Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Stonewall Lobby World Rugby

554 replies

SunsetBeetch · 23/08/2020 11:59

Ffs I am so sick of this agenda-heavy lobby group and their war against women's rights!

(Note that they are controlling who can reply to them too.)

“We are asking rugby clubs at all levels of the game to stand with us against a ruling that is exclusionary and that will impact some of the most vulnerable people in the community”.

Join us and
@LgbtiqS
in calling
@WorldRugby
to #TackleTransphobia lgbtiqsportalliance.org.uk/uk-lgbtiq-sport

twitter.com/stonewalluk/status/1296801438211944455?s=20

Stonewall Lobby World Rugby
Stonewall Lobby World Rugby
OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Kit19 · 24/08/2020 21:22

Nigel Owens the first openly gay referee in world rugby is on the side of sanity!! Thank god - he’s a fantastic ref & I was so afraid he might turn out to be another disappointment

RT this tweet twitter.com/coachblade/status/1296466549197492225?s=21

ThinEndoftheWedge · 24/08/2020 21:18

Wow, just wow.

Or is that the IGR don’t want TW in their game because they are actually transphobic?

Women don’t want TW in their game because they are men = safety, equity, fairness.

No issues of safety, equity or fairness for the IGR.

Datun · 24/08/2020 21:10

IGR firmly believes that the underlying drive of this proposed ban is not safety, but rather the transphobia-fueled perception that trans women have natural physical advantages due to being assigned a gender marker at birth that is inconsistent with their true identity.

Good lord. That's the whole point of the, entirely unnecessary because everyone knows males are stronger than females, study.

In other news, the sky is blue water is wet.

yourhairiswinterfire · 24/08/2020 19:52

Has anyone seen Maya Forstater's tweet about the statement Stonewall are supporting?

twitter.com/MForstater/status/1297087808285401088

Part of the statement made by International Gay Rugby:

IGR firmly believes that the underlying drive of this proposed ban is not safety, but rather the transphobia-fueled perception that trans women have natural physical advantages due to being assigned a gender marker at birth that is inconsistent with their true identity.

What.The.Fuck.

Flat earthers. Biology deniers. So fucking weird.

aliasundercover · 24/08/2020 19:39

Sorry, I'll ask for a deletion

highame · 24/08/2020 19:10

Are you trying to show that you can read? Please don't get this thread deleted. That would be really stupid

boatyardblues · 24/08/2020 19:03

The comments are good, especially the one about roller derby.

aliasundercover · 24/08/2020 18:56

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Deliriumoftheendless · 24/08/2020 18:27

Would I be right in thinking a team of gay men wouldn’t be playing against women anyway, so it’s no skin of their noses who plays on a woman’s team?

Aesopfable · 24/08/2020 18:21

Cuculus canorus would be a good symbol for stonewall.

Aesopfable · 24/08/2020 18:10

Mmmmmmm....

Datun · 24/08/2020 17:54

@yourhairiswinterfire

There is one line in that article (well 4 words) that are perfection. I can't repost here cos our monitors like monitoring.

I know the one you mean. Nailed it.

Indeed.

And in a separate paragraph, this describes what women are dealing with.

Stonewall have access to the same information that we have, yet they ignore it, tacitly admitting that their vision of ‘civil rights’ is impossible without the cost of dead or disabled women.

In a way, I'm quite thankful that I'm still able to be shocked by this kind of stuff. It shows that I haven't been rendered utterly cynical.

Because I am, completely shocked, that Stonewall, a mainstream charity and lobby group, are more than happy to accept that women will be killed or have life changing injuries, for the sake of the pride of a minute cohort.

It's been described as hovering near evil.

Kantastic · 24/08/2020 17:53

Ha, I think I know which line you mean. I will let Homer say it.

Stonewall Lobby World Rugby
yourhairiswinterfire · 24/08/2020 17:39

There is one line in that article (well 4 words) that are perfection. I can't repost here cos our monitors like monitoring.

I know the one you mean. Nailed it.

PronounssheRa · 24/08/2020 17:32

That is excellent by JL

There is one line in that article (well 4 words) that are perfection. I can't repost here cos our monitors like monitoring.

