Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Tarbuster
climber
right here, right now
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 07:47am PT
|
Davita Gurian, the young women who wrote the article, is 23 years old.
I say her message is clear and I like it.
This isn't to say that issues like gender and race relations don't still have some ways to go toward resolution.
Her point is: don't be petty and choose your battles. This doesn't weaken the cause, it strengthens it.
I'd wager that most of the women I climbed with during the 70s, 80s, 90s, and 2000s would wholeheartedly agree with her.
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 08:08am PT
|
After reading the article I don't see Davita Gurian as a feminist but more as a well balanced human being ....
|
|
Jaybro
Social climber
Wolf City, Wyoming
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 08:22am PT
|
Well if that's her point it's reasonable, and I thought, self evident in the first place.
Thanks Roy, maybe her next piece will be expressed as eloquently and articulately as you put it.
If that's really what she's trying to say.
|
|
drljefe
climber
El Presidio San Augustin del Tucson
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 08:24am PT
|
Where in these pieces is there anything about outperforming men?
|
|
cat t.
climber
california
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 08:29am PT
|
Feminists want so badly to believe that their bodies and their brains aren't fundamentally built to bear and care for children.
If women are approaching climbing with the goal of outperforming men, they're missing out on a lot of good stuff
Aren't humans in general all trying to believe that there is more to their bodies and minds than simple reproduction machinery? Why do you think a man's greater physical strength makes it more acceptable for him to aspire to some meaning beyond FoodSexSleep?
|
|
drljefe
climber
El Presidio San Augustin del Tucson
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 08:39am PT
|
Thanks warbs, I'd missed that.
When I saw this topic come up I knew you'd be on it!
I liked the piece- thought it was well written and put together.
At the same time I think it had a way of minimizing something very real and valid.
The old adage "perception is reality" comes to mind.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 09:19am PT
|
climbing is already a totally artificial activity with rules that are completely arbitrary
what constitutes "success" in climbing is also arbitrary, and what attributes contribute to success are undoubtedly unknown, this is simply because climbing has not been subject to nearly the same level of study as other, equally arbitrary, sports; there's no money in it, let alone "big" money.
so pronouncements of what body type, style, gender, hormonal mix, etc, are needed to achieve "success" are largely anecdotal; and it is not surprising that cultural norms play a large role in what our expectation of the male/female difference in climbing ability is. Opinions on what constitutes climbing are also all over the map.
motivation to succeed in sports is a major component to individual achievement, perhaps the major component, to success in that sport. An individual must answer the questions: how much am I willing to commit to the sport? what is my likelihood of succeeding?
What are the rewards for succeess in climbing? and who provides those rewards?
my main criticism of the article is that it didn't research a wider range of "informed opinion" regarding "feminism," but instead seemed to rely on the opinion of single voice. An article trying to establish a critical thesis regarding women in climbing and the effect of feminism might try to be equally critical of the sources they use to make their argument.
Surely there is a broader set of opinions to tap into and fill out the picture.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 09:26am PT
|
I agree that the article could have used a much better editor
|
|
Fat Dad
Trad climber
Los Angeles, CA
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 09:46am PT
|
I thought it was a 'meh' piece. I understand her general point--taking offense at everything is counterproductive--but it read like a so so term paper. She seems to have a poor understanding of the history of feminism, as evidenced by comments such as:
Shelma Jun is the founder of female/climbing-empowerment website Flash Foxy, as well as the Flash Foxy Women’s Climbing Festival. She’s been a huge force for female empowerment in climbing, and one of the reasons that we women have it so great in climbing today. Really? What about other women climbers who let their climbing do the talking for them: Bonnie Prudden, Lynn Hill, Catherine Destivel, Miriam Underhill, etc., etc.
