This 'inclusion over safety' approach at the lower levels is, at best, misguided and, at worst, dangerous.
Don't know much about low level rugby but I know that at low level American Football in this country (where players pay to play as they love the game), the medical personnel are often limited to well-meaning St John's Ambulance types who are out of their depth beyond low-level first aid.
I didn't play in this game but an ex-teammate once got a compound fracture of the arm in a game (not even a bad tackle, just put an arm out to save himself falling) and the St John's people were just horrified and out of their depth. Fortunately one of our defensive tackles was a paramedic and knew what to do before the ambulance came.
Point isn't to have a go at those giving up their time to allow others to play organised contact sports, but more that when you have biological males playing violent sports against opponents they already gave a physical advantage over (and perhaps even more so as female weekend players are less likely to be in as good physical condition as those playing at the international level) then you risk bad injuries to women who need to go to work the next day. If there are bad breaks and spinal injuries etc caused by physical mismatches then the absence of fully trained medical staff risk making such injuries worse.
In a way then, it actually makes more sense for it to happen internationally as at least the medical support would be better.