It's a good-ish analogy, and definitely worth thinking about as a starting point, if one hasn't thought about this kind of parallel before.

However, it's overly simple because people don't really use words like "hypertransphilophobia" or "cisphiloorthodoxy" to define positions analogous to "I think red is great but I'm not convinced yet that red is an appropriate color choice in every possible situation" or "I really liked the color that this already was--why do I have to change just to prove I'm not a redphobe?"

There exist people, quite a few people, with very simplistic anti-trans viewpoints, much like your very simplistic anti-red viewpoint.

But there are also a lot of people who simply aren't as gung-ho about every change suggested by trans advocates. For instance, in the paper you cited (in your response to Michael), they state, "Notwithstanding, values for strength, LBM and muscle area in transwomen remain above those of cisgender women, even after 36 months of hormone therapy." So, given that, isn't some "transphobia" actually required until you check out the details, especially in sports with very high risk of injury?

(Aside--that we allow boxing at all is kind of crazy. To a first approximation, anyone who does it for any substantial length of time gets traumatic brain injury--it's just a matter of how bad, not whether it happens.)

It's this complexity which gets lost if you just start hurling "transphobe" around and have it retain all its connotations (like the redphobia implies racist connotation in your example). Bludgeoning people with terms with strong negative affect is a terrible way to have a robust dialog about the complexities and concerns involved.

I absolutely agree with your suggestion to Michael, "if you really WANTED to have trans women in sports, if you had to find a solution to solve for all of the problems, you could think of some."

Starting the discussion about solutions by branding as evil anyone who expresses concern about a problem does not seem like a very effective way to get there, however.