Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
So they evolved with a higher percentage of their time and energy spent hunting, gathering, and risk taking (climbing)(PLAYING).
While the womenfolk were tending children and keeping house or cave, if you will.(WORKING)
|
|
Ken M
Mountain climber
Los Angeles, Ca
|
|
When women climb at the level of the best men across the spectrum, I will happily admit that I was wrong.
No, you won't.
Anymore than Crackers won't admit that Blacks are as intelligent as Whites.
Anymore than cretins won't admit that Muslims are as holy as Christians.
Anymore than KKK's won't admit that Jews are as good as Christians (all the while ignoring that Jesus was a Jew.
|
|
Largo
Sport climber
The Big Wide Open Face
|
|
Interesting stuff presented on this thread.
I had the pleasure of spending a lot of time around both Janet Wilts (who just posted here) and Lynn Hill, both or whom were crush it athletes, so much so that the male superiority racket didn't play too far around those two.
The reason women have had it comparatively well in the climbing world is because men and chauvinistic attitudes could never stop them. There is the rock. Go climb it if you can. So they did, no matter what people said or thought or wrote about it. Not so in the business world, for reasons well stated by others.
It's interesting to be around the Adidas Outdoor team (I manage several camps for this group, usually twice a year up in Yosemite) because the performance level is virtually the same among the top athletes - both men and women - and issues of inequality never come up because in that group that have no practical meaning. It's all just climbers trying to do new things. Pretty refreshing. The real world runs on another code, unfortunately.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2017 - 09:04am PT
|
Warbler, the Daily Wire, really?
|
|
micronut
Trad climber
Fresno/Clovis, ca
|
|
|
May 24, 2017 - 09:14am PT
|
Warbler I took the bait and read through that list in your article. Super funny. And kinda sad also, as many of those were sincere sentiments.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
May 24, 2017 - 11:45pm PT
|
The whole unequal pay thing is so complex that statistics can be twisted to support any point of view.
sounds like an easy excuse to not try to understand the statistics... which aren't so twisted.
and the bottom line isn't so hard to understand at all, women get paid less.
|
|
Mei
Trad climber
mxi2000.net
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2017 - 12:52pm PT
|
Link posted above:
A feminist review of climbing how-to guides
I did not follow most of this (long) thread, but took a quick glance at the above article. I think it is an example of "when feminist goes too far."
I think I'm safe to assume that it's known fact that there are more, probably substantially more, regular male climbers than regular female climbers, especially in alpinism, although I did not bother to spend hours searching for comprehensive scientific research data to support that assumption. With that honest (personal) observation, I find statements like following off putting.
Out of all the guides reviewed here, Advanced Rock Climbing offers the most representation for female climbers. In the text, women and men are represented almost equally, with 72 photos depicting climbers who appear to be women and 73 photos showing climbers who appear to be men.
Yet the majority of the personal story sections (35 out of 41) are written by men. With only 15 photographs of women and 148 of men, Training for New Alpinism has the lowest woman-to-man ratio of all the books in this review.
... and more ...
Just click on the Trip Reports tab on Supertopo. There are far fewer female climbers sharing stories than male climbers. I do not even see 6 women storytellers out of 41. Should men's trip reports be cut out, or should women's trip reports be shown in 10x sized enlarged fonts just to create a false equal representation? It's disingenuous to demand authors to go out of their way to find photos and stories in order to show "balance", which is a distortion of the natural imbalance of the sport in its current state.
I personally do not want to see How-to books made into what they are not. I read the books to seek knowledge; I don't read the books to seek gender validation. I agree there are many areas and avenues that equal respect and fair treatment need to be demanded and even fought for for some under-privileged or under-represented groups (including women as a whole), but distorting reality to push for a certain agenda is not better than the accused "crimes" or the -ism's.
|
|
kev
climber
A pile of dirt.
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2017 - 07:35pm PT
|
Ms Abel states:
Including a variety of people in how-to-climb guides will not only offer a more accurate representation of the climbing population, but will also provide readers with a wider range of perspectives and experiences.
Um am I missing something or is a complete lack of understanding statistics what's driving the first half of the above quote?
