Every few years, a public, homophobic tantrum is directed at women’s rugby. The latest was
from Laijipa Naulivouthe, the former director of the Fiji Rugby Union. Naulovou announced that the Fijian women's national team had a gay problem. She also stated that player retention and “this gay problem” were the main challenges facing European rugby teams. Homophobic assaults tend to argue that pervasive lesbianism is destroying women’s rugby and that younger, impressionable players must be protected from predatory lesbians.
The Women’s Rugby History archives have a few items from over the decades of attempts to
restrict or ban lesbians from rugby. None of which were successful at the time but were
disappointing.
None of the members of my current A and B women’s teams have any interest in playing [rugby] after college. They were exposed to the women’s club members at last year’s National Finals and were shocked by the attitude and dominance of lesbianism among the players.
From 1992 letter to USARE
The first Women’s Collegiate National Championship was played in 1991. Prior to 1991, collegiate teams played in the women’s national club championship. While most agreed it was time for women’s college rugby to have a separate championship, the debate was about “where” the governance of women’s college rugby would reside. Should college rugby stay under the governance of the women’s committee, the committee fighting for a women’s collegiate championship? Or should women’s college rugby fall under the governance of men’s college rugby, a committee composed exclusively of men who were ambivalent about adding collegiate women’s rugby to their portfolio?
The coach clutching his pearls over “the attitude and dominance of lesbianism among the
[club] players” was leading a charge in 1992 to align women’s college rugby with men’s college rugby. In addition to coaching a noted D1 women’s college team, he held a position with USARE, which he stated in his signature, thus putting USAR in the difficult position of appearing to support his position.
The letter was met with a swift response from the Women’s Committee, led by
Jami Jordon and Colleen Lanigan. Col. Verne Francis, who at the time was the Chair of the
National Collegiate Committee and part of the US Air Force Academy also swiftly castigated the letter as blatant discrimination. (The strange thing was that Air Force Academy Women, the team that won the first Collegiate Championship in 1991, had expelled the top player on the women’s team for being gay.)
The fear of lesbian behavior scaring prospective players and turning off sponsors and fans was common. Many tournaments admonished teams to police players’ behavior. This made its way up to the highest ranks. Players selected for the 1991 World Cup team were sent letters informing them about behavior that would not be tolerated. The gist was that national team players were to be straight-appearing and straight-acting. They were issued skirts and cardigans to wear at events (skirts and cardigans they had to purchase). The author of the letter to the women’s World Cup squad was understandably concerned about the fragility of the tournament and the potential that the progress women’s rugby was making could be stripped at any moment by the governing bodies of the sport offended by any behavior outside of 1990s heterosexual norm. The players on the national team were aware of this fragility, and their behavior was exemplary.
But constraining the social dynamic of rugby was difficult. Women followed the example of male teams, embracing the drinking and bawdy behavior that was part of rugby culture. Drinking, independence, and sexual exploration were part of many college and club rugby experiences. This made it challenging to attract media attention to women’s rugby. Sponsors were overwhelmingly beer companies. But the truth was that sports media had no interest in men’s OR women’s rugby. Rugby was unknown to Americans, and its rules were unfathomable. Coverage of women’s rugby focused on the oddity of the women playing the sport. Women hitting each other had the potential for titillating an audience, but only if the players were sexually appealing. The media’s interest in all women’s sports was primarily about sex appeal. Were female athletes hot by male standards? If not, why bother reporting on them?
No drinking, no drugs, no lesbians
Rene Portland, Head Coach Penn State Women’s Basketball
One of the more infamous lesbian witch hunters at the time was Penn State basketball coach Rene Portland. Portland would win over 600 games, 8 conference championships and take PSU to 21 NCAA appearances, including the 2000 final four. But Portland was also known for her ferocious opposition to lesbians. In a 1985 article in the Chicago Sun-Times, she offered, “I will not have it (lesbianism) on my teams.” With the blessing of the PSU administration, she hounded players she perceived as lesbians from the team and was known on recruiting visits to make her views on sexuality clear. Unfortunately, her views at the time were mainstream. Coaches of women’s sports who were discovered to be lesbians were routinely fired, often under the auspices of protecting players. Players who were out or thought to be lesbian were unwelcome on many varsity teams.