Everyone is going to have their own sense of propriety, which is based upon their own beliefs, values and past experiences. That's what makes us different. There is no "right" response. You can advocate why you believe your POV is more well rounded. However, those arguing that others should have thicker skin often miss the counterpoint that they can also be more considerate in how they act. What those folks are really advocating for is that others change, not themselves.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado & Nepal
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 09:48am PT
|
I'm saying a woman's physiology and mindset makes it more challenging for her to compete with a male climber.
I agree. That's why women should measure themselves against their own physical and mental limits, and stop worrying about competing with men. It also makes women's achievements all the more admirable when they can compete with the best men. I think that accounts for the universal admiration for the accomplishments of Lynn Hill for example.
The only real advantage women have in climbing it seems to me would be in alpinism where they should be able to suffer more and survive longer in the cold due to more subcutaneous fat. However, the world of alpinism is even more constrained than rock climbing. Try huddling up in an ice cave without touching someone.
As for natural activities, the only natural activities in nature in times past were related to survival. Only if you are killing something up on those cliffs and bringing it home to eat, can you say it is a natural activity. The people who climb cliffs for bird's eggs and honey are climbing naturally, the rest of us are just amusing ourselves.
And I agree with Ed that the whole field of feminism could use some major introspection as to how we got to where we are and what the issues of today should be, also what mistakes have been made in the past.
|
|
Jan
Mountain climber
Colorado & Nepal
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 09:50am PT
|
What those folks are really advocating for is that others change, not themselves.
Exactly, but isn't that all of life, especially religion and politics?
|
|
cat t.
climber
california
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 09:53am PT
|
I'm saying a woman's physiology and mindset makes it more challenging for her to compete with a male climber. In this (repeated) argument, it seems like you've narrowed the definition of "climbing" to something that almost no humans actually do. No, there are not very many women who will throw away their lives in search of the most dangerous and wild climb in the world. There are also basically no men who would do that. That's not the metric by which most of us would measure a "good climber," though.
Also, you state yourself that there's far more to climbing than competing to be the best physical athlete. We can all agree that men are, in general, better at picking up large objects and running swiftly. Climbing is far more multi-dimensional than that--and I think you agree with that statement. It's about balancing risk and reward, enjoying ones surroundings, challenging oneself, working out a puzzle with your partner, and a whole host of other things that have very little to do with physical strength. Many of those things rely more on mental strength--and perseverance--than physical strength. Being a good climber also does NOT require being actively attracted to risk.
When chatting with you, it seems that you set up these very narrow definitions to prove a point, rather than using more realistic definitions that result in a fuzzier real world. I don't think anyone will disagree that men are stronger, that women are slower, etc. But climbing is not really about competing to be the strongest.
|
|
Levy
Big Wall climber
Calabasas
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 12:39pm PT
|
Interesting article and one I find rather on target.
|
|
rbord
Boulder climber
atlanta
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 03:48pm PT
|
Don't be ridiculous. The definition of real climber, and real climbing, is whatever I say it is. Why can't you see how humble I am for saying it?
|
|
August West
Trad climber
Where the wind blows strange
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 05:03pm PT
|
I agree. That's why (women) climbers should measure themselves against their own physical and mental limits, and stop worrying about competing with (men) other climbers.
|
|
cat t.
climber
california
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 06:53pm PT
|
For starters I enjoy when cat and warbler discuss men/women climbing issues, immensely.
I have no idea if you're being sarcastic...
I don't agree that are 'basically no men' who would do that, particularly if we substitute 'the most' with 'a'. My use of "the" rather than "a" was actually purposeful. I see a distinction between pursuing objectives that are risky, and pursuing danger itself.
I'm gonna guess the male climber death rate is ten times the female. It would be interesting to know. We've been through this before, but the mere presentation of a number does not guarantee a solution to a given question. The number you seek would not accurately represent relative risk tolerance. The factors that influence such a number would include economic conditions, geographical region, education, and a whole lot of other things we cannot parse.
