Clare Balding Show BBC2

[C H Calthrop]

I think you are a little confused about terminology. You have used the terms "gender studies", "gender politics" and "gender equality". Your statement that "gender studies maintains that men and women are the same" (i.e equal) is simply wrong (yes, there is a theory that gender is a social construct but there are many competing theories in all academic disciplines). You then seemed to switch to "gender politics" as if gender politics and gender studies are one and the same. Despite that conflation you now claim to not be taking about gender equality. Your argument is confused by lack of clarity in terminology.

No, not at all. Any reference to gender anything whether colloquial or not doesn't detract from the argument. 

I mentioned gender politics in the context of the backing it give the promotion of mens sport to women in this case by the BBC  and gender studies the source of the mantras that make believe men are the same as women much of which will be cherry picked to reinforce the gender politics. I never mentioned gender equality except to state I never mentioned gender equality.

[ckn]

I remember going to assess one referee (union) who had somehow got to quite a senior level without refereeing a women's game, he was reffing one of the most senior domestic women's games in England and he was such a patronising thwaite that both captains asked me before the game if I could remove him.  I asked to listen to his captain's briefing (not something I normally do) and he was talking to two players with double figures international caps and treating them as if they were precious little 6 year olds who might break a fingernail.  I ended up asking the number 1 assistant ref to do the game instead and sending the ref home.

 

The point of that is that women turning to play rugby (of either code) won't be doing it without knowing what goes on regardless of how junior the game.  They're volunteers to the game, no-one has forced them onto the field.  If they're playing for a club then I can guarantee that they'll have been to at least one or two training sessions or watched a game and will know what goes on on a field.  If they're playing for a university side, then unless they're doing it as an idiot bet and have conned the coach/captain into letting them play they'll know what goes on on a field.  To patronise them by trying to hold them back is just as bad as telling them they can't challenge any male-dominated area because it's too tough for them.

 

Try telling the woman in this video that she shouldn't be playing because she might damage her "looks".

[Shadow]

No, not at all. Any reference to gender anything whether colloquial or not doesn't detract from the argument. 

I mentioned gender politics in the context of the backing it give the promotion of mens sport to women in this case by the BBC  and gender studies the source of the mantras that make believe men are the same as women much of which will be cherry picked to reinforce the gender politics. I never mentioned gender equality except to state I never mentioned gender equality.

Men aren't the same as women in any number of ways but that doesn't mean they can't do the same things

[C H Calthrop]

Again, you are making assumptions here.  Those women attending university who want to try out rugby league will likely already have made acquaintance with their testosterone.  The girls I coached in rugby league were already involved in sports, including hockey which is another high risk game.  A woman at university will have a much better idea of what kind of thing they like to do than the girls I coached and so the chances of them being surprised by rugby league will be far lower than you suggest. 

 

You also forget that women play women, not men.  There is not the muscle mass involved and the female body gives in ways that male bodies do not due to shape and the location of fatty tissue.  I haven't seen any stats - I'm not sure whether any have been compiled - but I would be very surprised if female rugby league is as risky to play as the male version due to the physical differences between the sexes.  Sure, anyone can get a random elbow in the face but then they could experience that or its equivalent in a host of other sports.  Hockey has been a mainstay in female school sports since the year dot yet the damage that a puck and hockey stick can do to another person is well up there.  I played lacrosse and winded an opposition player pretty badly in only my second competitive game.  Women risk injury in all manner of sports, individual and team, contact and non-contact.  Rugby league is just a relative newcomer to the list for most. 

Likely! And then again not likely. Gareth Thomas on his first run out for a Celtic took his first tackle head down. Now as a Union international with huge amount of experience and coached by Brian Noble  in RL he then went on to do it again minutes later. Standing bandy as they say. If he can show the results of poor preparation and inexperience then newcomers can too.

What I propose is less Spice Girls more pragmatism. Less you can do it and more this is what you are doing and what can happen which is the only reasonable approach.  Which i dare say you agree with and I know you are not really comparing hockey with RL.

 

My palate was cracked by a 17 yr old 12 1/2 stone young man, landing on my head with his knee. Some of those female forwards are pretty big (do they give their weight in stats) and would do exactly the same.

[C H Calthrop]

Men aren't the same as women in any number of ways but that doesn't mean they can't do the same things

Who said they can't do the same things.

[Railway End]

My palate was cracked by a 17 yr old 12 1/2 stone young man, landing on my head with his knee. Some of those female forwards are pretty big (do they give their weight in stats) and would do exactly the same.

My wife's friend used to play international hockey and suffered a broken palate and lost a mouthful of teeth when accidentally whacked by a stick.

My mates daughter broke her nose courtesy of a stray elbow while playing netball at school last year.

Conclusion: Injuries happen in most sports (particularly team games). As long as the participant understands the potential for injury in his or her chosen sport where's the problem?

[C H Calthrop]

My wife's friend used to play international hockey and suffered a broken palate and lost a mouthful of teeth when accidentally whacked by a stick.

My mates daughter broke her nose courtesy of a stray elbow while playing netball at school last year.

Conclusion: Injuries happen in most sports (particularly team games). As long as the participant understands the potential for injury in his or her chosen sport where's the problem?

Potential and consequences of injuries.

Where is the problem? That will be figured out after the fact, in later life by the individual concerned. if there is no problem then ok.  As I have gone to great pains to point out no one is denying choice. You will of course agree that injury in hockey and netball of the type you describe are not the result of normal play but by accident and foul play. Full contact sport can have serious injury as result of perfectly ordinary and legal play. 

[Wolford6]

That's not your decision to make.

 

It would be if I was the parent of a post-pubescent  daughter under 16 years of age.

[Saintslass]

Likely! And then again not likely. Gareth Thomas on his first run out for a Celtic took his first tackle head down. Now as a Union international with huge amount of experience and coached by Brian Noble  in RL he then went on to do it again minutes later. Standing bandy as they say. If he can show the results of poor preparation and inexperience then newcomers can too.

Every boy/young man who plays his first game of rugby league will be equally vulnerable to injury from inexperience, as Gareth Thomas was (albeit an older inexperienced man).  Inexperience in women is no reason for them not to play and nor do women prepare any less thoroughly than men when they play.  Have you watched women play rugby league?  If you haven't then I would recommend that you do. 

 

 

 

What I propose is less Spice Girls more pragmatism. Less you can do it and more this is what you are doing and what can happen which is the only reasonable approach.  Which i dare say you agree with and I know you are not really comparing hockey with RL.

 

My palate was cracked by a 17 yr old 12 1/2 stone young man, landing on my head with his knee. Some of those female forwards are pretty big (do they give their weight in stats) and would do exactly the same.

I'm not sure what you mean by your first sentence.  As for the rest, why women should be warned more than men or wrapped in cotton wool more than men I have no idea.  Clearly you have a strange idea of what women are made of.  They give birth to children.  A broken nose may hurt some girls' vanity or a cracked palate may be very painful, but squeezing a child out of the vagina (usually causing tearing) when conscious would at least equate to that level of pain.  What do you think women are?  Wimps?