In 1991, the Philadelphia Enquirer ran an article about Rene Portland’s anti-lesbian policy, suggesting that homophobia was the problem and Portland’s policy was wrong. This was a shift in thinking for the media and the beginning of a somewhat more enlightened attitude toward gay men and lesbians in sport. By 2007, Penn State and Portland were on the defensive. Portland was inevitably sued by a former player, Jennifer Harris. Portland, perceiving Harris to be gay, drove her off the team (the irony was that Harris was straight). The lawsuit became national news, and the fallout was abrupt; Portland resigned a month after agreeing to a confidential settlement with Harris. Penn State conducted an internal investigation and found that Portland had created a “hostile, offensive and intimidating” climate on her team in apparent violation of Penn State’s non-discrimination policy.
Along the way, there were other small but significant wins. In 2002, University of Florida starting catcher Andrea Zimbardi settled a suit against the school, charging that she was dismissed from the team because of her sexuality. The suit restored one year of her eligibility and required coaches at UF to undergo training on LGBTQ+ issues in sport. In 2009, Women’s basketball coach Lori Sulpizio won a lawsuit against Mesa Community College for being fired without just cause. In 2009, Sherri Murrell, the women’s basketball coach at Portland State University, became the first publicly out lesbian coach in NCAA Division 1 basketball.
With the threat of lawsuits and the support of burgeoning DEI offices, gay and lesbian coaches and athletes found protection from unjust firing and harassment. The NCAA embraced educational programming for administrators and coaches. It took time, but the team experience improved dramatically for gay and lesbian coaches and athletes. That wasn’t because of a mass enlightenment but rather the universities’ low tolerance for the threat of legal action.
The attack on trans athletes, the dissolution of DEI programming, and the rollback of Title IX means the protections for LGBTQ+ athletes and coaches will be dismantled as part of a new golden age of discrimination. As noted, Title IX lawyer Janet Judge recently posted:
To those who believe they just saved Title IX and women’s sports by voting for Trump, buckle up. You have just sacrificed the law for your fixation on athletes trying to live authentically and compete consistent with standards established by their governing sports bodies. You were played and now we all will have to pay. Two schools already have asked the courts to gut the existing athletic equity guidance as a result of the Supreme Courts’ decision that allows courts to ignore agency guidance. And the GOP has stated repeatedly that they seek to abolish the Dept of Education. If you are intent on continuing to spout off around saving women’s sports, understand that by repeatedly arguing to read Title IX as sex and not gender, you are throwing all of the LGBTQ community under the bus.
Janet Judge
Perhaps more chilling are recent posts by former US Eagle prop Jennifer Levi. A noted civil rights attorney, Jennifer is currently the Senior Director of Transgender and Queer Rights for LGBTQ Legal Advocates and Defenders (GLAD). Jennifer is in Washington, DC, leading a defense of transgender service members. She currently is in the ‘belly of the beast’. Her recent posts from court are chilling. As Jennifer notes, “systematically stripping the rights and protections of vulnerable minority groups is not just an erosion of democracy but paving the way for authoritarian control.” (Jennifer Levi)
The speed at which Americans embraced the lies and dehumanization of trans people was astonishing. Trans folks and immigrants were a way to test the appetite of Americans for hate. The administration will continue to use this blueprint on other vulnerable groups, including lesbians. Keep in mind that books with any hint of homosexual characters are being banned as dangerous to children; it’s a logical step for the far right to follow Laijipa Naulivou's argument that pervasive lesbianism is destroying women’s sports and that younger, impressionable players must be protected from predatory lesbians.
Women’s rugby has often faced moments of dehumanization and exclusion. But we have persisted as a community built on our deep respect for one another and our belief in the imperative of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Our community will be tested. We must protect one another and resist attempts to promote division and exclusion. Our binds need to be tight.
New York Womxn's Rugby Club vs All Blues Rugby WPL Match, Pride Month 2024
Comentarios