Transgender players banned from international RL

[Damien]

I do think once swimming stuck it's head above the parapet it just made it easier for other sports to then follow suit:

Transgender players have been banned from women's internationals while the sport's governing body does further research on its inclusion policy.

International Rugby League (IRL) said it wanted to "balance the individual's right to participate... against perceived risk to other participants".

The move comes as a number of sports are considering transgender inclusion.

Transgender swimmers were on Sunday banned from women's elite races if they have gone through male puberty.

And World Athletics president Lord Coe hinted to the BBC that the sport could follow swimming's example, saying it is set to discuss adopting a new eligibility policy and that "fairness is non-negotiable".

The IRL said it had considered "relevant developments in world sport" in coming to its decision to ban transgender athletes until it had completed research on its final inclusion policy.

The ban will apply to the league's World Cup to be held in England in October. The competition involves teams from Australia, Brazil, Canada, Cook Islands, England, France, New Zealand and Papua New Guinea.

"It is the IRL's responsibility to balance the individual's right to participate - a long-standing principle of rugby league and at its heart from the day it was established - against perceived risk to other participants, and to ensure all are given a fair hearing," the organisation said.

"The IRL will continue to work towards developing a set of criteria, based on best possible evidence, which fairly balance the individual's right to play with the safety of all participants," its statement added.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/rugby-league/61875651

[Dave T]

Agree with your first line. Is it too much to expect RL to finish its review, or in reality is it one of those reviews that never leads to anything and this ban just covers it now? 

[Barley Mow]

2 minutes ago, Dave T said:

Agree with your first line. Is it too much to expect RL to finish its review, or in reality is it one of those reviews that never leads to anything and this ban just covers it now? 

Does anyone know if this has any practical impact? Does it result in anyone being prevented from playing a women's international who might otherwise have currently done so?

If not, it could well be a review which runs for a long time with no real desire from the IRL to reach a conclusion (which would be bound to upset one side of the argument or the other).

[Dave T]

15 minutes ago, Barley Mow said:

Does anyone know if this has any practical impact? Does it result in anyone being prevented from playing a women's international who might otherwise have currently done so?

If not, it could well be a review which runs for a long time with no real desire from the IRL to reach a conclusion (which would be bound to upset one side of the argument or the other).

As Damien says, it's probably easy to do this following FINA's decision yesterday, but at least theirs was made upon completion of their review and they've landed on a position, ours appears kneejerk. 

[Damien]

1 minute ago, Dave T said:

As Damien says, it's probably easy to do this following FINA's decision yesterday, but at least theirs was made upon completion of their review and they've landed on a position, ours appears kneejerk. 

Yes, I am 100% certain that if swimming hadn't announced their ban then we'd have heard absolutely nothing from the IRL and there would have been no thought to it come the RLWC.

[The Rocket]

25 minutes ago, Dave T said:

As Damien says, it's probably easy to do this following FINA's decision yesterday, but at least theirs was made upon completion of their review and they've landed on a position, ours appears kneejerk. 

There`s nothing  " knee-jerk " about it really, it seems that the latest research shows that any one born male, and no matter what stage of life decides to call themselves female ( pre- or post-puberty ) is going to have certain physical advantages over those who were born and remain female.

It`s just that everyone is too cowed to come out and say it.

[Dave T]

Just now, The Rocket said:

There`s nothing  " knee-jerk " about it really, it seems that the latest research shows that any one born male, and no matter what stage of life decides to call themselves female ( pre- or post-puberty ) is going to have certain physical advantages over those who were born and remain female.

It`s just that everyone is too cowed to come out and say it.

Yes, nobody is saying that. Nobody at all. We never hear anythibg like this, at all. 

Trans people have it so easy, they live their life without any scrutiny or criticism. 

But we should discuss that in politics as I expect it'll get locked quickly here. 

But IRL haven't made an evidence based decision, their review is still ongoing. Apparently. 

[Jim from Oz]

Maybe all this is also a clever tactic by international rugby league to get some much-needed publicity for the rugby league World Cup?

[David Shepherd]

Why was allowing trans women to compete against women ever even considered?

Massive player safety issue. Whether they're intact or not, they went through male puberty with all the strength and stamina benefits that gave them.

To expect female players to put themselves at huge risk against such an opponent is mental.

And before you jump on calling me a transphobe, I'm not. Anyone can live how they choose, but they need to accept there are some things you just can't do.

[ckn]

Discuss this all you want. Just don't expect any sympathy when you get booted from the site for rampant transphobia.

One post removed, no more please.

Discussing whether people born male can play in female sports after legally changing gender is one thing. 1970s attitudes about them as people and their choices is a completely different thing.

[RigbyLuger]

There's a transman potentially playing the the Wheelchair Challenge Cup Final on Saturday, and as a sport with men and women playing, the headlines on this story are misleading.

[Ragingbull]

Rightly so.  Well done IRL 

[Man of Kent]

Good.

We don't want players born male who may since have had cosmetic alterations to identify as female but remain biologically male gaining an unfair advantage.

[JohnM]

I feel the IRL have taken a very sensible decision (apart from "banning" rather than "suspending") until the review is completed. 

Overall, it is a very controversial issue, though and continuing the debate on the politics sub-form is very wise where it can be addressed in a free and frank way on all sides.

 

Edited June 21, 2022 by JohnM

[nadera78]

Your headline is completely misleading - as are those used by various news organisations. No-one has been banned from playing rugby league, but biological males have been told they cannot play against females. There is a huge difference.

