RFU clears TW to play at *all* levels of rugby

[Kit19]

the absolute fuckers!!!

If an activity has the potential to be unsafe for participants surely the governing body should treat it as being unsafe until "evidence" is found that proves otherwise?

The logic here is back to front.

What they are saying when quoting "more evidence" is that they acknowledge there's a potential issue but refuse to do anything about it.

Why for the love of all that's holy are these people so determined to put women at risk to satisfy the wants of a tiny minority of men?

What is the potential to create new, "biological female" sport categories? I know it's giving up ground (like the word woman, FFS), but can this be a way forward in sports generally? So if there are "women's" events (which include males) in the Olympics, and separate "biological female" events too, I'm guessing that most biological females will opt into the latter...?

If an activity has the potential to be unsafe for participants surely the governing body should treat it as being unsafe until "evidence" is found that proves otherwise?

This was my thought too. Especially when World Rugby have presented evidence that says it is unsafe.

I wonder how RFU plan to gather more evidence? I assume that is the plan, that investigation is ongoing.

What more evidence do they need? They need to understand why there is men's and women's rugby in the first place.

What is the potential to create new, "biological female" sport categories?
Yeah, that’s the conclusion I’m coming to. Women have always had to give ground to get something they want, and I think maybe it’ll happen this time too. Infuriating, but maybe the only way. So you’ll have men’s competitions, w*men’s - which will presumably be mostly men, and ‘biological female’.
I wonder how long it would take before the transwomen started moaning that they weren’t included in the BF category? I’d give it a couple of years.

Awfully hard work, and it would take a long time to get back to where epwe are, but as a bonus it would be great to see the thighs racing round a track by himself but still claiming he’s a world champion.

Does anyone know what the sex split is at the top table of the RFU? Is it all men?

Perhaps a way forward could be to have a separate body for women's rugby, (WRFU?) consisting of women.

Which in turn could lead to the founding of the TRFU.

I know there's no "validation" in such arrangements but perhaps people could be persuaded that "validation" isn't very sporting. I don't think is anyway.

They need to understand why there is men's and women's rugby in the first place.

Yes, the current status in most sports is essentially stating that there's no need to have single sex sport. In which case, be open about this, bring on the case to change it (and see women obliterated in most areas), and let us evaluate it directly.

@IwishNothingButTheBestForYou2

Does anyone know what the sex split is at the top table of the RFU? Is it all men?

Perhaps a way forward could be to have a separate body for women's rugby, (WRFU?) consisting of women.

Which in turn could lead to the founding of the TRFU.

I know there's no "validation" in such arrangements but perhaps people could be persuaded that "validation" isn't very sporting. I don't think is anyway.

its heavily male

www.englandrugby.com/about-rfu/structure-of-the-rfu

the trouble is even if you created a separate womens rugby organisation, TRA would demand access to that too

Well that is it. I wouldn't be encouraging my daughter to play club rugby under any circumstances. No safe risk assessment

What utter bastards.

When women are injured or killed I hope the media does an absolute number on them and never lets them forget.

Yes, @aliasundercover - a good point that we've had to give up ground for progress in the past.

The new category will have to be very tightly defined from the outset (there will always be some rare grey areas, as evidenced by some of the much misrepresented intersex area of understanding, but this isn't what we need to guard against and in most cases is relatively simple to sort).
The people this will most affect and most appeal to (I'd imagine) will be the elite female athletes and sportspeople. The ones missing out on the big prizes because of males. So I'd imagine the move to this category could be highly motivating in general. Those females happy with the inclusion of males can remain in the "wom*en's" categories, and that's fine. How this will be made to work with prize money, etc., is tricky. But I know what the majority of people would want to support in, e.g., the Olympics.

I’d give it a couple of years.

I'd give it a couple of weeks.

If anyone is on Twitter, please add your comments. It seems as though th various sports bodies in the UK are doing this at the same time.

twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status/1316009752980148224

This is how we know that they do not believe, not for one moment, that transwomen are women. The history of women's sport is of exclusion, and downplaying, and disregarding. The moment males want to participate, then suddenly inclusion is the rule.

It's not even subtle. None of this is.

This. Of course they don't fucking believe they're women. No one really does. It's just about just redefining the category of women so actual women don't have a voice.

In terms of viewing on telly (so advertising revenue, sponsorship, etc.), if you want to see really great female athletes, you watch the "biological female". If you want to see great male athletes who identify as women (also beautiful, also valid, of course), you watch the "wom*n's". Hopefully there would be support for both. In effect it's the same as introducing a third "trans" category/space, but we have to leave our word behind and move to a new one.

Urgh, why can't women just be nice and let transwomen play rugby with them? It's just letting transwomen continue to play their sport isn't It? Maybe women should just be nice and share.

Obviously that position requires entirely ignoring the safety of women (I refuse to use Cis) being able to play their sport fairly and without being disadvantaged by biology.

I'm so annoyed. So disappointed in this decision. It's clear that what is more important is making transwomen rugby players happier, much more important than letting women feel safe.

There is a reason why secondary school girls don't play rugby with secondary school boys. It's not because secondary school girls wear skirts or have a she/her pronoun.

I'm incoherent. FFS.

Who provides insurance for RFU? And have they been made aware?

Allowing males to play against females in rugby is going to result in many more legal claims as a result of injury, I'm not sure insurers will want to cover that risk.

Could they be sued for sex discrimination?

This is my thought.

What evidence besides eyes and basic biology is needed ..

Its not a complex genetic test to dx rare conditions its should makes be abke to play against females

No.

Simple as fuck.

It seems as though th various sports bodies in the UK are doing this at the same time.

It does. It seems coordinated, to me.

englandrugbyinsurance.co.uk

Howden are now the RFU brokers of Club Liability insurance:We're here to helpmembers, clubs and staff work together to minimise risk and help make surerugby is safe - on and off the pitch - for everyone.

Fucking bastards.

Trans rights to SNAP WOMEN'S NECKS.

That's what this is. This is death and paralysis waiting to happen.

Once again, the entire concept of 'trans' is the issue here.

Bastards. They hate women and girls.

Absolute fucking cunts the lot of them.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

It seems as though th various sports bodies in the UK are doing this at the same time.

It does. It seems coordinated, to me.

I believe that gendered intelligence were due to deliver their report on trans inclusion to sport England in September

I’ve looked to see if it’s been made public but I can’t see it but given that particular organisation I’ll be amazed if it says anything other than TWAW and must be included in all levels of sport