
    • IFs and NOCs should lead the education of athletes and entourage members, with a particular emphasis on the responsibility of coaches, managers and entourage members to support the athlete’s autonomy, privacy and well-being, and to refrain from sharing information beyond authorised channels. 
    • They should ensure access to mental health and safeguarding support, provide clear early guidance on SRY gene screening and, where appropriate, align it with regular sports health checks. 
    • They should also maintain safe, accessible channels for information, concerns and reporting, with specific safeguards for minors. 
    • This education and guidance should provide reassurance that all athletes have a place in sport according to their age, sex and skill, and that biological sex-based eligibility criteria (including SRY gene screening) are not a judgement on, and do not question, the athlete’s legal sex or gender identity.

Please find the French version of these FAQs here, and the Spanish version here.

Please note: In the event of any divergence between the English, French and Spanish texts, the English shall prevail.

More information