So now we have people inspecting women's genitals to see if they are really female, women being called out because they don't look feminine enough, and all the worst misogynistic instincts on full display.

The thing is, the best athletes frequently have genetic privilege that others don't have, whether it be extra long or extra short limbs, being extra tall, having higher than average testosterone levels, etc. There is no level playing field.

I don't know what the best answer is, but what we are seeing now is pretty ugly.

Screening for sex can be done with a cheek swab. It's much, much less invasive than the anti-doping tests that require blood to be extracted and a direct visual on the athlete passing urine. And it only needs to be done once in an athlete's career.

In most cases though it's very obvious when a male is in a women's event. For example, no-one is going to mistake this male, who competes in women's cycling, for female: https://i.ibb.co/N6ZBzh4K/F4-Svyxt-XYAAMpc-M.jpg

The best athletes often do have some sort of genetic privilege, that is true. But look at the world records of pretty much any sport and compare the most elite male athletes with the most elite female athletes: the difference is massive. Even having advantages in limb length, lung capacity, and so on doesn't overcome the physical advantage of male development.