The Swab

This is not a pop-up.

You can simply scroll past—but please don't overlook the importance of an independent queer press.

Time is now or never.
Queer voices disappear without independent journalism to amplify them.
We document what others won't touch.
We hold power to account when it threatens our communities.
This work exists only because you choose to fund it directly.

Donate over €25/month and receive our limited-edition tote bag — a badge of resistance, a statement that you stand for fearless journalism.

We are grateful!

Can't donate? Sharing our work helps more than you think

This is not a pop-up.

You can simply scroll past — but please don’t overlook the importance of an independent queer press.

You can simply scroll past—but please don't overlook the importance of an independent queer press.

Time is now or never.
Queer voices disappear without independent journalism to amplify them.
We document what others won't touch.
We hold power to account when it threatens our communities.
This work exists only because you choose to fund it directly.

Donate over €25/month and receive our limited-edition tote bag — a badge of resistance, a statement that you stand for fearless journalism.

We are grateful!

Can't donate? Sharing our work helps more than you think

€5 €10 €25 €50 Custom amount

Monthly donation Recurring monthly charge

Donate €25 / month

Secured by Stripe • Your payment information is encrypted

Under the policy announced on 26 March 2026 by the International Olympic Committee, this swab, or its equivalent in saliva or blood, will determine whether a woman is woman enough to compete at the Olympic Games. The IOC’s ten-page document, published after an executive board meeting in Lausanne, declares that eligibility for women’s events is ‘now limited to biological females’, determined by a one-time screening for the SRY gene, the sex-determining region of the Y chromosome. The policy takes effect at the 2028 Summer Games in Los Angeles. It is, the IOC insists, based on science.

Kirsty Coventry delivered the announcement in a video statement, with the composure of someone who had rehearsed the language many times. She is Zimbabwean. She won two Olympic golds in the backstroke. She won the IOC presidency on the first ballot in March 2025, aged forty-one, the first woman and first African to hold the job. She spoke of margins and fairness. ‘It is absolutely clear that it would not be fair for biological males to compete in the female category,’ she said. Asked whether the decision had been influenced by the American president, she did not hesitate: ‘This was a priority for me way before President Trump came into his second term.’

Perhaps. But pressure is not always applied; sometimes it is ambient. Trump’s executive order of February 2025, titled ‘Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports’, directed the Secretary of State to ensure the IOC amended its standards and threatened visa denials for transgender athletes seeking to compete in Los Angeles. Within hours of the IOC announcement, White House spokesperson Karoline Leavitt posted that Trump’s order had ‘made this happen’. The political choreography was, at minimum, convenient.

Two categories of athletes are excluded: transgender women and athletes with differences in sex development (DSD) whose biology does not fit the typical female pattern. Both groups, the IOC argues, retain the physical advantages that come with male puberty. The document puts numbers on this: a 10 to 12 per cent male performance edge in most running and swimming events, more than 20 per cent in throwing and jumping, and in collision sports like boxing and weightlifting, advantages north of 100 per cent. The SRY gene, which sits on the Y chromosome and kicks off male sex development in utero, is the chosen proxy. The IOC calls its presence ‘highly accurate evidence that an athlete has experienced male sex development’. Athletes with Complete Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome may apply for an exemption, though nobody has said how.

The Olympics have been here before. In 1966, women at the European Championships were made to walk nude before a panel of examiners. By 1968, the Games had moved to chromosome testing. At Atlanta in 1996, eight of 3,387 women tested positive for a Y chromosome; seven turned out to be androgen-insensitive, gaining no athletic benefit whatsoever from the gene they carried. The whole enterprise was scrapped in 1999. Twenty-seven years later, the swab returns.

The man who discovered the SRY gene does not think much of this use of it. Andrew Sinclair, an Australian geneticist at the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, identified the gene on the human Y chromosome in 1990, in a paper in Nature that has been cited thousands of times since. After World Athletics adopted its own SRY screening in September 2025, Sinclair wrote an essay in The Conversation calling the policy ‘misguided’. The test, he said, ‘isn’t cut-and-dried. All it tells you is whether or not the gene is present.’ Not whether a testis formed. Not whether testosterone was produced, or the body ever used it. Eric Vilain, a human geneticist at the University of California, Irvine, who advised the IOC on sex eligibility for close to a decade, was blunter. The science, he told the New York Times, is ‘not settled at all’.¹

Caster Semenya won 800-metre gold at the 2009 World Championships as a teenager. She was subjected to sex testing almost immediately. She went on to win Olympic gold at Rio 2016 and was retrospectively awarded the London 2012 title after Russia’s Mariya Savinova was disqualified for doping. Her condition, 5α-Reductase 2 deficiency, has made her probably the most scrutinised woman ever to lace up a pair of spikes. In July 2025, the European Court of Human Rights ruled that her right to a fair hearing had been violated. In a letter co-signed by eight other African athletes, Semenya described ‘cruel and degrading treatment’ endured under previous eligibility regimes. ‘Reintroducing genetic screening is not progress,’ she said. ‘This is just exclusion with a new name.’²

And the boxing ring. At the Paris 2024 Olympics, Imane Khelif of Algeria and Lin Yu-ting of Taiwan won gold medals while misinformation about their sex, much of it manufactured by politicians and pundits, ricocheted through social media. Neither is transgender. Both had competed internationally for years. Days before the IOC’s announcement, World Boxing cleared Lin Yu-ting to return to competition at the Asian Boxing Championships in Mongolia, after six months of appeals following her suspension under the federation’s own SRY testing. World Boxing did not disclose the details. The case suggests that the question of who is female enough is rather less binary than a cheek swab implies.

At the Milano Cortina Winter Games in February 2026, Swedish mogul skier Elis Lundholm became the first openly transgender athlete to compete at a Winter Olympics. Lundholm, a transgender man assigned female at birth, competed in the women’s event. Under the IOC’s new rules, he could keep doing so. The logic is blunt: it is not transgender identity that triggers exclusion, but the Y chromosome. A man born female may race against women. A woman born male may not.

Jaime Schultz, a sports historian at Penn State, told NPR that the chill will spread well beyond the athletes actually tested. ‘If a woman suspects that she might not pass this screening, she might be deterred from pursuing sport altogether,’ she said. The screening costs roughly $250 a time, and nobody has clarified who foots the bill, least of all for federations in the Global South. Schultz worries that cash-strapped nations will simply send fewer women to competition, or stop sending them at all. In France and Norway, genetic testing for non-medical purposes is illegal under privacy law; athletes from those countries will have to get tested abroad.³

Payoshni Mitra, executive director of Humans of Sport, called the IOC’s language brutal: ‘It fuels suspicion, invites public scrutiny and puts already vulnerable athletes at risk.’ Erika Lorshbough, who runs interACT, a nonprofit for intersex youth, pointed out that athletes as young as eleven have competed at recent Summer Olympics. ‘It’s not clear what it is exactly they’re up against in trying to just participate in their sport,’ she said. Mitra went further: ‘Expanding these practices to minors, without robust global safeguards, is not precaution. It’s negligence.’

At the press conference, Coventry said she expected appeals to the Court of Arbitration for Sport. She said safeguarding was a priority, but did not say what that would look like. Somewhere in the bureaucracy of a national federation, a girl who has trained since childhood, who has never once thought about her chromosomes, whose body has done only what bodies do, will be asked to open her mouth for a cotton swab. The result will take one to two weeks. The test, the IOC assures us, needs only be taken once in a lifetime. It does not say what happens to life after the result.