FA to ban men from womens football

[LivelyFinch]

Sanity is starting to prevail.

Thanks @WandaSiri .. sorry.. must have googled the wrong Ross Tucker..

Maybe the Sports Organisations were under pressure from their insurance companies... it has been a hope that they would... I guess I didn't see any evidence that anyone was sticking up for women, not the sport organisations, not the courts and I have never seen any evidence of insurance companies stepping up to the plate.

I don't think insurance companies are sticking up for women and girls, sadly - it's that everybody now knows that the sports bodies have no legal cover for the increased risks of putting women in competition with men, especially in contact sports.

https://x.com/millihill/status/1918009389589356570
Listen here. She certainly shut Evan Davies up.

@ChateauMargaux it’s here that Sharron Davies mentions the FA insurance

This isn't my area of expertise but Public Liability Insurance provides cover for the insured party against the costs of a claim under EqA2010. Following the SC ruling, any sports organiser that that allows members of one sex to compete in competitions that are ostensibly for the opposite sex would be liable to a claim of direct discrimination from any member of the named sex and indirect discrimination from any member of the excluded sex without the additional protected characteristic. Any such claim would inevitably succeed. Insurers do not insure against a certainty.

ETA

Of course I don't know what appetite the insurers might have to write specific exclusions into the policy terms to remove cover in these and similar circumstances or the appetite of the insured to accept such exclusions.

Another local "lovely lady" moaning about the policy:

https://www.echo-news.co.uk/news/25134935.castle-point-trans-goalie-leaves-team-fa-policy-change/

How long will we have to see the pronouns not based on correct sex

The Supreme Court ruling was clear on biological male. Will it change the language we see?

This policy comes into effect today, and there is an article on BBC Sport:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/football/articles/cx2e0l5gr27o

It starts off with an interview with a transwoman called Sky, who is very sad about the new policy. However, Sky is still playing football on a non FA-affiliated team, so is not being prevented from playing football. Sky has also turned down the offer to coach or referee on an FA-affiliated women's team.

However, the article does give a decent amount of space to an interview with a female footballer who supports the policy (anonymously of course, for fear of reprisals). And she discussed the fact that female players have been put in situations where they come up against male players, against their consent, and are told not to say anything. So overall, it's not a bad article.

@ItsCoolForCats yes, it included everybody's point of view.

What it didn't do though, is address why transgender Billie thinks "I don't feel safe playing there" (with the men) and why women should be in the position of being unsafe instead, and, unlike Billie, it has been without any choice in the matter.

It also didn't question Billie's statement that Billie's teammates "want me here". Maybe they do, maybe they don't, but given that of the women that the BBC talked to, "Most did not want to go on record with their opinions because of a fear of reprisals, but one footballer, who plays in the sixth tier of the women's game, was willing to speak anonymously" we certainly can't assume that Billie's teammates are able to speak the truth.

In fact, that was my main takeaway from this article. The poor, vulnerable transgender Billie is happy to use their own name and own photo, but although the BBC approached "a number of grassroots footballers who support the ban" they couldn't find a single one who was prepared to risk "a fear of reprisals" by going on public record.

It’s not a bad article, though rather emotive when talking about the poor male player (they’ve chosen to feature a very “pretty” one) and somewhat more factual when addressing the women’s point of view.
So, on the face of it, balanced, but with some bias towards the trans player.

I agree. It think it's probably the best we can expect from the BBC in terms of balance though. It would be interesting to delve more into why female players are afraid of speaking out, but hopefully people can read between the lines with that.

The article said Billie played for two teams. Billie will carry on playing with one of them as they are no longer FA affiliated in response to the policy. I assume these are the players that Billie says are supportive. This could be a solution for those teams who are adamant that they want trans women to keep playing with them. Although, if that is the vibe, it's likely any women on the team who disagree with doing this will keep silent.

I wish the article would explore why Billie doesn’t feel safe playing on a men’s team.

feeling safe has become a catch up that can’t be questioned. Unless it is women saying that and then it is transphobia.

Youve nailed it in terms of the insurance position I think.

My OH is in the industry and assures me that the cost of such an exception would be considerable given that such a case would now certainly lose. As a pp said, there's no profit in insuring against a certainty and moreover one that is likely to occur in the current litigious climate in this area.

I do find it annoying that the driver is basic capitalism rather than obvious science or interest in women's rights, but I'll take our wins where i find them 🙂

Yes Billie who transitioned at the age of 24 and is now 28 somehow isn't safe with males like him, why not?

Journalist should be drilling down and asking why but they won't.

