The main exponent of the trans cause in Brazilian high-performance sport in recent years, volleyball player Tifanny Abreu stated that the IOC (International Olympic Committee)’s determination to impose genetic tests to allow the participation of athletes in the female category represents a setback in the fight of all women.
Having faced a series of questions about her presence on the court throughout her career, the Osasco player stated that she received the Olympic Committee’s resolution with a feeling of sadness.
“Many people try to reduce this debate to an exclusive attack on trans people, but it’s not just about that. It’s about women. About all women,” said the athlete in a statement.
On Thursday (26), the IOC announced that only biologically female athletes, whose gender will be determined by a unique genetic screening test, will be eligible to participate in competitions in the female category at the Olympic Games.
According to the organization, the policy aims to “protect the female category”, as part of its initiative to establish a universal rule for competitors in elite women’s sport.
Under criticism from LGBTQIA+ and human rights groups, sports entities, international federations and governments have been promoting a tightening of rules on the participation of transgender women in sporting competitions and events over the past few months.
The allegation is that the actions aim to preserve justice in the female category and are based on supposed competitive advantages in relation to cis athletes, due to exposure to testosterone when they still identify with the male gender. Researchers emphasize, however, that the available data are not sufficient to confirm the supposed advantage.
In addition to the debate on physical attributes, Tifanny also mentioned in the note the case of deputy Erika Hilton, who had her election to the presidency of the Women’s Rights Committee of the Chamber of Deputies questioned, due to the fact that she is a trans woman.
The deputy “had her identity questioned to the point of trying to remove her from a space that is, precisely, the representation of women. If before the argument was “advantage” or “strength”, in this case what was it?”, asked Tifanny.
“This shows that it was never just about performance. It’s about who is recognized as a woman”, added the striker, who had her participation vetoed by Londrina councilors in a tournament in the city at the end of February.
Minister Carmen Lúcia, from the STF (Supreme Federal Court), granted an injunction authorizing Tifanny’s participation in the competition, with the player winning the Copa do Brasil title with Osasco.
According to the athlete, the IOC’s new rules could harm many women, “including cis women, due to increasingly questionable criteria. And this needs to be discussed responsibly, not with exclusion.”
“There is a discourse that all this is to ‘protect women’s sport’, but in practice we see something else. When the issue involves trans people, there is always an attempt to remove, exclude, question their presence, regardless of the context”, said Tifanny.
“Rights cannot go backwards. The world cannot go backwards. Either we take a stand now, or we accept seeing achievements being dismantled little by little by an extreme right that insists on excluding, dividing, destroying,” she added.
Fundamental rights at stake, experts point out
Legal professionals assess that the imposition of the COI, although allegedly based on scientific criteria, tends to increase judicialization around the topic.
Lawyer at Ambiel Bonilha Advogados and specialist in sports law, Mariana Araújo Evangelista stated that, from a legal perspective, the measure highlights the prevalence of the principle of competitive integrity over that of inclusion, at least in the context of high-performance sport.
“Although based on scientific and safety arguments, the adoption of a strict biological criterion tends to face relevant questions from the perspective of fundamental rights, especially with regard to proportionality and the prohibition of discrimination”, stated Mariana.
“The absence of absolute scientific consensus on competitive advantages may weaken the justification for such a broad restriction,” added the expert.
She also said she hopes that the Olympic Committee’s decision will act as a kind of catalyst for new restrictions internationally, both by international federations and national legislation.
“The tendency is for disputes involving sports eligibility to gain even more space in bodies such as the Sports Arbitration Court, the CAS, consolidating this debate as one of the most sensitive and current in sports law”, said Mariana.
Specialist in sports law, Higor Maffei Bellini stated that the IOC is the organizer of the Games and has regulatory competence to set criteria for eligibility and participation in its competitions, including in terms of the women’s category.
“This does not mean, however, that the decision is immune to legal control.”
Bellini said that the CAS (Court of Arbitration for Sport) should be the route that many athletes and entities can resort to, but highlighted that “it is important not to treat this arbitration route as an absolute end point”.
“Recent experience shows that, once control in Switzerland has been exhausted, including before the Swiss Federal Court, the discussion can move towards European human rights jurisdiction,” said the expert.
He cited the case of South African runner Caster Semenya, two-time Olympic champion in the 800 m, with triumphs in London, in 2012, and in Rio de Janeiro, in 2016. Her condition is classified as hyperandrogenism, a type of endocrine disorder that generates above-average testosterone production.
In 2019, a new World Athletics policy determined that runners with Semenya’s condition would undergo hormonal treatment to reduce testosterone if they wanted to continue participating in events between 400 m and 1,600 m. Distances at which, in the federation’s assessment, they could have an advantage.
The recommendation was rejected by the athlete, who said she suffered discrimination from the federation. She ended up being prevented from competing in distances.
In July 2025, the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) ruled that Switzerland, home of the IOC and CAS, violated the athlete’s right to a fair trial.
“The discussion stops being just about the organization of sport and starts to also involve civil rights or human rights, both for cis women and trans women”, stated Bellini.
On the one hand, the intention of ensuring that cis women compete for vacancies under conditions of material equality, without the influence of biological factors linked to male development; on the other, the right of trans people not to be discriminated against and to participate in an activity that also has an economic dimension, since high-performance sport is work and a means of subsistence for many athletes.
“As the Los Angeles Games will only take place in 2028, there is time, in theory, for athletes directly affected to try to discuss not only the sporting validity of the rule before the CAS, but also its legality in European courts, from the perspective of equality, non-discrimination, effective access to justice and the protection of the fundamental rights of trans and cis women.”
