Rugby - RFU seeking feedback on its transgender policy

[Biscuitsanddoombar]

Will go on its website on Wednesday to get public feedback

I've just done the survey not sure if has been linked so link here

www.englandrugby.com/about-rfu/rfu-policies/transgender-policy

I may have had a mini rant about the use of 'ciswoman' pointing out that women / girls playing rugby are not corresponding to the gender roles that 'cis' implies.

@NiceGerbil

I found this from USA which I know was discussed before.

www.womenssportsfoundation.org/press_release/billie-jean-king-megan-rapinoe-and-candace-parker-join-nearly-200-athletes-supporting-trans-youth-participation-in-sports/

They all say

If trans girls (and it seems to focus on girls, not women) can't compete with the girls then that means they are denied access to sport

(??!!)

And

Be kind.

That's it.

Billie Jean King? How disappointing.

The US left has lost its collective mind over this.

I watched the film The Battle of the Sexes a few years ago. What struck me was how hard BJK had to train in order to beat Rigg - a man twenty years older than her who had retired from professional tennis (iirc). Yes, she beat him - but according to the film, she was out on the court training everyday while he was messing around with TV interviews and gameshows. If he had put in the same amount of training, I think he would have beaten her.

Now, obviously it was a film and had artistic licence. Maybe she didn't train so hard as portrayed.

However, the idea that a male-bodied person competes on a level playing field with a female-bodied person is just so ludicrous. Rigg was already disadvantaged by age when he played her, regardless of any discrepancies in training intensity.

Sadly, I am a pessimist. I don't think things will change until it becomes clear that a handful of mtf transitioners are dominating women's sport and several women end up seriously hurt from clashing with mtf transitioners. Obviously Tamika Brents has already had her skull broken, but apparently that's not enough.

I just think if sports orgs were going to listen to reason, they would have done so by now.

@TinyRebel I honestly couldn't believe it when I saw it, they are absolutely vile and just don't get it do they?
Women's rugby has taken off massively, why are they looking to destroy it?
To attempt to doxx you is absolutely disgusting.
Maybe the old boys at the RFU have threatened the women with reduced funding or something.
Just a few years ago the top ladies teams were playing in the men's kit, just a few seasons out of date. (That's how seriously they were taken) Now they are a separate entity, why why why pull the ladder up?

However, the idea that a male-bodied person competes on a level playing field with a female-bodied person is just so ludicrous. Rigg was already disadvantaged by age when he played her, regardless of any discrepancies in training intensity.

Yes, and don't forget Rigg had already beaten Margaret Court when he played King. He probably thought he could relax.

I don't know how many trans women there are playing in women's tennis. Obviously if a half-decent male player decides to identify as female, he will very quickly start scooping up the prizes. What I really don't understand about the RFU's position is that this isn't just an issue of fairness (even though it is clearly massively unfair to women), it's an issue of safety. Anyone who knows even a teeny weeny amount about rugby knows it's a dangerous sport. The RFU is currently facing lawsuits from a group of former male players suffering dementia as a result of repeated concussion in training. The idea of allowing male-bodied people to play on women's teams isn't just unfair, it's utterly fucking demented. How can the sport's ruling body even contemplate such a thing? I can only assume they really hate women and want to hurt us.

The RFU is currently facing lawsuits from a group of former male players suffering dementia as a result of repeated concussion in training. The idea of allowing male-bodied people to play on women's teams isn't just unfair, it's utterly fucking demented.

I suspect it was a poor choice of word RoyalCorgi but if not, the first sentence may explain the last one.

Thanks for the link. I've filled it in.

I suspect it was a poor choice of word RoyalCorgi but if not, the first sentence may explain the last one.

LOL, I hadn't spotted the ambiguity in "former male players"!

Anyway, when I turn this stuff over in my head, I go through a cycle of enraged, depressed, baffled. Or sometimes all at once. I feel the same about the decision in California to put trans women (aka violent male offenders) in women's prisons. Is it because they are stupid? Or because they hate women? Or just a combination of the two?

It’s good to see improved inclusion for trans and male identifying players

What is this Mermaids nonsense? Oh yes, there is definitely a problem with including "male identifying" players as distinct from trans players in rugby. Presumably Verity believes that all men "identify as men" so one would imagine it's manly male men who are being talked about. What a ridiculous statement.

They seem to have deleted most of their replies from this twitter.com/EnglandRugby/status/1378791983930544130?s=20 I saw it on Sunday things were not going as they expected.

Going back to Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs for a moment....remember Renée Richards, who transitioned (surgically) aged 41 in the 1970s, after a highly successful athletic career, and then as a tennis player fought to compete in the US Open as a woman?

According to Wiki: Richards has since expressed ambivalence about her legacy, and came to believe her past as a man provided her with advantages over her competitors, saying "Having lived for the past 30 years, I know if I'd had surgery at the age of 22, and then at 24 went on the tour, no genetic woman in the world would have been able to come close to me. And so I've reconsidered my opinion."

Thanks for the link.

DH and I are watching the video.

He used to play rugby.

He laughed incredulously when they said that a player's size is not related to how likely they are to cause injury.

We have both filled it in.

He's a man who used to play rugby so maybe they will read his survey answers.

He's a man who used to play rugby so maybe they will read his survey answers.

I think perhaps we all need to identify as men who play rugby when filling in the “consultation”.

Thank you for this thread. I have responded to the survey.