SunsetBeetch · 24/08/2020 16:52

Glinner hss a piece on this:

grahamlinehan.substack.com/p/stonewall-now-actively-campaigning-b60

OP posts:
PotholeParadise · 24/08/2020 13:16

Any women's clubs signed up?

Roswellconspiracy · 24/08/2020 13:15

That's not to say that trans children or trans people aren't interested in sports or can't participate appropriately, but I'm just thinking the compatibility of top flight sport with a someone who didn't actually go through puberty, it's just not going to happen is it?

Binding is basically incompatible with sport anyway. They would pass out and protective equipment nay not fit properly over a deformed rib cage Sad

KingFredsTache · 24/08/2020 13:09

No child who has been on puberty blockers and then cross sex hormones, with or without surgery is going to play rugby, or any competitive sport for that matter. Their bodies will be medicalised with all sorts of problems, and staying healthy and fit and out of hospitals will take a lot of work, let alone playing a sport as demanding as rugby.

Well yes, quite. It's not really the same as a top athlete having, say, managable Type 1 diabetes or something.

It does seem that, for a 'trans child' it is all encompassing both physically and emotionally. If you think about the amount of medicalisation it takes to stop a puberty from happening completely, the amount of medicalisation it takes to 'maintain' a biological male as a 'girl' and the effect that has on their body, the number of hospital appointments, the counselling, the emotional impact it all has on both the child themselves and their families (who normally in top level sport have played an enormous role in the athlete getting to that point) - it's highly unlikely that alongside all of this a child would develop a passion for and rise to the top of any sport really as well?

That's not to say that trans children or trans people aren't interested in sports or can't participate appropriately, but I'm just thinking the compatibility of top flight sport with a someone who didn't actually go through puberty, it's just not going to happen is it?

Goosefoot · 24/08/2020 12:55

@Kantastic

The map shows that there are actually UK clubs signing up in support of the pledge to allow TW in women’s rugby. Only 6 so far, but still - I can only hope they don’t really understand what they’ve signed up in support of.

Randomly clicked on 3 of them - 2 of those were "inclusive" gay men's rugby clubs.

I suppose the most charitable explanation for this is that gay men are more likely than heterosexual men not to fully understand the strength differences between men and women - same applies to incels, come to think of it. I don't know if I believe the most charitable explanation.

A certain number of gay men seem to see any exclusion of transwomen as similar to ways they were excluded from certain things. Like guys not wanting them in the changing room for sports.

I'd be inclined to wonder whether any of them had actually watched a game of women's rugby that included TW. Some people need a visual to get that lightbulb moment.

Sexnotgender · 24/08/2020 12:39

Sorry not sure if I'm explaining that well. Obviously there will be whats considered a "normal range" if that range starts to include these low readings from medicated children then when they perform the bone scans required when a child is put on this path, their ranges are included im normal as opoosed to showing on the low side.

That’s fucking outrageous, scandalous 😱

PronounssheRa · 24/08/2020 12:38

2 of those were "inclusive" gay men's rugby clubs

Meh, if they were inclusive they would welcome gender non conforming males onto their team. Hypocrisy.

NotBadConsidering · 24/08/2020 12:20

No child who has been on puberty blockers and then cross sex hormones, with or without surgery is going to play rugby, or any competitive sport for that matter. Their bodies will be medicalised with all sorts of problems, and staying healthy and fit and out of hospitals will take a lot of work, let alone playing a sport as demanding as rugby.

The argument “if you just let us medicalise all the kids’ bodies from now on to avoid male puberty, then women and girls won’t have to worry in the future” makes me rage so much 😡.

growinggreyer · 24/08/2020 12:02

But the problem remains. Even if a new league was set up with inclusive mixed sex teams, the players with vaginas are more likely to be crippled by the players with testicles no matter which of them attend training sporting pink trainers.

Cattiwampus · 24/08/2020 11:56

@Winesalot

They always conveniently 'forget' to add 'from competing with women' at the end of 'trans women face being banned', don't they?

Yes. I noticed that. They are NOT banned from playing. They would be banned from playing in women’s division. They can play in the men’s, no problem.

They could set up their own, inclusive teams. Just like women did across the board when they were excluded from activities and events.