Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

IRFU Transgender Women Policy Change

1246712

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭M three


    Best to deal with the obvious issues first. Like I've outlined and explained above.

    Funnily enough the current publicity and furore is this:

    men (who identify as women) wanting to play with biological women. Now why would that be I wonder....



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,534 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    In light of the current debate and controversy surrounding brain trauma in sport, there's no way that IRFU could allow a potential situation to rise where biologically male players can compete against biologically female ones. THe documentation already supports evidence that female players suffer concussions at lower levels of force to begin with, adding the increase mass and strength of biologically male players into the equation is a potential disaster down the line



  • Registered Users Posts: 12,920 ✭✭✭✭stephen_n


    That 19 year is very unlikely to playing at any level that would put them in contact with 120kg extremely fit players. At 19 I was 57kgs and playing junior rugby. Which wax ok for the most part as everything happened at such a slow pace. There are levels where it doesn’t matter. Though the 57kgs I had was fairly much aided by Testosterone.

    I don’t think anyone should celebrate the fact that these two players can’t play womens rugby. However that doesn’t mean it is not the correct decision. The risk involved in not taking this decision. Far outweighs any risks of taking it. I’m sure that’s why the decision is being made. It’s not any form of prejudice.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,795 ✭✭✭Mrcaramelchoc


    Absolutely the right decision. They should not be allowed in the women's game. If they are so anxious to play why not set up their own competition or play with the men.. if that's allowed.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,994 ✭✭✭✭Spanish Eyes


    Correct decision.

    I can see why a failing biological male in a male sport might be top dog if they call themselves a woman and perform/compete in women's sports. They have a biological advantage over biological females. That's true isn't it?

    Is that a reason why they do it? I reckon so.



  • Advertisement
  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,188 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    I for one am not celebrating. Its a deeply unfortunate outcome and there was no way to come to a decision that ultimately wouldn't prejudice some people. But a decision had to be made.



  • Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 27,188 Mod ✭✭✭✭Podge_irl


    There is an obvious difference between someone taking on a risk on themselves versus a risk on others.



  • Registered Users Posts: 204 ✭✭Capra


    I think you need to reread your own post and my post....

    These trans players are still perfectly entitled to play rugby, just not women's rugby contrary to your post...

    Being sound to someone does not always mean giving them everything they want. It might be sound to give a drug addict the drugs they want or a child the dangerous things they want to play with. As adults we are supposed to do the right thing above the "sound" thing. I think the IRFUs decision is quite right and sound to the women who are probably now relieved they won't have to play against biological males.

    I actually know 2 people who consider themselves transgender including one of them who would have been my best friend for years growing up. He has always had issues that go far beyond being allowed to play a sport or not and unfortunately that is the case for an awful lot of trans people. He was a big rugby player and extraordinarily strong and at times worryingly aggressive to the point where he attacked another guy who used to bully him and gave him a ruptured spleen and fractured his own hand. He now identifies as a woman although i havent spoken to him in 12 years. I'd be extremely worried for the wellbeing of any woman playing against him if he decided to play rugby in his new identity as a woman.



  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    I can completely understand the safety aspect of the decision, but it doesn't mean that it's not without its flaws and hypocrises.

    You can understand that and not be a dick (not saying you specifically are, it's a 'general you') about it, while I can also question the hypocrisy around what we see in rugby every single week that isn't addressed.

    This issue effects two players. How many times a week are we seeing concussions or really serious injuries from men (or women) of different shapes and sizes playing against each other, even at junior level?

    I am allowed to think this decision was considered while also being compassionate towards these two women and also questioning the safeguarding protocols already in place for the game - which is leading to numerous injuries on a weekly basis. These women (that we're aware of) haven't done anything wrong yet are given blanket bans while dangerous players in the mens game (and there are a small amount, lets not kid ourselves here. We have all played with or against one) are allowed to play week in, week out despite the clear and obvious recklessness and disregard they show to other players safety.

    That's why I think the decision is flawed. The dangers and safety elements of this happen in clubs every week and this was before any transgender women showed up.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,534 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    That's why I think the decision is flawed. The dangers and safety elements of this happen in clubs every week and this was before any transgender women showed up.

    I think you have that backwards tbh. Rugby is going to reach a point with respect to brain trauma where there's going to have to be some sort of liability waiver to play imo. You can't separate the game from the risk, without it becoming non-contact. I don't see them being able to accommodate the potential power differential of a trans woman with increased mitigation efforts towards brain trauma.



  • Advertisement
  • Site Banned Posts: 12,341 ✭✭✭✭Faugheen


    But how much more powerful are these two women, in reality? Did they pose a threat? Did their team-mates want to play with them? Has any woman involved in rugby come out against this?

    People can make the point of 'what if Andrew Porter decides to wear a dress and call himself a woman' but that's the extreme end of it, isn't it?

    Trans people don't 'decide' they're trans, just like gay people don't decide they're gay. Using extreme examples is the ultimate in bad faith.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,534 ✭✭✭✭AbusesToilets


    It's not a question of those people operating in bad faith, I think there's an element of the irfu taking action to protect people from themselves. I've no doubt the players in question are sound, and their teammates like them a lot, but that doesn't mean that they aren't potentially at risk from them. Sex based segregation exists for a reason. Either you support that, and recognize the necessity of it, or you're advocating for the elimination of women's sports in totality.

    You also have to acknowledge that they aren't just acting in relation to these two individuals, they're projecting forward into the future to protect themselves from potential liability, and also presumably acting in good faith to protect other players from injury.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,599 ✭✭✭✭CIARAN_BOYLE


    While I generally agree with the IRFU decision I do wonder if a line around puberty could have been drawn.

