The iWoman Report: Women's rugby, Trump Administration makes shocking claims about acetaminophen, and women's military initiative axed

A Historic Moment for Women’s Rugby

The Women’s Rugby World Cup is proving to be more than just a tournament in the increasingly popular world of women's sports.

This year’s competition, hosted by England, has smashed records across the board. With over 440,000 tickets sold, attendance has more than tripled compared to the last World Cup in New Zealand. The original target? Left in the dust.

The momentum continues into the final, which will see England face off against Canada in front of a sold-out Twickenham Stadium. That match alone is expected to draw more than 80,000 fans, making it the most-attended women’s rugby game in history. For comparison, the previous record was just under 60,000 during the 2023 Six Nations.

And it’s not just in-person support driving the sport forward. A staggering 3.1 million viewers tuned in to watch England’s semi-final clash with France, a clear sign that interest in women’s rugby is growing far beyond the stadium.

On the pitch, both England and Canada are winning games and setting new performance standards. Analysts are highlighting the rapid pace of play, with both teams completing complicated plays faster than the average in men’s international rugby. Just a few years ago, those numbers would’ve been unthinkable.

In a fitting finale to this historic event, the World Rugby awards will also be presented at the final. Nominees for 15s Player of the Year include England’s Meg Jones, Canada’s Sophie de Goede, and New Zealand’s Jorja Miller. Miller is also up for Breakthrough Player of the Year, alongside Canada’s Braxton Sorensen-McGee and Fiji’s Josifini Neihamu.

The anticipation and excitement for this tournament shows that the global attitude toward women's rugby, and women's sports in general, is being redefined. And if the sold-out stadiums, rising TV ratings, and elite athletic performances are any indication, the future of the sport has never looked brighter.

The Trump Administration Makes Bold Claims About a Link Between Tylenol and Autism

Pregnant women across the country are facing renewed confusion about medication safety after President Donald Trump cast doubt on the use of Tylenol during pregnancy, suggesting a possible link to autism, despite no strong scientific consensus supporting that claim.

During a recent press conference, the President raised concerns about acetaminophen, the active ingredient in Tylenol, stating that more research is needed into a potential association between its use during pregnancy and autism in children. In response, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced it would update labeling on the medication to reflect that concern, even though experts say the evidence is inconclusive and no causal relationship has been established.

This announcement quickly drew criticism from leading health organizations, including the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG), which reaffirmed that acetaminophen remains a safe and necessary option for pregnant women when used appropriately. The organization emphasized that untreated fevers and pain during pregnancy can pose real risks to both mother and baby. The President's counter-suggestion is to just suck it up.

Medical professionals are warning that these statements could discourage pregnant women from using one of the few medications still considered safe during pregnancy. Some are concerned that fear may lead women to avoid managing fevers altogether or turn to medications like ibuprofen, which are not recommended during pregnancy.

Although several studies have explored a possible correlation between prenatal acetaminophen use and neurodevelopmental conditions like autism and ADHD, most experts agree the research is far from definitive. In fact, some findings suggest other contributing factors such as parental age, genetics, or pregnancy complications may play a more significant role.

The FDA clarified that its decision to update labeling is based on precaution, not new data. The agency noted that any potential risk might be linked to chronic, high-dosage use over time, rather than occasional, medically necessary use.

Doctors continue to urge pregnant women to speak directly with their healthcare providers before starting or stopping any medication. Acetaminophen remains a key tool in managing symptoms like fever and pain, which, if left untreated, can pose a greater risk to maternal and fetal health.

For now, the medical community remains united in its message: decisions about medications during pregnancy should be grounded in science and made in partnership with trusted medical professionals, not shaped by fear or politicized rhetoric.

Defense Department Disbands Women’s Advisory Committee in Major Cultural Shift

In a move that’s raising concern among servicewomen, veterans, and advocates, the Department of Defense has shut down a historic committee that for decades championed the advancement of women in the U.S. military.

The Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS), established in 1951, was officially dissolved this week by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. The committee played a key role in shaping policies that expanded opportunities for women in uniform, from opening combat roles to improving health care, family support, and career development.

Its closure is part of a broader cultural shift at the Pentagon under Hegseth, who has been systematically dismantling programs that promote diversity, equity, and inclusion. Programs that supported women in peacebuilding and conflict prevention have also been eliminated, reflecting a growing push to reframe the military around a narrower vision of combat readiness.

Officials say these changes are about enforcing “uniform, sex-neutral standards” and removing what they describe as divisive influences. However, many see the elimination of DACOWITS as a significant rollback of the hard-won progress women have made in the armed forces.

The advisory committee was one of the few institutional spaces where the voices, experiences, and needs of women in the military were directly elevated to senior leadership. It helped spotlight challenges such as unequal promotion opportunities, sexual harassment, and inadequate support for military mothers.

For many women who have served or are currently serving, this decision feels like a step backward and a signal that their unique contributions and concerns may no longer be a priority at the highest levels of military leadership.

As the Pentagon redefines its internal culture, questions remain about how women's perspectives will be represented in future policy decisions and whether the loss of this committee will create gaps in support, advocacy, and accountability.