Climbing history is full of epic tales of death and near death in the mountains, and nearly all the players in those epics are males. You could just as easily conclude that the publishers of epic tales are predominantly male.
We could circle 'round endlessly (and have) about the numbers of female first ascentionists and the relative strength and mental fortitude and risk tolerance of different genders and all that. Here's the point I really care about: if you were choosing a partner for a weeklong trip into the backcountry to do some long alpine routes or some FAs or just wander around scouting, there is nothing about female partners that would make them fundamentally less qualified than a male partner. You want someone who is gritty, determined, focused, kind, strong, with a healthy balance of risk-tolerance and pursuit of excellence. Those things will come in different measure in each individual. Perhaps some of those variables have a gender bias: maybe men are more risk-tolerant, while women are grittier. It doesn't really matter, though, because you don't want a one-dimensional partner, you want someone with a range of good qualities who complements your own skills (and deficits).
It's unfortunate that the mental fortitude and commitment it takes to do serious leads is not respected as a hard earned skill by many modern gymbred climbers. I've jumped on the grumble-bandwagon lately because of a theme I've seen recurring in several aspects of my life: I keep interacting with people (those gosh darn youth) who seem to expect that there is some sort of official, decision-making governing body for everything. Whether it's social events or climbing trips or scientific decisions, these "consumers" (I realize I am wildly generalizing) seem to expect that someone else is in charge of making the decisions, and that someone else is in charge of providing specific programming for them. I think it's some bizarre American culture thing, though I'm sure you'd like to think the phenomenon is the fault of sneaky women in lulululululemon pants diluting the climbing gyms...
|
|
cat t.
climber
california
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 06:58pm PT
|
I agree with all that stuff cat. It's your sister shelma that is putting the spotlight on competition
Sigh. How do I put this the most digestible/interpretable way--
When white dudes say something that you disagree with, you say "you are wrong." When a woman says something you disagree with, you say "women are wrong." As long as that continues to be the default interpretation ("women are wrong" rather than "she is wrong"), I would say that the female voice is insufficiently represented. If a woman speaking up is so novel that the reader thinks her individual voice represents all women, then enough women aren't speaking up.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 08:00pm PT
|
I'm curious as to why you think climbing is a "totally artificial activity" Ed?
I think Jan answered this, I'll amplify on that answer. But maybe Kerwin would chime in if he's around.
Basically, what we call "climbing" is a relatively modern invention, 19th century, and involves a privileged class with the wherewithal to pull it off. The Stonemasters were a byproduct of the post war affluence that allowed them the liberty to pursue their passions, with basically enough resources to scrounge to pull it off...
There is nothing natural about this. In nature, the survival margins are so thin there isn't a whole lot of time available for anything other than surviving. In this condition, this leisure class does not exist, what you have is your labor, and you apply it directly to making a living, in the literal sense.
Along the lines of the 19th century activity we've morphed into modern climbing, the goals, objectives, styles, ethics, etc are all totally arbitrary, and they change with time. What climbers in the 1970s in Yosemite came to agree were "the best style" is hardly known today, and hardly practiced.
A style that Bachar promoted around that time was the full on commitment to your abilities and skill through soloing. In some ways, that is "purer" than the protected climb... but it is a style that didn't catch on. I don't remember any deep philosophical discussion regarding this choice, the people doing it made the choice, and by and large, the people doing it were men.
And it was these men who defined, through their writings, through their exclusive societies, how climbing was defined, a legacy that still affects us today.
|
|
Ed Hartouni
Trad climber
Livermore, CA
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 09:45pm PT
|
Our climbing ability is a legacy of our evolution, in many ways we are well adapted for it.
So it isn't surprising when we do it and it feels natural.
But that legacy did not come from the need to send that 5.12 route... in good style...
|
|
ß Î Ø T Ç H
Boulder climber
ne'er–do–well
|
|
|
Jan 19, 2017 - 10:41pm PT
|
feminasm
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!