Her argument only makes sense when you consider chromosomes to be the sole method for sex determination. This works for the 99.9% of people who don't have some kind of intersex disorder. For people WITH an intersex disorder, they are by definition neither male nor female so trying to classify them as such using one single criteria is unscientific.
Using her argument, let's consider the example of a hypothetical inverse sex disorder to CAIS (which I have no idea if actually exists), in which a person with XX chromosomes who nonetheless develops as a male and has underdeveloped. but unambiguously male genitals. This person is, by her definition then, female, and should only be allowed in women's restrooms and changing rooms, correct?