World Rugby Guidelines out

[ItsAllGoingToBeFine]

www.world.rugby/news/591776/world-rugby-approves-updated-transgender-participation-guidelines

"it was concluded that safety and fairness cannot presently be assured for women competing against transwomen in contact rugby."

"As a result, the new guidelines do not recommend that transwomen play women’s contact rugby on safety grounds at the elite and international level of the game where size, strength, power and speed are crucial for both risk and performance, but do not preclude national unions from flexibility in their application of the guidelines at the community level of the game. Transmen are permitted to participate in men’s contact rugby. "

Have you seen the message someone sent to Nic?

mobile.twitter.com/fairplaywomen/status/1314629421853224966

You will be fucking dealt with. Chilling. I hope the police will deal with that.

That email is disgusting and I hope the police do something about it (assuming it has been passed to them).

I love reading Ross Tucker's tweets on this. He's so clear and firm.

That email is disgusting and I hope the police do something about it (assuming it has been passed to them).

With the blatant politicisation of the police - pandering to the ‘he instead of she’ is literal violence brigade - I doubt it. Very happy to be surprised.

I see quite a few people saying how dangerous it is for transwomen to play with males in rugby. And we have had so many tell us there is few side effects for males on estrogen. So, why is it so dangerous for transwomen to play with males, and in the same breath ok to ignore the scientifically proven and repeatably provable that it is dangerous and unfair for transwomen to play with females.

That the lack of coherence is so discordant aside, do these transwomen believe they are more prone to injury, to violence, or to being harassed? Or is there known serious side effects to their medication? In which case, others with medication that excludes them from sport don’t get to put females in danger.

And why is it females who have to fix it? Why do females have to fight back to reclaim fairness and safety in our sports?

If the police decline to respond to that malicious, threatening communication then it needs to be reported to MPs, newspapers and anything else possible to demonstrate the police are now selectively enforcing the law according to an institutional political bias that is prejudicial to women and safeguarding.

Sooner or later one of these fundamentalist nutjobs is going to seriously hurt somebody, and it will be because police among others repeatedly enabled them to believe that their politics made them above the law.

And for the hard of thinking, let me make clear 'fundamentalist nutjob' refers to someone with or without any protected characteristic who believes their personal politics permits them to threaten to harm and kill another person.

Behaviour. I am talking about the behaviour.

You will be fucking dealt with.

The most vulnerable people in society who we need to be kind to? That's who wrote this?

So oppressed. So in danger..

Good decision. Shame they treat community level rugby like a kick about with kids at the park but hopefully this will give those who run their clubs the confidence in the fact they can say no.

I still think the transmen need saving from themselves on this but I think men can sort that out for themselves if they have problems with it.

Good work everyone

Both my sons play rugby. My 13 yo is slightly taller than me 5’6” and definitely stronger. My 17 yo is 6’2”, solid muscle who can squat and bench press multiples of what I could manage. One tackle last year was so hard he ended up with a broken finger.

There would be very very few female rugby players of the same age would be safe that would be safe playing against them.

As before, Ross Tucker is dealing with the whatabouts. There is particular push back on the ‘lack of studies of transwomen athletes’ being used for the decision.

Interestingly, Dr Hilton has restated that she has looked more closely at biological advantages from birth and there may still be advantages that are inherent even before puberty. So, I wonder if that will be a study available for the in-depth review in 3 years. It would underpin the entire discussion surely.

I still think the transmen need saving from themselves on this but I think men can sort that out for themselves if they have problems with it.

As a transman would have the opposite of advantage over men, then it is more a weak point in their team or the opposing team.

The fact that there is flexibility at community level, the decision makers is where the buck should stop in the case of injury. Would they need to show on what basis they decided to allow female bodied persons who have the gender identity of a man to be put at risk on the field? Also, do they open it up for all female bodied person, then? If not, why not?

If it is 'gender' identity, do they allow male bodied persons who claim the 'gender' identity of a woman to play on the men's teams? If 'gender' identity trumps sex for one, why doesn't it trump sex for the other?

Bbc headline

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54491179

Yes of course stonewalls disappointment is the key thing here as opposed to world rugby making sure women are safe

All teams have been consulted and DD's league are not allowing trans women to compete in contact rugby, hence the decided at a local level

@vivariumvivariumsvivaria

Depends on the transman, you would never tell that my friend was once female and he plays rugby at a high level, he's accepted completely by his team based on performance. He's a hooker!

Yes of course stonewalls disappointment is the key thing here as opposed to world rugby making sure women are safe

The Telegraph's coverage was the same, to my disappointment.

(I think the Torygraph has gone for trans ideology in a big way because it's a bit Maria Miller on the issue - an easy way to pretend Tories aren't the Nasty Party by being woker than woke on something they don't think matters in the grand scheme of things. Which is disappointing, because they have made a big push to cover women's sport properly, and they back women in business issues and the "Pregnant then Screwed" campaign.)

twitter.com/timoconnorbl/status/1314878304122535937

A long thread but pretty much concludes that it will be the insurance that will be the issue. I don't see why insurers would want to cover the costs when a woman inevitably gets injured. How is "we didn't care about women's safety because we were afraid of Twitter" going to sound in court?

I can’t see insurance firms being influenced by Twitter or “woke”. Money trumps everything

*Kit19

Bbc headline

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-union/54491179

Yes of course stonewalls disappointment is the key thing here as opposed to world rugby making sure women are safe*

And the BBC is supposed to be a public service.

Utterly biased reporting - and doesn’t explain it to the uninitiated.

Transmen are permitted to participate in men’s contact rugby.

^Surely this would be massively dangerous for transmen? Bad enough having one male competing with females, but a team of males against one?! Jesus. Mind, I suppose transmen were actively fighting for the right to be competing with men?

I saw that BBC headline - 'World Rugby Criticised on Transgender Decision' - and thought - Great, the BBC are actually telling it how it is and reporting the prevailing common sense view that male bodied people shouldn't be allowed in women's rugby at any level.

But no. OF COURSE the BBC are reporting from the niche stonewall perspective. In spite of the twitter ratio and the glaring gaps in actual logic.

How the fuck they still kid themselves they're unbiased becomes more difficult to fathom every day.

The BBC coverage is appalling.

Just a quote from someone from Bonerwall whingeing "they didn't look at the science" which is an outright lie, because the whole thing was an exercise in looking at the science - all of it, not just cherry picking one study with a small sample size in an unrelated sport.

And the BBC instead of challenging this lie, let it go.

And - did you notice the lovely bit of misogynistic ageism, where they mentioned Sharron Davies' age for no reason whatsoever?

mobile.twitter.com/MVSRUFC/status/1314944199377260544/photo/1

One response. They seem to think world rugby want to exclude trans players.

Sorry, the link didn't explain, Posie Parker has a strong opinion that's hard to disagree with