I really liked this post (all length aside, and, by the way, I don't mind the bio terminology, scientific stuff helps clarify things for me). In the light of Caster Semenya's ordeal, I'm starting to really reconsider if classifying people as male/female is worth doing, not only in sports but in life in general. I had never really considered that the only things making us really biologically "male" or "female" were our reproductive organs until I read this. Even though I'm cisgendered, I think I would be ok with going to a system of less restrictive classification, if this were possible. I always wondered about why some of my secondary sex characteristics seemed different from other women and why not everyone seemed to naturally fit the societal "female" model (For example, I have a lot of body hair, including some facial hair, as do other females in my family, and this always bothered me... besides the embarrassment that came with a fourth grader telling me I had chin hair, I wondered why I had to remove hair to appear more "female" if it seemed to grow naturally and always come back. I guess the variation in hormones and gene expression would explain this.) Seeing them as largely arbitrary in gender classification makes a lot more sense. Your point about technology making certain requirements for mating obsolete also makes a lot of sense.
I definitely don't have any real answers to this problem either, but I'm glad to be aware of it now.

(@patriarchysucks from twitter).