I suspect that the team he is playing for rather cynically welcome the unfair advantage that it gives them to have a male on the team.

Happy Women get to play Football day everyone in England !!!!

Great post from

Women's Rights Network - WRN

Today’s the day that men are kicked out of women’s football.

At long last women’s football is for women only (unless you live in Wales where the Wales FA has yet to change its policy). There’s a flurry of interviews out there with males bemoaning the fact that women’s football is now fair and safe. Some useful thoughts to retain while listening to the whinge-fest:

⚽️ No one is banned from sport. Males can play on men’s teams where they belong. And use the men’s changing rooms and toilets where they belong.

⚽️ If men who are gender-non-conforming feel ‘unsafe’ in men’s teams then that’s a man problem. It’s not down to women to sort out men’s issues.

⚽️ Women who are gender non-conforming can play in the women’s teams as they always have. Unless they’re on testosterone because that’s cheating. If you choose to cheat then you should be banned from sport.

This day is long overdue.

Wales is next.

The media really seems to go with the mental health angle, suggesting that this is the primary aim of including males in the women's teams. The trans players could still be included if they stayed on as coaches or referees. They would still be part of the team, they would get exercise and could pass on their skills, they would still have the camaraderie and social life that comes with being part of a club. All wonderful things for someone's mental health. However, Billie turned down this opportunity because Billie is only interested in women's football if he can play competitively.

I read the Poor Billie article this morning. No exploring how men's football should change to become a safe environment for all men.

I didn't find it a balanced article on that basis.

Obviously the women who are against this have to remain anonymous due to the hate they receive from the #BeKind crowd.

For the men they like to proudly show off the results of their transition. Their gender transition has made them special and they're getting media attention. You would expect nothing less from the people who "just want to live their lives in peace".

They could also ask why he feels safe as the focus of a BBC article, but the women who disagree do not feel safe.

Quite. It's such a jarring statement in the article and yet the 'journalist' just ignores it.

But the TRA would tell us that the women quoted should be ashamed of their views and that is why they are anonymous- even though the reality is their anonymity is required to protect them

I am getting slightly annoyed with this not safe in the men's whatever as it has never been proven beyond the 'feelz' of these people.

The sad truth is that Billie is probably not good enough to play on the men's team. Whereas he brings extra strength and speed to the women's team, and it centres attention on him.

I am - as usual - late to the convo.

I did, once upon a time and many years ago, deal with football liability claims, amongst other things. Way back before transgender players were ever an issue..

Football Clubs usually get their cover through some sort of scheme, often at county level, to make it cheaper. It will provide PL for physical injury (not between players in course of game) and third party property damage, EL for injury to employees, and officers and professional indemnity to cover wrongful acts (like discrimination), and claims for libel and advice given. Player to player liability and accident cover are usually available as add ons.

I doubt insurers had much sway in affecting policy at the FA. I am not sure that the inclusion of transgender players presented a significantly higher risk to insurers, despite posing an increased risk to female players. As long as clubs were following the FA guidance on transgender eligibility it would have been hard for anyone to pursue a claim for an injury on the pitch, unless the player causing the injury was particularly egregious in their foul play. Just being bigger and stronger wouldn't be enough to make the player liable for injury through standard play. Just for context, I saw just one player to player claim for the scheme I dealt with and it got booted out (pun intended) because the claimant had caused his own injury. He'd gone in for a completely wild tackle, totally misjudged and busted his leg. Ref had red carded him on the stretcher.

I do think the FA are responsible, at least morally, for women who have sustained serious injuries from male transgender players in the past, although whether they could be held legally liable I have no idea.

I think insurers and FA feared claims for discrimination, both the financial effect and the publicity, much more and thus inclusion of transgender players in the women's game would have been fully accepted by insurers.

Basically fairness and safety for women didn't come into the equation.

Billie isn't happy with the BBC article as he doesn't think it is impartial: I’m Billie from the article about the FA football ban on trans women : r/transgenderUK

Billie thinks that most 'cis' women support tw playing in women's football, so the BBC should also have interviewed a cis woman to give this view, not just a 'cis' woman who doesn't support it.

Billie also suggests that the female footballer chose to stay anonymous because her opinion isn't popular, even though the stated reason was fear of reprisals, which we know to be the case because of how Cerys Vaughan was treated.

Honestly, it just shows how utterly futile it is to try to get these men to see things from women's perspective. They surround themselves with people who unquestionably affirm them, and from this position they discount other women's concerns. They are so selfish and self-centred.

I think everything Billy says has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

.