The legal obligations of RFU extend only to reasonable adjustments to accommodate those with protected characteristics. The Equality Act 2010 allows for protected groups to be excluded from certain activities where there is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It is a legitimate aim to keep biologically female players safe.

It is beyond reasonable, and surely disproportionate, to put biologically female players at risk by allowing biological males to play alongside them. Similarly, allowing biological female players who identify as male to play alongside male players is reckless and I do not believe a signed waiver would sufficiently clear RFU in the case of a negligence claim as the risk is foreseeable based on scientific data that is widely available about the increased risk of rugby related injuries to biological female players.

I have serious concerns that allowing a biological male player could seriously injure my U18 daughter accidentally by way of their biological advantage in strength and power. World Rugby have already made their stance clear on safety grounds and I strongly believe that this is the correct one.

If this policy is introduced I will be insisting that our club notifies me if a trans female player joins the team so that I can withdraw my daughter for her own protection. This is a sad and personally very difficult prospect.

Completed it. Refused to tick Cis Woman so just wrote "woman" in the text box

Don't say that sexnotgender. It'll be used as 'proof' that any responses saying it's not a great policy were all written by 3 women on MN etc.

Also just thought.

This policy (and the IOC) with their testosterone level thing are saying that any man with testosterone lower than that is a non man, not a real man. A woman. That's a massive kick in the teeth for men may well already be feeling pretty bloody sensitive about it.

Ditto the weight/ height thing. Reminds me of that old USA advert about being a 7 stone weakling and needing the atlas program. Boys and men are very hierarchical and judgemental about the physique of other men.

What message does this send ?

I mean for years big strong women have had men saying they look like men as an insult.

Now we have big strong butch rugby saying if you're under this height/ weight/ testosterone then you're a woman?

That's really really shitty.

@GCSEmum2024

Thank you for this thread. I have responded to the survey.

The legal obligations of RFU extend only to reasonable adjustments to accommodate those with protected characteristics. The Equality Act 2010 allows for protected groups to be excluded from certain activities where there is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. It is a legitimate aim to keep biologically female players safe.

It is beyond reasonable, and surely disproportionate, to put biologically female players at risk by allowing biological males to play alongside them. Similarly, allowing biological female players who identify as male to play alongside male players is reckless and I do not believe a signed waiver would sufficiently clear RFU in the case of a negligence claim as the risk is foreseeable based on scientific data that is widely available about the increased risk of rugby related injuries to biological female players.

I have serious concerns that allowing a biological male player could seriously injure my U18 daughter accidentally by way of their biological advantage in strength and power. World Rugby have already made their stance clear on safety grounds and I strongly believe that this is the correct one.

If this policy is introduced I will be insisting that our club notifies me if a trans female player joins the team so that I can withdraw my daughter for her own protection. This is a sad and personally very difficult prospect.

As a rugby player and a rugby mum - Insee the problem more as the opposing team having a trans woman. If my own club introduced a trans player then I would know; the England Rugby policy is proposing (against the Equality Act) that neither I or my daughter have rights if we turn up on match day to see a male in the opposite position.

My son was 6ft and well built when he was 14. The idea of him playing rugby in a team against his twin sister doesn't bear thinking about.

I also think that most men, irrespective of a signed waiver, will not feel comfortable going full force against a trans man.

I propose, in the pursuit of fairness and inclusion, ALL levels of rugby should be 50/50 male and female. Everyone just signs a waiver and gets on with it.

Sounds good? No? Why not?

0there's the fact that a mediocre male rugby player can take a woman's place on a team due to his biological advantages

If strong teams make money like football, I can imagine our women's rugby will just be full of trans over time.

What's the point of height and weight restrictions if this doesn't apply to biological women they still feel being 'discriminated'.

We should have separate teams for transgender.

Just a word of warning. The survey is quite abrupt. It takes you through a number of tick poxes where you 'agree' or 'strongly disagree' etc with various bits of the policy, then there is one box for you to be able to write your own words. When you click to submit that box the survey finishes and that's it.

www.englandrugby.com/about-rfu/rfu-policies/transgender-policy

Slight derail here but I thought this was interesting timing.

There's an advert for a sensitive toothpaste on tv at the moment featuring a women's rugby team player midst game, then, afterwards drinking a cold drink.

Voiceover states 'some pain is worth taking' (playing rugby) and some not (tooth pain whilst drinking something cold)

Is this nudge theory at play here-conditioning us to believe anything thrown at a woman rugby player is 'worth it?'

Just completed it and gave them a piece of my mind as well. Phrases like 'seek to strike a balance between inclusion, fairness and safe inclusion' make me want to scream and shout. They are saying women should put up with more physical injuries so a male bodied player can take part in women's sport on the basis that that's where they 'feel most comfortable'. Do they think women are human? We certainly don't seem to have full human rights. Given the World Rugby research and that they require transmen to sign a declaration recognising the increased risk to them of playing in men's sport, and they separate girls and boys after the age of 12 for safety reasons, yet women get no say over whether they play against a transwoman or not, I cannot see the policy standing up in court for 5 minutes if an injured women takes them to court. Please do let them know what you think - It doesn't take long to complete.

@Sexnotgender

I propose, in the pursuit of fairness and inclusion, ALL levels of rugby should be 50/50 male and female. Everyone just signs a waiver and gets on with it.

Sounds good? No? Why not?

Ha! Yes.

Push for this 100% and watch the pushback...and then the embarrassed tumbleweed