    IE any transwoman who transitioned before puberty can play womans rugby. The IRFU statement mentions the benefits of a male puberty. Probably completely unworkable though.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 896 ✭✭✭DarkJager21


    No, because trans interference pre puberty should never ever be accepted. It is child abuse and nothing else.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,035 ✭✭✭✭chopperbyrne


    Anyone against this policy is arguing to allow things like this to happen.

    https://twitter.com/NawTrouble/status/1521169266958995458?s=20&t=rdJpWGuXj4XbSShxN9mslQ

    As for trans men playing in men's rugby, they'll still have a smaller frame due to their biology, so it's also a difficult one to justify, but at least they have a clause that the player acknowledges the risk to themselves.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    IRFU's policy for the female U18 category reads:

    Players are only permitted to play in the gender category if the sex that was originally recorded at birth is female.


    Took me less than a minute to find that out.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    ...did you look at the comments on the thread that the IRFU announced this policy on? A single glance would tell you this is incorrect.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    My argument is that the case-by-case basis works because there is nuance to the subject. I haven't a notion what this wall of text is trying to prove but I do know what it is actually telling me.



  • Registered Users Posts: 245 ✭✭thegreycity


    Without wanting to delve into this particular policy change, the level of ignorance around trans people from some of the posters here really is something.

    Even the guy who was best friends with a trans woman as kids is still referring to her by male pronouns.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,327 ✭✭✭✭Larbre34


    Faugheen, it sounds to me like you really don't understand the safety aspect at all.

    Or you're prepared to minimise it for the sake of inclusivity.

    Thats a dangerous enough road to take and one the Union simply cannot.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭M three


    This nonsense around adjudicating the whole thing on a case by case basis is totally deluded.

    Its MAYBE workable when you have only 2 cases but what happens when there is more. Do you expect the IRFU and everyone else to start employing people to adjudicate on these cases non stop? It would end up in a mess with adjudicating officers and sporting bodies being dragged to the courts every week by people throwing their toys out of the pram at any perceived slight.

    The IRFU are to be commended and applauded for their actions which bring clarity to the situation, will improve the safety of players, and will eliminate the risk of biologically female players being subjected to serious injury by biologically male players.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,036 ✭✭✭Jonnyc135


    So your a young woman that has spent all her life hard work and grafting to be top of her game and somebody that's naturally going to be stronger through genetics is comming in swooping up medals as they will be at a clear advantage. Women's sport for birthcert born females, Men's sport for birthcert born males and if trans people want to compete on a level playing field they can set up there own tournaments.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    'It's totally deluded...to do the thing that we were doing before" is a fantastic take.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭M three


    Bingo.

    That can be reposted ad infinitum until the reality starts to sink in for the deluded posters on here.

    Those advocating for biological males to be let loose against biological females havent a notion when it comes to the business of getting insurance cover for rugby or GAA.

    The minute a biological male flattens and seriously injures a biological female on a sports field I guarantee you the insurance company underwriting the players injury fund would pull the pin. Then again some of the trans people foaming at the mouth at the IRFU this week would be more than happy at that outcome. If they cant play and be pandered to endlessly then why should anyone else be allowed to play🙄



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    The last two sentences here are the most illustrative thing you've written.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭M three


    says you. BTW the IRFU arent going to change their minds about this and I expect other sporting bodies all over the world will do likewise.

    So good luck with your campaign or crusade or whatever you call it. Its doomed.

    And I'll reiterate this again, kudos and well done to the IRFU. Putting the safety of biologically female players front and centre. The correct and proper decision.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    What campaign or crusade or whatever I call it do you think I'm on?



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,142 ✭✭✭M three


    Im off to bed, busy day of games to go to tomorrow. Delighted that the whole nonsense of biological males being allowed to play against biological females has been clarified and put to an end for good.

    You enjoy spending the day indoors writing complaints to the IRFU or whatever.

    Cheerio.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,320 ✭✭✭Teferi


    I can't spend the day indoors writing complaints to the IRFU or whatever, I'm off on a campaign or a crusade or whatever.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 204 ✭✭Capra


    Because he is not a woman at all and never will be. I dont accept this nonsense that we have to pretend that genders are meaningless. He hasn't transitioned medically and he calls himself a woman despite only occasionally dressing as a woman. Most of the time he just wears some makeup from what ive seen on his Facebook. He does not meet any definition of a woman. He has however always been a serious attention seeker. I remember him being abusive to his parents all the time and him writing weird gothic poetry on the blackboard before class. Never once did he act in an overtly feminine manner when we were in school together and ive known him since i was 10. This trans thing seemed to happen very abruptly a few years after he came out as gay. His Facebook is a constant stream of trans activism and from what I've seen of the trans pride parades that happen in Dublin and elsewhere an awful lot of trans people seem to share very similar traits. There's a serious degree of narcissism in someone who thinks they should be allowed to keep all of their male sexual characteristics and still demand that they are called a woman.


    Just because I vehemently disagree with you on something doesn't mean I'm ignorant around trans issues. I'd wager that I'm considerably more informed on the debate than most. I've yet to see a convincing or rational argument in favour of gender theory that doesn't fall to shreds under even light scrutiny. It's just not based in any hard repeatable science, it's all totally subjective.

    When you can't define gender how can you demand that someone must use pronouns which refer to gender. Its either meaningless or its not.


    I also think this argument that anyone who hasn't gone through puberty should be allowed play is ludicrous. Testosterone is not the only advantage men have. Just look at videos of prodigious talents like Tiger Woods or Lionel Messi before they hit puberty. They were doing insane things well beyond the reach of any girls many years older than them. The differences in coordination and reaction speed in boys and girls are very real well before puberty.



Advertisement