First off, the IBA is a corrupt organization just like the rest of the alphabet soup that is boxing. Therefore, we must take everything they say with a serious grain of salt.
However, I can't help but notice that the two boxers in question are just so much more powerful than their opponents that it doesn't compute that they could be so unnaturally strong as a natural woman with a full set of XX chromosomes.
However, why such secrecy by the IOC? If they have proof that they are women no different than the average athlete then why not say so, and if they are intersex to some degree and have XY chromosomes why not just say that? I get privacy arguments but those kind go out the window when you are an athlete competing at the highest levels of competition.
That silence makes me believe that they are holders of some XY chromosomes in their DNA, which makes the argument more scientific in basis than political, therefore I think we can have a civil discussion without getting moderated. Does the mere presence of a Y chromosome make one a man, even if the person in question has female sex organs, raised a female, and treated like a girl for all of this person's life?
I'm assuming facts not in evidence, yes, but let's assume that the two boxers do have that Y chromosome, should that make them ineligible for women's sports? I'd have to say yes, not because it is fair to those two boxers, but patently unfair and unsafe for the hundreds of thousand of women that train to be boxers and dream of Olympic glory. It's also patently unsafe, XY chromosome holders could develop a punch that can kill or seriously injure a XX boxer. Sometimes the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few or the one, and unfortunately, those two boxers will just have to train for their own validation and find success in another field.
The ironic thing is that in the 70s and 80s before DNA testing female athletes from certain countries had to undergo a humiliating physical just to prove they were women by stripping off in front of a panel. I'm assuming the two boxers could pass that test. However, with DNA testing, we have a better understanding of sex and biology, and the two in question are just unique individuals that don't fit neatly in a category.
All that being said, the two boxers should be excluded, not because they are doing anything wrong or immoral, but because they are unlucky to be born with Y DNA in their cells that gives them unnatural strength and endurance. That also means that they are unlikely to bear children, a terrible result of their unique DNA makeup. That doesn't mean they can't continue their lives living as women, they just can't compete in formal athletic events.
That being said, the IOC should be ashamed of themselves, they should have taken a stand of some sort and at least have a scientific standard that can be applied fairly and evenly to every boxer who wanted to compete. I don't want to hear "they're women because we say they are," I want to hear they met specific standards that have been agreed to by the various boxing federations. If the two women in question meet that standard, they can compete. If not, then they can't. It should be that simple.
IOC has zero obligation to publicize player's personal medical information, not matter how badly some people might want it.
Furthermore, XX and XY sex determination is, frankly, a construct that we have created as humans to help in our understanding of the natural world, based on common observable patterns. But nature doesn't care about our definitions, and there will always be exceptions or examples that don't fit into our boxes.
To that point, it is possible to be XX Male or XY Female; it is possible to have only 1 sex chromosome or to possess 3 sex chromosomes.
While there is no proof that Khelif has a Y chromosome, the rare circumstances that allow that would also not align with her being an Olympic level athlete, and/or at least not having any sort of advantage.
An XXY "male" individual with Klinefelter syndrome is going to possess male genitalia, and struggle (from an athletic perspective) with reduced muscle mass, tone, and strength, brittler bones, excess fat deposits and/or breast tissue, less energy, and reduced coordination. They will likely suffer delays in motor skills early on in their life and require physical therapy, and they will likely be taller than average and possess round, youthful features in their body and face.
An XY "female" individual with Swyer syndrome is going to possess female genitalia. This is due to the SRY gene not initiating the development of testes in the fetus, which in turn means the fetus will develop with female reproductive organs. What this also means is that the body will
not produce the elevated T levels or AMH found in a cis-XY male. An individual with Swyer's XY will likely not produce breast tissue and will likely have narrower hips, but will have a vulva and uterus. This is the syndrome most commonly attributed to Khelif but it is completely unsubstantiated, and, even if true, would not give her any inherent biological advantage over a cis-XX female.
And none of this even touches on the natural variety of testosterone levels within sex-groups or even how they can naturally change within individuals,
nor the difference between the body's (in)ability to use free testosterone or bound testosterone as an advantage...
I appreciate your attempt to keep it scientific, and not political.
The reality is though, our colloquial acceptance of XX vs XY works because it works
most of the time, but there are still limits to that definition, and like almost everything in life, there is more nuance and grey area to the whole discussion. The truth is there is no
direct linear connection between any of chromosomes, sex, gender, hormone levels, or athletic ability. Patterns and correlations, sure, sometimes pretty strong even, but there are still other underlying factors that can waylay those correlations, or that many people just don't know about.