That said, this is the correct decision by the IRL. The evidence regarding the retained physical advantages for those who have gone through puberty (gathered in other sports not the IRL of course) makes it clear it would be both unfair and dangerous to allow males to play RL against females.

[andyscoot]

Out of curiosity, prior to todays banning, were there any trans people within the professional/semi pro leagues for both men and women here and in Australia?

[ckn]

4 minutes ago, JohnM said:

I feel the IRL have taken a very sensible decision (apart from "banning" rather than "suspending") until the review is completed. 

Overall, it is a very controversial issue, though and continuing the debate on the politics sub-form is very wise where it can be addressed in a free and frank way on all sides.

 

I get your point and often will completely agree in shifting things to Politics, but rugby is a sport where physicality is important and I think there's a genuine rugby angle to it that I'm happy to allow to be discussed. As long as the subject stays on rugby.

I'll boot someone for transphobia whether it's on this rugby forum or on the politics one with no difference in how I treat them.

[nadera78]

4 minutes ago, andyscoot said:

Out of curiosity, prior to todays banning, were there any trans people within the professional/semi pro leagues for both men and women here and in Australia?

No idea, but it's not really the point. Far better to have an evidenced-based policy in place now, rather than to wait until a live situation arises where you'd then be dealing with a personalised and emotive debate centred on one individual which is what's happened in numerous other sports.

[ckn]

9 minutes ago, ckn said:

I get your point and often will completely agree in shifting things to Politics, but rugby is a sport where physicality is important and I think there's a genuine rugby angle to it that I'm happy to allow to be discussed. As long as the subject stays on rugby.

I'll boot someone for transphobia whether it's on this rugby forum or on the politics one with no difference in how I treat them.

I forgot the point I was going to make at the end...

I'm very proud of this forum over the years and how we've discussed some very sensitive issues. We've excised the bigots, and will keep doing that on this subject, warnings have been issued, no more will be given.

That's why I'm OK with this subject remaining when many places treat it as THAT THING THAT WILL NOT BE DISCUSSED.

[Damien]

17 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

Your headline is completely misleading - as are those used by various news organisations. No-one has been banned from playing rugby league, but biological males have been told they cannot play against females. There is a huge difference.

That said, this is the correct decision by the IRL. The evidence regarding the retained physical advantages for those who have gone through puberty (gathered in other sports not the IRL of course) makes it clear it would be both unfair and dangerous to allow males to play RL against females.

Yes I'll try and fit all that in a topic headline. Jesus wept, its the same headline as the article I quoted. Some people moan about anything.

[Barley Mow]

17 minutes ago, andyscoot said:

Out of curiosity, prior to todays banning, were there any trans people within the professional/semi pro leagues for both men and women here and in Australia?

If there are, they can continue playing as they were (unless the governing bodies of those competitions change their rules too).

This change only impacts women's international matches.

[andyscoot]

5 minutes ago, nadera78 said:

No idea, but it's not really the point. Far better to have an evidenced-based policy in place now, rather than to wait until a live situation arises where you'd then be dealing with a personalised and emotive debate centred on one individual which is what's happened in numerous other sports.

I agree with the policy provided it's to allow time to be fully informed. My point was more about general attitudes to trans people and how it's very disproportionate to how many trans people there are. It would get a bit too political, so I'll leave it there unless this thread moves to a different place.

[Damien]

1 hour ago, The Rocket said:

There`s nothing  " knee-jerk " about it really, it seems that the latest research shows that any one born male, and no matter what stage of life decides to call themselves female ( pre- or post-puberty ) is going to have certain physical advantages over those who were born and remain female.

It`s just that everyone is too cowed to come out and say it.

But not the IRL's or RFL's research, that is still ongoing. This is firmly on the back of the decision of swimming. I think any decision that is taken without a review, and after another sport has had the guts to be the first and take the flack, can be described as knee jerk.

That said I do think its the correct decision and I can see more and more sports doing the same after swimming took the lead.

 

Edited June 21, 2022 by Damien

[Dunbar]

While we need to be fair to women who play the sport and absolutely consider the safety implications of including a participant who has the strength and size of a born male, we also need to have empahy and compassion with the trans people here.

People don't transition lightly.  They transition because they have a burning feeling that they are not living their true life - that they are not the person they were born to be.  We all should try and have empahy for people who face challenges that we may not do ourselves..

And then to cap it off you are told you cannot compete in your chosen sport or enjoy you chosen pastime.

This may be the right decision but it is one that we need to recognise is tough on some people and so not one to celebrate.

Edited June 21, 2022 by Dunbar

[Damien]

2 minutes ago, Dunbar said:

While we need to be fair to women who play the sport and absolutely consider the safety implications of including a participant who has the strength and size of a born male, we also need to have empahy and compassion with the trans people here.

People don't transition lightly.  They transition because they have a burning feeling that they are not living their true life - that they are not the person they were born to be.  If you cannot empahise with how tough a life that must be to lead or how hard the journey must be when you do tmake the decision to transition then you are simply not human.

And then to cap it off you are told you cannot compete in your chosen sport or enjoy you chosen pastime.

This may be the right decision but it is one that we need to recognise is tough on some people and so not one to celebrate.

But is that not where there needs to be a third way where transgender athletes are given the opportunity to compete against each other? I think its important that sport doesn't just say no and provides alternatives. Whether the numbers exist in RL is a different issue.