Does the PDF of the variety match the PDF of the climber population?
|
|
jgill
Boulder climber
The high prairie of southern Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2017 - 09:08pm PT
|
For an interesting and thought-provoking diversion, look into the Wikipedia Climbing Project:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Climbing
Although Lynn Hill is at the very "Top Importance" category (deservedly so) other females are quite a bit further down into the "Low Importance" realm: Beth Rodden, Ashima Siraishi, Barbara Washburn, Brooke Raboutou, Elizabeth Hawley, Gwen Moffat, Sasha DiGiulian, etc. Even others, like Pat Kelley ( a huge breakthrough for female climbers in England in the 1920s) are not even categorized.
|
|
nah000
climber
now/here
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2017 - 09:42pm PT
|
first, i should start by commending abel for continuing to push this conversation within our community. and kudos as well to the above folks who continue to consider it, even if they disagree... and i have to admit i appreciated The Warbler's sharing some of the backstory regarding his tenacity on this issue... in all seriousness, accepting his story of false accusations as true, it helps to explain quite a bit, because no matter which "side" lies about the t'other there is nothing to respond to the situations that he describes, except with: god damn that sucks.
but, as i've continued to consider it, i'm going to come at abel from a bit of the opposite direction, even if i end up in the same place as others who are making this argument. as much as i appreciated the step up that she has, imo, made to the seriousness and depth that she brings to bare to this subject [as compared to her previous writings on the matter] i don't believe she has successfully made her explicit [and implicit] case, as much as she might have [assuming it actually exists].
the argument that she made regarding females being underrepresented in some "how to" books, relative to their participation, was from my perspective, pretty weak. as Mei [here] and ChristopherElliot [over at the comments section to the Alpinist site] have argued: if anything it is quite possible house and co overrepresented women's participation in alpinism [for example] and really the other books "indiscretions" seemed to me to in general be pretty minor relative to the statistics that she laid out at the beginning of her article.
ie. for example, it was a weak bit of logic for abel not to have found some actual stats on alpinism participation, because as it stands it seems like she is using a 37.6% female trad climbing participation stat as an implied stand in for alpinism... which to myself, is kind of like assuming the roped sport climbing gender proportion stats are going to be same as the rock free soloist proportions...when of course we pretty much all "know/assume" that they are not... and so at least myself, would need to be convinced that at least the implied argument that she seems to me to be making [that female alpinists are underrepresented] is actually correct.
in short, i have sympathy for the argument that abel sets out to make, as i suspect that there are weaknesses [in "climbing" regarding these matters] that should be addressed. and so while i also agree [with for example The Warbler], that sexist issues are not just unidirectional [men "against" women] and that they sometimes do go in the opposite direction, i also disagree and suspect that in general, including in climbing, that there is more that we collectively, as a society/culture, need to do to address in the men "against" women category than in the women "against" men category.
while it might sound confrontational to be so blunt, that is the world i see.
and so it is from that perspective, that i think abel could have done some better analysis, and specifically could have used more foundational statistical evidence, if she was going to be more successful in making her case.
kudos to her for stepping up and getting started with contributing on a larger scale, though. and kudos to alpinist for giving her a platform... regardless of one's stance, i suspect very few will argue that it isn't an important conversation of our time.
|
|
BigBlue
Trad climber
Boulder, Colorado
|
|
|
Nov 28, 2017 - 11:40pm PT
|
I struggle to see how the actual percentage of women participants in alpinism is relevant. The argument that media representations should reflect actual participation presupposes that the ratios are the natural results of the differences between men and women. I.e. that it is natural for significantly more men than women to be alpinists. This argument is completely flawed – it ignores an entire system (that we all participate in) that rewards men for being bold adventurers, and punishes women for the same actions. In this context of course fewer women will become alpinists – but not because of any fundamental personality difference with men.
Take sport climbing. There was a time when there were way more male sport climbers than female. Back then the argument could have been (and in fact was) that men are just wired differently and that women aren’t cut out for hard, athletic climbing. Nowadays that argument is laughable. What caused this shift? Definitely not a sudden change in heart, personality or physicality by women. No – there are more women sport climbers these days because its more socially acceptable for women to be sport climbers. That’s probably due partly to sport climbing being perceived as less of a fringe “adventure sport” and partly to a shift in society's expectations of women. Taking this argument further can anyone honestly stick up their hand and say they preferred it when there were fewer women at the crag? Unlikely. But then why are we still so resistant to the very simple step of including more pictures of women in books about alpinism? Its a small easy thing with a potentially big payoff. What's the downside? I can't see one.
