I think we can discuss this issue rationally without the use of transphobic (yes, that's what it is - please try to keep up) language, DeskDiary.
The division of sport into two categories - Men's and Women's - derives from a traditional and simplistic classification based exclusively on biology. And by that crude standard biological "women" do, indeed, need to be protected from unfair competition by biological "men".
But a more subtle consideration of the issue might suggest that biology alone is not the single determinant. There are, for example, societal and psychological factors at work amongst others. Allowing for all of those, then, the biological woman does not need, nor ought to demand, protection from a competitor who is just as much a woman, but has had the accidental misfortune to be born with some features of the male physique. But to complain about "unfa" advantage in this case would be just as irrational as a shorter basket-ball player shouting "foul!" because another basket-ball player is two inches taller.
PS: I understand, of course, why sportswomen of an older generation like Martina and Sharon find it a little difficult to come to terms with the modern view. But I do believe Ms Navratilova has apologised for her ill-considered outburst, hasn't she?