there are lots of women who are speaking up. Martina Navrátilová, Sharron Davies, and others. They got abused and told they were terrible people and tat all their considerable achievements were rendered worthless by their horrific bigotry.
I agree with vorpal btw, that there does seem to be a strong sense of women sticking up for an oppressed group in defending this.
I think this is a difficult situation in that there is no desire to be open about what is going on.
For example, we have never been told fully about Caster Semenya's biology, because it is deemed private, yet what we do know is that Caster Semenya has XY chromosomes and testes, and may have a condition (5ARD), whereby most children, even if raised as girls, will identify as male after puberty (besides of course having functioning ejaculatory ducts, testes, etc.)
So on the one hand there is lots of 'let's be nice' and say 'X is a woman' (as in this case), but no desire to say that the biological reality is you can't reverse the clock on growing up, and convert a male into a female, any more than you can covert a greyhound into a chihuahua.
People born with Y chromosomes will grow up stronger, taller, with stronger bones, more lung capacity, than those without them. If they want to 'live as a woman' or whatever so be it, but your rights should end where my rights begin - Weatherly says that after winning (?) at a previous event in March, the prize money was enough to compete and train for this. Which is nice, but what about the woman behind in March, who didn't get any, or less, prize money, the woman in fourth place in the race, the woman in 16th place in the qualifying because of Weatherly, and so on. These women have the right to compete without people who have biological advantages fundamental to being male.
Some foolish people say 'but what about tall women'. Tall women are irrelevant - if you only have two categories, male and female, then they should be based on underlying biology, not 'I've taken some hormones for a few months, that makes me a woman, honest guv'.
If on the one hand you have lots of touchy-feely groups talking about civil rights, oppression, and such like, then it's pushing against an open door in terms of advancing the agenda. In the 70s, there were paedophile rights groups affiliated to some of the groups, such as Liberty, who are pushing for this. Paedophilia isn't the same thing, but when you have people with a rights agenda, it does show that in many cases people lose their judgement and simply say 'the poor paedophiles' or whatever it is, instead of applying any sort of reason.