Rugby - RFU seeking feedback on its transgender policy

I’m not going to say my connection with RFU but I definitely have a right to fill in the questionnaire.

The issue may well affect many on this board as (future) parents/partners of players and coaches.

Women should be in the places where decisions are being made. Especially when there is a good chance other sports or organisations may look to RFU for their stance and think it’s the model code of practice.

Can you not see that Disgusted?

The moral question is should people who do not play, watch or have any interest in women's rugby have a say? Its up there with rando blokes getting to decide if a woman can have birth control.

The questionnaire is shocking. The only question it asks is basically ‘what other lovely sounding criteria can you think up for us to use to justify the decision we have already made and won’t be changing’. This is not a consultation by any definition of the word.

Female people having incompatible biological needs to males and saying so is not transphobia. Female people having boundaries is not transphobia.

Oh my goodness @GAHgamel for the autocorrect, teach me to type when getting ready.

This is the link, the interview is on there. (I am presuming it is the one on last night)

www.skysports.com/football/news/11095/12261329/transgender-day-of-visibility-finding-an-inclusive-club-as-a-trans-man-and-raising-awareness-of-football-v-transphobia

If it was offered that everywhere and everything was made mixed sex it would be rejected; there would be nothing to validate a MTF transitioner as a woman and vice versa. This is evident from the sport issue. No one is stopping any transwoman from playing rugby, but they don’t want to just play rugby, they want to play in the women’s competition.

I’ve included comments on reducing testosterone doesn’t reduce speed, strength etc significantly especially if training continues during transition.

I’ve said also, that if they disagree with World Rugby analysis for a local level, and they don’t think there is sufficient evidence to support their approach, women’s rugby should remain for born women unless and until they can show it’s safe for transwomen to play in the women’s game. Maybe they should make the men’s game more inclusive until they can prove it.

I’ve also asked on what basis the assessment would be made. Their approach to this contradicts their approach in making the game safer using science e.g. saliva test, concussion reviews etc

Also used the line, women aren’t small men - that you to the pp for that line. I ended by saying my son loves playing rugby and everything that goes with it but my daughter wouldn’t be playing it until her safety won be compromised by boys playing in girls rugby.

I use the words “male bodied”, so we’re clear on the issue.

Weakened males are not women.

Good to hear that.

Panic not, I may have included a hours worth of lecture notes on just that

The problem with many of your responses is that you are writing about the safety issues of men competing with women. Transwomen argue, and clearly the RFU have bought this, that anatomically and physiologically they are no longer like men. They aren’t as strong, fast etc as men. That’s probably true, but it doesn’t make them like women either. That’s the point you should be making. That weakened males are still distinctly different, and a danger, to females on the rugby pitch.

I played about 15 years ago and I was in the absolute minority who wasn’t a lesbian. It was so inclusive of gender non conforming women and a great sport.

Remind me how many “out” male rugby players there are?

Completed too. Told them they should be ashamed of capitulating, that they were throwing women's safety and lives under the bus, and that it is still law that women are entitled to single sex spaces, such as changing rooms.

I'm also and "other" - adult female

One of the many concerns that I raised was that sex is observed at or before birth not assigned arbitrarily and if they cannot understand such a basic scientific fact how could anyone trust them to properly understand or asses any actual scientific evidence (of the type and quality of evidence that wr produced)?
I then asked was this inability to understand science why they were ignoring all the evidence of increased risk to women?
I also asked what they intended to do to prevent women and girls from having to shower and change infront of biological males?
I quoted the equality act and suggested that they actually read it instead of listening to someone else's opinion on what it should say and that they have a moral duty to use the single sex exemption.
I asked them how and under what circumstances was it morally or legally justifiably to put one person's feelings before the physical safety of numerous others?

In rugby, we need to Chesterton’s fence it.

What is women’s rugby for? Why does it exist?

I’m unrelentingly fucking angry about this. There wasn’t any problem deciding what women are when I was playing and we had to make do with second rate facilities, lack of funding, constant derision and undermining.

There wasn’t any question of increasing inclusion when my gay friend was bullied out of the men’s team, while the women’s team was about one third or more lesbian and bisexual players. I don’t imagine that any women have a problem with trans identified or non binary female players on our teams, as long as they’re not using testoerone. I certainly wouldn’t. If the men’s teams do, then let them work more on their inclusion, which has always been donkeys years behind the women.

The blazer brigade fucking women over one more time is no surprise to me. I lived through it before.

Done, thanks for signposting this. Took advantage of the free text box at the end to make some hopefully salient points. Teenage son plays rugby; they played mixed teams up to U13 (not in UK then) but the differences become pretty obvious after that age.

Yes, that is the end result.

Fucking hell. Just own it, Stonewall. You won’t be happy until it’s mixed sex everything, everywhere

Mixed sex isn't the goal, it's ensuring that female people have nothing at all, regardless of how desperately needed, regardless of what other provisions may be available, that ever is just for female people. The very existence of it is an anathema. Even support groups for conditions affecting only female people can't be allowed.

As Tibtom says: it's ensuring that people born female know their place in the world. And it ain't to have any of their needs met.

Fucking hell. Just own it, Stonewall. You won’t be happy until it’s mixed sex everything, everywhere

Mixed sex everything is not sufficiently validating - women must know their place as existing to validate men.

If push came to shove women would lose...

... which is how we get to 'no compromise'. See how far Stonewall and TRAs have pushed many women off their usual social niceties?

Surely if a transman has transitioned then they have been taking testosterone making them much bigger and stronger. This is not fair to other women. If no drugs are involved they can play by sex.

I dont feel we should have different rules. LBGT teams are a good solution.

If push came to shove and it has ti be resolved then transwomen should play in mens and transmen in womens as this is the safest option.

I added a paragraph about the initial descriptors and that cis woman is an offensive term to me. Yes! The Other box takes quite a bit of text, I found out