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

If anyone has not seen the review that Dr Hilton and Tommy Lundberg have done that shows just how male puberty benefits are retained, here is the link. Dr Hilton was one of the presenters at the Rugby symposium.

www.preprints.org/manuscript/202005.0226/v1

Anyone else get a faint chant of 'no shit, Sherlock', playing in the background when reading this article?

It takes about a nano-second of Hannah Mouncey to realise the truth of what this report is saying.

Thank goodness for it. Next - boxing. (I can't believe this even needs to be debated. But apparently it does.)

What happens to transwomen who were on puberty blockers from a young age, so no male puberty. Is that treated differently? Anyone know anything about that?

Yes Apollo. I look forward to the day when women and girls can have their sports back without these euphemism-filled arguments.

Anyone else get a faint chant of 'no shit, Sherlock', playing in the background when reading this article?

I did. Then I remembered the entire self serving paper written by someone.with a doctorate saying how they dont have an advantage and wondered what made them disregard that "evidence"

Anyone else waiting for our friends to wade in on twitter. This must sting ...

Anyone else get a faint chant of 'no shit, Sherlock', playing in the background when reading this article?

certainly did😁

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

They might. However, males who don't go through puberty are still not physically female. The barbaric creation of Castrati was to create a high voice backed by exceptional lungs:

As the castrato's body grew, his lack of testosterone meant that his epiphysess^ (bone-joints) did not harden in the normal manner. Thus the limbs of the castrati often grew unusually long, as did their ribss^. This, combined with intensive training, gave them unrivalled lung-powerr^ and breath capacity

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Castrato

Why I'm a trans Ally and LGBTQtogether are both trending on twitter.... Interesting timing

BobbieDraper (great name by the way)

I think I would like to see what they say about this too. I think there are still some advantages but no where near as many. For instance, are the nerve fibres may still be more delicate and susceptible to damage (concussion) even without male puberty? Ie in male prepubescent children vs female. Also, would bone density issues arising from medical transition pose a problem for their safety??

Many questions.

Well, any boys who take puberty blockers and transition with female hormones to become trans-women would probably be just fine playing women's rugby, I should think. Mixed sort is approved up to about age 10, I think.

Whether trans girls will be lining up to play rugby is another matter. It's not a very 'pink' sport, is it? Girls are going against ever-tightening gender rules to play it in the first place. Power to all of them, I say.

The RFU take their responsibility towards injured players very seriously indeed, (since Matt Hampson's injury at least) and don't hesitate to get the wallet out. I imagine they don't want to do it more than they have to.

The data is startling and blindingly obvious at the same time.

Also, would bone density issues arising from medical transition pose a problem for their safety??

This is why I think that allowing transmen to sign a waiver is utter stupidity. How many broken necks will he deemed to many.

Adult males who transitioned and took/take oestrogen well that helps maintain bone density gained from male puberty. They woukd have stronger bones for longer than women ever could.

Many of the older transmen are very aware of their biology and probably wouldn't be so daft as to sigb the form. But these younger ones being egged on by adults who should know better. They are one ruby match away from losing the ability to walk. Someone needs to he the adult and say no here. Form or no form

Also, would bone density issues arising from medical transition pose a problem for their safety??

I wondered this too. With so little rigorous follow-up and tracking of these adolescents, it may take a while to derive sufficiently robust evidence to advise on the safety pf contact sports.

I am overwhelmingly relieved to hear World Rugby have taken a safety first stance. I know someone who had a horrible rugby injury in their teens who is now paraplegic. It is a sport that carries considerable risks. It was madness to allow this in the first place.

Excellent point Wines and Bobby

From memory Owl said something once (also in the Guardian or just on Twitter?) that when trans athletes have been on puberty blockers it will not be a problem (around fairness) as the natural strength etc that develop during puberty would be altered.

Only the likely damage done to bodies by late teens, early twenties, will prevent them from being athletes. If they were in tip top physical condition and at a level to compete their IQ could be affected so maybe signing a consent form as an adult with a brain that never matured as nature intended shouldn't be an option either.

(There urgently needs to be more studies on PBs.)

I don't follow rugby but there was an interesting thread on here when they held the workshop that predated this report:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3828981-RUGBY-review-of-transgender-women-in-womens-sports

www.world.rugby/news/563437

I think rugby has approached this exactly the right way. Remember how unfair it was when Nic Williams was uninvited from Radio 5 live while our favourite cyclist was feted for giving the scientific evidence that there was no advantage to experiencing male puberty? It will be harder for this to happen again now.

Bobbiedraper I suppose this has not happened yet - the controversial cases seem to be those where there is a very visible difference on appearance alone.

great article and some good news at last on the sports front

It really feels like these questions should have been studied and answered before they threw the door opened to transathletes. It will be much harder to turn thing back, especially with the tide going go opposite direction and the fact that everyone seems to just ignore the science now in favour of being "inclusive" (even though they end up excluding biological females!).

So many questions, so much unanswered science... yet sports bodies the world over have allowed the message that testosterone reductions makes it all fair to become the standard line. And the general public are never actually going to read 7000 word long articles, so you're arguing with people who are totally uniformed but still believe themselves to be fully knowledgable because they can quote some sound bites.
Its infuriating.

Gotta love the Guardian trying to spin this as a terrible threat to transwomen rather than the attempt to protect women's safety that it is.

The actual article is admittedly less biased than the headline, to be fair.

I believe the author has more balance than some other guardian authors.

Trans men present an interesting dilemma.

If they choose to take hormones, they likely violate women’s league doping rules. So to play, they have to be allowed to play with the men. Trans women face no such issue playing in the men’s league.

The actual article is admittedly less biased than the headline, to be fair.

Maybe it's because it's in the sports section of the guardian rather than elsewhere in it?

The idea of tranmen signing a waiver to play with the men worries me, though. What that means is that when some of them are seriously injured, which they will be, they'll have no recourse at all from a legal perspective.

@TheProdigalKittensReturn

The idea of tranmen signing a waiver to play with the men worries me, though. What that means is that when some of them are seriously injured, which they will be, they'll have no recourse at all from a legal perspective.

Would the doctor who did their medical be liable if they were hurt? If so, would they be able to find someone willing to OK them?

Surely Kittens there must be a point where if the information about risk is adequately given (and really is very clear and actually given) that people take responsibility for taking that risk. If it becomes a situation where the risk is not clearly stated and in a way that they take on board (not magically minimize due to not being female) then yes, there should be recourse.