A new fighting unit for women sports has been formed called the ‘International Consortium on Female Sports’ (ICFS). The consortium will spearhead the protection of women’s sports, which are currently experiencing encroachment and intrusion by men who call themselves women, but are biologically male. These men are being supported by many sporting bodies, instead of the sporting bodies supporting women. So, once again women are having to assemble, this time to
I suspect that it was not accidental that the last consideration is "safety". Safety for who? Clearly not for the women competitors. When it comes to mixed sex sports, surely this should be the first consideration considering the much higher chance of smaller women being injured by bigger men? Situations as described here https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/05/opinion/trans-athlete-swimming.html are actually rare, because everyone knows the physiological advantage that men have over women in sport. That's the reason that men choose to compete against us, because they will win.
In this paper, I link philosophical discussion of policies for trans inclusion or exclusion, to a method of policy making. I address the relationship between concerns about safety, fairness, and inclusion in policy making about the inclusion of transwomen athletes into women’s sport. I argue for an approach based on lexical priority rather than simple ‘balancing’, considering the different values in a specific order. I present justifying reasons for this approach and this lexical order, based on the special obligations of International Federations such as World Rugby. As a result, I provide a justificatory framework for the WR Guidelines that exclude transwomen from the women’s game in WR competitions. Finally, I give an account of a maximally safe, maximally fair and maximally inclusive form of sex categorisation in sport
And: inclusion [of trans identified males] and fairness in sport are multiple exclusive
I suspect that it was not accidental that the last consideration is "safety". Safety for who? Clearly not for the women competitors. When it comes to mixed sex sports, surely this should be the first consideration considering the much higher chance of smaller women being injured by bigger men? Situations as described here https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/05/opinion/trans-athlete-swimming.html are actually rare, because everyone knows the physiological advantage that men have over women in sport. That's the reason that men choose to compete against us, because they will win.
Thanks for reporting on this. Helps me keep up with this crucial issue. All power to the Consortium!
Safety, fairness, and inclusion: transgender athletes and the essence of Rugby
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/00948705.2020.1863814
Sent from Mail for Windows 10
ABSTRACT
In this paper, I link philosophical discussion of policies for trans inclusion or exclusion, to a method of policy making. I address the relationship between concerns about safety, fairness, and inclusion in policy making about the inclusion of transwomen athletes into women’s sport. I argue for an approach based on lexical priority rather than simple ‘balancing’, considering the different values in a specific order. I present justifying reasons for this approach and this lexical order, based on the special obligations of International Federations such as World Rugby. As a result, I provide a justificatory framework for the WR Guidelines that exclude transwomen from the women’s game in WR competitions. Finally, I give an account of a maximally safe, maximally fair and maximally inclusive form of sex categorisation in sport
And: inclusion [of trans identified males] and fairness in sport are multiple exclusive
also, i am happy to be a paid subscriber of your substack. i tried to upgrade but there was no option to pay. thank you.
thank you so much for this. i have signed up as a supporter of the consortium.