Here’s something else to think about. If a white man reading a climbing handbook sees a picture of a woman or a person of colour leading a hard route will he suddenly re-evaluate his intention to be a climber because he doesn’t feel represented? Of course not. If the thought even crosses his mind he need only turn the page to find someone who looks like him and with whom he can identify. So what’s the big deal about greater diversity and representation in climbing media? It’s really not that scary an idea.
My take is that Abel’s call for representation in media is well-founded. Responsible media shouldn’t only reflect where we are right now, but where we want to go.
|
|
Degaine
climber
|
|
|
Nov 29, 2017 - 12:33am PT
|
Here's a link to Howard Stern interviewing Jon Stewart:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BohWWbKBCGw
Listen to 09:30-13:00. It discusses a similar type of criticism of the Daily Show when JS was at the helm.
That is how I took the article written by Georgie Abel (Mei's link).
|
|
ECF
Big Wall climber
Ridgway CO
|
|
|
Nov 29, 2017 - 05:50am PT
|
Women are under the impression that we think about what we do and say.
Sometimes, but not always...
Labels, generalities, its all BS. We are just flawed individual units competing for resources in a closed sysytem. Use every tool, compete. Or die.
But as a rule, women over things and men over do them.
Then we started eating more soy...
|
|
clinker
Trad climber
Santa Cruz, California
|
|
|
Nov 29, 2017 - 06:13am PT
|
The answer may be hormone supplements(testosterone to women and estrogen to men) for both sexes until we reach an equilibrium.
The workplace tone is gonna change from here on out. Guys had better get their mouths and actions in line pronto.
New climbing term-A Matt Lauer (A memorable hold on a trade route that breaks of after decades of use. A hold once deemed solid and is no more)
|
|
Flip Flop
climber
Earth Planet, Universe
|
|
|
Nov 29, 2017 - 06:38am PT
|
I carry heavy stuff for women who trade desireability for all kinds of things.
90+% of jobsite fatalities are men who do the vast majority of 3D work (difficult, dirty and dangerous).
We die to bring women and children our paychecks.
85% of custody cases go to the mother.
I still open doors and think women are special.
I used to be a feminist too but I can't hang with haters
|
|
Bad Climber
Trad climber
The Lawless Border Regions
|
|
|
Nov 29, 2017 - 07:10am PT
|
Boy! Girl! The climbing media I see has many, many, many pictures of women, like, all the time. In raw numbers, there are far fewer female aplinists, so there are just going to be fewer photos. I don't know anyone who has a problem with seeing photos or reading articles about female climbers. Ladies: Get to writing! This seems like tempest in a teapot BS. Would the author have an official gov't agency of gender equity that grants permits to publish based on equal representation of men and women? That, of course, opens the floodgates. There MUST be a few queer climbers, and transgender climbers, and transitioning climbers, and questioning climbers, and non-binary climbers, and...and...and.... We must ensure that EVERY possible permutation and combination of attributes, leanings, gleanings, genders, colors, et al. are represented. Except, of course, republicans.
BAd
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Nov 29, 2017 - 07:12am PT
|
Mei: I read the books to seek knowledge; I don't read the books to seek gender validation.
A false dichotomy. “Knowledge” vs. “. . . ?“
I think what you’re groping for is a valid basis for distinction between the sexes. It used to be “type-A achievement” versus “relational nurturing” (or some such hokum). Over the past 100 years that appears to have shifted, however, and it’s difficult to say just what the distinctions are beyond what is purely physical.
Hey, men and women are confused by the shifts on both sides of the aisle.
As soon as people add-in what would otherwise be considered “ethical” considerations (political, religious, communal), then I think no real answer will be found. Instead, it’s incremental accommodation and assimilation. Nothing remains the same; everything is always in flux.
If you’re not confused, then you don’t know what’s going on.
|
|
c wilmot
climber
|
|
|
Nov 29, 2017 - 07:19am PT
|
Feminism- making mountains out of mole hills
Same as it ever was
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!