Rugby reject koolaid, listen to science

[niceberg]

Thank goodness.
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2020/jul/19/transwomen-face-potential-womens-rugby-ban-over-safety-concerns?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

Its a start. Probably the most obvious sport for safety of male and female playing together.

Hope it trickles down.

Thank goodness.

Even the guardian couldn't really put much of a spin on that!

Now that Rugby are saying that science backs banning transwomen, it does mean that the Olympic Committee are going to have to do some fairly heavy lifting to justify their stance, no?

Well done for the rugby crew, and about time too. I’m fairly sure it was the harsh reality of facing being sued by women suffering life changing injuries from playing with a TW, but if that’s what it takes...

Great news

Still called us Cis though.

The IOC will have to change its stance eventually. It's not going to look good on television seeing all the gold medals go to transwomen

This has been acknowledged in the US for some sports but I think transwomen are allowed in weightlifting, don't understand that one, surely strength is a major factor in weightlifting.

It is me or did that read a bit more like The Times? (they still did the old assigned stuff birth BS but that was a big improvement).

Excellent news, as PPs say, hope it trickles down.

This is great news. I cannot believe that it would be rejected considering the research about women and concussion issues. Plus the umpires who feel that they don’t want to allow male bodied people to play if they have to take responsibility for making sure play is as safe as possible.

And Dr Emma Hilton’s research that people going through male puberty don’t lose the benefits.

It does seem that if a group has to take responsibility for women’s safety, they will listen to proven science. And no one can be upset that if the science changes dramatically then they will review.

I guess this will cause other sporting bodies to take notice. At the very least in all contact sport but it will force review in other sport as well.

Now that Rugby are saying that science backs banning transwomen, it does mean that the Olympic Committee are going to have to do some fairly heavy lifting to justify their stance, no?

We have to hope so. I suppose rugby is the first sport to be forced, by the obvious safety issues (not theoretical, women have already been injured iirc) to take women's concerns seriously and therefore pay proper attention to the science. Now they've done so, it should make it harder for other sports to ignore.

Some way to go in returning to fairness in sport, but a start.

I'm just shocked it's in the guardian...

I like the term that they have gone through male puberty. There is no arguing against that and it has nothing to do with how someone presents or feels. It’s a statement of fact.
I notice trans men get a mention as well, saying that they can play men’s rugby if they sign a consent form. And I think for me this is the big difference. The trans men can consent to playing against men. They get to make that choice. Women playing against trans women don’t get to consent.

Still called us Cis though.

I think that was a quote from the report.

I was coming here to post about this. It's only repeating rumours of what we have heard already but it's an important step forwards.

Good grief - sense at last.

"are stronger by 25%-50%, are 30% more powerful, 40% heavier, and about 15% faster than players who are assigned female at birth (who do not experience an androgen-influenced development).”

The word Guardian is WOMAN ffs.

Actually I think that's a very positively worded article! If I were the author of it I'd be braced for howls from the TRA public...

Yes, that's probably the only sensible approach re transmen - especially if they've been on T whether during or after puberty. It's up to them to decide whether they want to risk playing with the men (I'm sure a lot of boy rugby players give it up if they don't end up big and strong enough for the men's game)

@highame

Still called us Cis though.

The IOC will have to change its stance eventually. It's not going to look good on television seeing all the gold medals go to transwomen

This has been acknowledged in the US for some sports but I think transwomen are allowed in weightlifting, don't understand that one, surely strength is a major factor in weightlifting.

Hmm 800m Olympic final 2016...

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2016/aug/21/caster-semenya-wins-gold-but-faces-scrutiny?CMP=ShareiOSAppp_Other

Phew. Some nuance, and an outcome that protects women.

I love the "assigned male at birth" followed by the (breath of fresh air) male puberty stuff. Were they "assigned" a male puberty, too?

If they hadn't written the article and all the other media outlets had, wouldn't it draw major (instead of moderate) condemnation for the ultra bias and cause the loss of even more readers

Common sense prevails at last, thank God.

I saw a collection of pictures of a trans women playing sport (I'm sure Rugby was in there) with women and the difference in size was alarming. No way would I like to be tackled by someone so physically bigger and stronger than me.

I like the term that they have gone through male puberty.

Wonder if boys who get puberty blocked will argue they haven't "been through male puberty". Still in the right direction though.

Well, if Dr Hilton and Tommy Lundberg’s research gets published in whatever reputable journal they have submitted it to, the IOC will have to take more notice.

Wasn’t the sticking point for them just getting consensus with a definition of what a ‘woman’ was to start with?

www.google.com.au/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/sport/2019/sep/24/ioc-delays-new-transgender-guidelines-2020-olympics

Hmm 800m Olympic final 2016...

No that didn't look good but Caster wasn't trans