That England Rugby @EnglandRugby have affirmed inclusion of transwomen in female contact rugby, despite the scientific analysis from their governing body @WorldRugby highlighting extreme safety risks, is disappointing but not surprising.
The calls for ‘further research’ are a smokescreen to kick tough decisions down the road.
What might happen in the mean time is now on them.
What do they expect further research to show?
That athletes become inexplicably weaker than couch potatoes, and thus hold a smaller or no advantage over females?
That is truly irrational.
That the decrease in hemoglobin will reduce cardiorespiratory capacity to female levels, when major contributors to this (heart size, lung surface area) are unchanged?
That is truly irrational.
They have chosen inclusion despite scientific evidence showing it is explicitly a large safety risk (and implicitly unfair).
That’s obviously their call. I wish they’d be honest about it though.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
@GMB The World Rugby argument is really quite simple.
1. Forces generated in tackles by males on females present an unacceptably high risk of head injury for females.
Evidence: Extensive modelling of head/neck forces when two weights collide, basic physics.
@GMB 2. That risk is amplified when you factor in the premise that male weight is accompanied by superior strength and superior speed.
Evidence: again, basic physics.
@GMB 3. When they suppress testosterone in accordance with sports fed rules, transwomen lose only small amounts of strength, and there is no change to their bone structure.
Evidence: 11 published cohorts (800+ transwomen) tracked for muscle/strength changes over at least one year.
Wiik et al 2020 is one of 11 longitudinal studies of mass/strength in TW (some covering over 200 subjects), before and after intervention, all well within IOC limits.
@Lux48098905@JulietLine@ChardonnayM@CStaffordSmith In total, those 11 studies cover measurements of mass and/or strength in more than 800 TW, before and after 1-3 years of treatment, all well within IOC limits.
Please don’t tell me you’ve been fooled by the coincidence of 11 studies, one of which contains 11 participants. 😂
All they do is leave me with stripes/patchy legs. I cannot, for the life of me, get them onto my legs in any semblance of uniformity.
Tights need some resistance to ensure the weave lies evenly and springs back when you rub them or pick off a bit of fluff.
I am unable to fashion a suitable Tubigrip applicator shape with my hands, so am currently sporting vertical stripes on my calves, pale patches on my shins and horizontal stripes on my thighs.
Three years ago, the Conservative government launched a consultation on a somewhat esoteric piece of legislation concerning the rights of trans people to alter their birth certificate and legal sex.
The proposed changes included ‘self ID’, a radical departure from the current system of careful assessment and mindful transition for those suffering dysphoria.
Self ID would have allowed acquisition of legal sex based on no more than a sworn declaration. But, in reality, the sworn declaration was lip service.
Yesterday evening saw an interesting chat with French colleagues about adapting to gender neutrality/gender changes in a language where so much is gendered.
It seems we may have it easier in English.
French extends beyond pronouns into nouns, adjectives etc. Not even ‘they’ is neutral.
The week before saw a comparison of gendered words between different gendered languages (French v Russian).
Example: Is ‘boat’ masculine across gendered languages? English language convention sees ‘boat’ (and other vehicles?) as feminine, despite no gendered noun.