Your explanation of why women (and girls) got a separate category of sport that for a while was protected is dead wrong. A separate category for women was not created "because women were missing out on opportunities to show their (relative speed) due to (relatively) less talented men taking their spotlight" LOL. Women were never allowed to compete with men in the first place. We got our own category because historically we were entirely excluded from sports. Men and boys had sports for millennia. Women's participation and competition only started to be added on, sport by sport, and often event by event, over the course of the 20th century.
When sports finally began to be opened up to women, boys and men never wanted us in with them - and women and girls never clamored to enter the men's and boys' category. Because girls and women are physically different to boys and men in myriad ways that mean in nearly all sports we don't perform as well as they/you do. It doesn't mean we are lesser human beings; it just means we are physically different.
Since the topic here is scholastic and interscholastic sports in the US: girls and women in the US have only had the full legal right to participate in school sports in government-funded schools for the past 44 years, since 1978. Until the US Congress passed Title IX in 1972, school sports in US public (and many private) educational institutions were for male students exclusively.
Title IX established for the first time in US history that girls and women attending US federally-funded educational institutions have the same right to scholastic and interscholastic sports as boys and men. However, Title IX did not come into effect immediately. The law gave schools and universities until 1978 to start putting in place programs and measures to insure that girls and women could actually begin to exercise this right. But it took time to get school sports for girls and women off the ground. Schools were given lots of leeway and many institutions intentionally dragged their feet. By time 1978 rolled around, schools were not considered in violation of Title IX if they were moving or could produce plans showing they were preparing to move in the direction of compliance. As a result, it wasn't until the early-mid 1980s that Title IX really began to have a noticeable effect.
Outside of the school and university contexts, women were explicitly barred from many sports organizations and events. In 1961, the sports governing org in charge of amateur road running in the US explicitly banned women from all distance running events. Many running clubs traditionally barred women from their memberships, not permitting women to participate even just recreationally.
Until the 1970s-80s, and in many cases later, women and girls in many places in the US were barred from using municipal and private sports facilities such as tennis courts, golf courses, ball courts, swimming pools and gyms all, most or many weekend hours, early evenings and other times when men wanted them for themselves. In many instances, women could only play tennis or golf during non-peak-demand hours on the weekends, and then only if playing mixed-sex doubles or in a foursome with at least two men. Where I lived, even if tennis courts were empty on a Saturday or Sunday, and the sign-up sheets showed no boys or men had reserved a court for several hours, girls and women still couldn't play by ourselves in case a man or boy showed up and wanted the court on the spur of the moment.
When women back in the day objected to policies that excluded or unfairly restricted females from sports solely because of our sex, the aim was never to invade boys' and men's sports or take away boys' and men's right to have sports that are effectively solely for males. When Little League was sued for unfairly excluding females in 1974, the larger intent was to get programs for girls under the LL umbrella. Girls in great numbers weren't champing at the bit to try to play LL Baseball back then. Though LL is now open to both sexes equally, it's ended up with two separate but parallel programs that are de facto sex segregated: LL BB for boys, LL SB for girls. Boys and girls can play either BB or SB in LL, but most boys choose BB and most girls choose SB.
Also, AFAIK, women don't generally and customarily rail against men's sports as represented by the NBA, NFL, MLB, NHL, FIFA, US college football, etc. We don't go around wagging our fingers and pronouncing in scolding tones that men's sports are not "inclusive" and diverse enough coz the players are all male. We don't castigate male athletes as bigots and haters for not doing their bit to show support, empathy and kindliness for all the females who now "identify as" boys/men" by giving up places on teams, purposely losing games/races and giving up podium places so that "trans men" can feel included and "affirmed" in their claimed identities.
Women want our own sports in addition to the sports men play, and we want to protect the hard-won gains we've already made and the territory we've already carved out through enormous amounts of effort over decades. Sure women would like our sports to get more attention and better pay. But we don't want to reduce the chances that boys and men have to play sports. We don't spend time devising ways to make sports less fair for males the way some males seem to be constantly plotting nowadays about how best to make women's sports less fair - and less safe - for females. And we certainly don't sit around agreeing amongst ourselves that some males should be forced to forfeit fairness and safety in sports "for the greater good" the way some guys do on LRC regarding girls and women and our sports.
Honestly, I can't imagine any woman claiming as some men have done on this thread that in order to protect "the vulnerable" and show respect for some athletes' claimed gender identities, a good number of male athletes are just gonna have to suck it up and step aside, lose out and sacrifice their own sports dreams and ambitions - and if they don't like it, tough luck, they need to learn that being robbed of their own chance to excel, win and feel the pride and joy of victory is "a small price to pay" to mollycoddle someone else and advance a political agenda they might not even agree with.