Rugby - RFU seeking feedback on its transgender policy

What annoyed me is the Stonewall line about barring trans people from sport... which isn't happening! Expand the bandwidth of male!

I was thinking using equipment with monitoring capabilities rather than live women. I would not be thinking of using live women at all.

Unlike the RFU...

The draft policy also requires trans men to sign a waiver saying they understand the risks involved if they want to play men’s rugby.

Does every single female player also have to sign a waiver saying they understand the risks involved if they want to play women's rugby, given that may also involve playing with male-bodied people?

FFS. The misogyny.

Women - please STFU
Transmen - please sign this waiver saying that you are making your own reckless choice
Transwomen -

I presume the waiver is there in an attempt to satisfy their insurers i.e. sign this and promise not to sue us to hell and back if you get very badly hurt. Can't see how that would work in reality though.

I cannot see grassroots rugby being happy with this, or coaches, referees or players. why do these sports bodies who managed to ignore the needs of women in sport for decades roll over on this issue so easily?

Considering that their parameters would include Faf de Klerk, I would be interested in the other parameters they are using to assess.

Does this then rest on coaches to ultimately make the decisions? I don’t know how they are going to stand up and state they are still prioritizing female Health.

I happily played against women 6ft tall.

I would not countenance playing against a 5ft 7 14stone male. So bloody dangerous.

If this shit had been happening when I played I’d simply have stopped playing as the risk would have been too great.

Would this be covered under the EA2010? If you allow some men in but not others, it’s unfair. Taller men are being discriminated against on the grounds of their sex as women of that height and weight are not excluded.

When I played rugby at uni I was overweight, but even as a 5'11 15 stone female, the men who were shorter and weighed less were far stronger. Height and weight doesn't override biology. It's such a shame as women's rugby has been gradually growing the past few years, and this will no doubt put a lot of women off.

Do RFU expect tall heavy women to play on the men's teameven though they are women and don't identify as men?

To sign a waiver ^

Thanks, but I presume RFU don't see why this would be necessary?

I really can't believe they are still going against world rugby findings.
What will it take? Serious injury? Death? The rfu are spineless.

Would a study of this nature even pass the ethical approval stage? The risks to female participants are so obvious and high, could you even argue there is equipoise regarding outcomes or that the trial could be safely run without harm to female participants?

I was thinking using equipment with monitoring capabilities rather than live women. I would not be thinking of using live women at all.

I wonder what would happen if Swansea University did a study using these transwomen players and the power of their tackles and the damage to opponents. If it was so important to disprove the harm, surely this would be the way to do it.

Would a study of this nature even pass the ethical approval stage? The risks to female participants are so obvious and high, could you even argue there is equipoise regarding outcomes or that the trial could be safely run without harm to female participants?

Wait, who and why is asking transmen to sign a waiver?

If height and weight are used as assessment criteria for safety purposes then presumably it could lead to women who exceed the agreed limits being excluded from playing. This is just another tactic to muddy the waters and to avoid using the clearest criteria of all; biological sex.

I wonder what would happen if Swansea University did a study using these transwomen players and the power of their tackles and the damage to opponents. If it was so important to disprove the harm, surely this would be the way to do it.

I find it horrific that the science is now in and conclusions effectively confirmed by Harper who was at the WR symposium and these organisations are still prioritizing males ahead of female safety.

Sadly, I wonder if there is probably a great deal of inclusive goodwill vs well informed decision making being shown by other female players. Are the risks probably being discussed? If you are currently playing in women’s rugby in England or Wales, are you getting any information? Or is it just what you find for yourself?

I cannot believe they are pushing ahead like this.

thanks OP, I will look out for that. 14 st 2 is a pretty hefty bloke at 5'7"

Yep. BMI chart puts a person with these measurements in the obese category (whether male or female).

Disclaimer: I’m pretty sure BMI has been said to be an inappropriate measure for fit athletes like rugby players. But still.

39 applications from trans men, seven from trans women and four players identifying as men but wishing to continue playing in women’s rugby.

Am I reading the article correctly, 9 applications from transmen wishing to continue playing in women's rugby?
4 players identifying as men?

And the records as well as median and average results show that male weightlifters who weigh the same as their female counterparts will outperform them by at least 10%. So if weight checks are supposed to protect women, the pound-for-pound greater strength of male athletes would need to be taken into account.

And I've heard men in men's rugby teams say that they wouldn't want to play against a transman, because of the risk of causing an injury. OK the transman could sign a waiver, but it would be pretty horrific for the male player if their play resulted in an injury to the transman..

That's it Helleofabore Thank you.