Rugby - RFU seeking feedback on its transgender policy

[Biscuitsanddoombar]

Will go on its website on Wednesday to get public feedback

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

I know this thread has pretty much stopped but I've just read comments on an article on FB. Predictably there are "Why don't the women say no, we're not having it?"

Gosh, if only we’d thought of that!

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

I know this thread has pretty much stopped but I've just read comments on an article on FB. Predictably there are "Why don't the women say no, we're not having it?"

Past, I'm not sure if you're asking or being sarcastic or not, but women won't object - they simply won't. They don't want to be dropped by their sponsors, dropped by their clubs, attacked on social media for being bigots or transphobic. There really is NO where for them to go but to put up and shut up.

Just banging my head on the table knowing why women can't object. Men always wonder why the women aren't saying no when we are but they aren't listening.

The rugby issue is peaking a lot of the men in my life - DH, friends and colleagues who, up til recently have done a bit of an eyeball roll and seen the whole sex-based rights thing as a non issue.

Many men I know are sitting up and paying attention to this.

So apparently this is England Rugby’s definition of male and female 🙄

"Male: refers to a person who produces testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

Female: refers to a person who does not produce male levels of testosterone at puberty
and adolescence."

@PastMyBestBeforeDate

Just banging my head on the table knowing why women can't object. Men always wonder why the women aren't saying no when we are but they aren't listening.

When they bleat, where are the feminists? Why aren’t you speaking up?

Fuck off.

@Sexnotgender

So apparently this is England Rugby’s definition of male and female 🙄

"Male: refers to a person who produces testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

Female: refers to a person who does not produce male levels of testosterone at puberty
and adolescence."

What?

See attached for their excellent glossary

@Sexnotgender

See attached for their excellent glossary

So women are just non-men

Why not define men as a people who do not produce female levels of oestrogen at puberty? Oh that's right, 'male' has to be the default in fucking everything!

It’s like they’ve been taking direction from the Green Party. Men and non-men.

Arseholes.

It seems deliberate to me, all smoke and mirrors to make out that the only difference is testosterone levels - and behold! These males have lower levels so can now play in women’s rugby too. It’s such a dick move, pretending that the differences are negligible. When organisations trot out this rubbish it just makes them look like idiots. It’s astonishing how many organisations are willing to sacrifice their credibility and reputation in this way, ONS being another case in point. What insulting sexist claptrap!

@Sexnotgender

So apparently this is England Rugby’s definition of male and female 🙄

"Male: refers to a person who produces testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

Female: refers to a person who does not produce male levels of testosterone at puberty
and adolescence."

I’m not surprised they’re having trouble telling the difference between males and females if that’s their definition. Maybe they could ask somebody with GCSE biology to rewrite this section?

@Sexnotgender

See attached for their excellent glossary

That definition of female really says it all doesn’t it???

@Sexnotgender

See attached for their excellent glossary

That is such a pathetic effort.

I am embarrassed for them and glad DS has decided not to play any more. I’m sure that their zero regard for safeguarding only applies to girls but I want nothing to do with such an absolute shower.

As I suspect is usual practice for most of us if we're honest, I read down the definition list and stopped when I thought I'd found the entry that was for me: refers to a person who produces testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

Excellent. Well we're mostly all male then.

'Male: refers to a person who produces testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

Female: refers to a person who does not produce male levels of testosterone at puberty
and adolescence."

Oh fuck them. Non males. Like men but lacking...

All this tells me is all these years, any gains we thought we made were bollocks.

We're still just like men but more rubbish. In their eyes.

Seriously fuck them.

Interestingly my DH who for unknown reasons has his testosterone at rock bottom

And is over 6 foot, used to play rugby, and is a powerful male build

Is female?

Erm ok.

This stuff is really offensive to men with low testosterone isn't it.

He's a massive bloke with everything working but according to them he's a woman....?

And WHY are the definitions of female in this sort of thing always related to how we differ from men?

(Rhetorical question)

I’m incandescent about that definition.

When you place it in the context of how women’s rugby, and rugby playing women have been treated, and continue to be treated as lesser, it is a fucking slap in the face.

This is what focusing on testoerone levels gets you- complete scientific illiteracy that leads to nonsense like this that doesn’t just disappear all of the other sex based differences, but uses male as the default, and frames women as inferior.

When we’re talking about WOMENS RUGBY, in which you would think it would be reasonable to USE WOMEN AS THE DEFAULT MEASURE!

FUCK OFF ENGLAND RUGBY. RED CARD.

Makes no sense.

Male: refers to a person who produces testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

Female: refers to a person who does not produce male levels of testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

But apparently any testosterone being produced means someone is male. So there isn't a 'male' level.

That level of sexism and idiocy is almost impressive.

I think we need to be talking about a boycott of the men's RFU, and their sponsors, if they don't pull their heads out of their arses.

Oh look. A complete list of RFU partners.
www.englandrugby.com/about-rfu/rfu-partners

So often in these debates, you get told that the definition between male and female is so complex and anyone saying any different has an infantile understanding, and yet on the other hand they're arguing that the only difference is testosterone?

@Collidascope

Makes no sense.

Male: refers to a person who produces testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

Female: refers to a person who does not produce male levels of testosterone at puberty and adolescence.

But apparently any testosterone being produced means someone is male. So there isn't a 'male' level.

That level of sexism and idiocy is almost impressive.

Good point I had misread it as saying a male level of testosterone. But then that means everyone is male since even women have some testosterone in us? So it doesn't even make any sense.

Gender data gap of the week
Sticking with non-men playing sport, (A LIKELY STORY 🧐) this week came the revelation that while the FA mandates four doctors at every men’s premier league match, only one doctor is required at women’s matches. The doctors at the men’s matches also have access to real time replays to help them spot concussions as they happen. The women’s doctor does not. A gender data gap if ever there was one.
Meanwhile, the BBC proclaims a saliva test for concussion to be 94% accurate – but only in men, because it hasn’t been tested in women.
All this despite the fact that we know women are both more likely than men to experience concussion and suffer longer term consequences. Although it should be noted that there is a data gap here too: all the research on sport-induced early onset dementia has, so far, only been done in men.
This is pretty standard for sport science, which as I wrote in a 2019 article for The Telegraph has one of the worst data gaps of any research area. There is, however, a woman on a mission to change this, at least when it comes to women’s rugby: Dr Elizabeth Williams, a researcher at Swansea University.
Her findings, which include significant sex differences in neck strength as well as in how and when players receive head injuries (in the male game it tends to occur to the person tackling, but this is very rare in the female game) should add urgency to the need to collect data in female athletes specifically, rather than applying research done in men to all humans. Female athletes need female-specific training based on female-specific research.( Extract from " Invisible Women" Newsletter)

So not just England rugby who don't give a damn about their female players' safety. Who would have guessed!