Wakal Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 (edited) Note: This thread drift was spun-off from the Fate, Destiny, and Divisions topic. Wakal: "Ladies" is blatently sexist and should be dropped Vince Pinto: Alex,Excuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me. IPSC's use of the term "Lady' is not sexist - it's respectful. My dictionary defines "Lady" as "[n] a woman of refinement; [n] a polite name for any woman". Besides, male IPSC shooters are all "gentleman", right? Vince, allow me to clarify...the term "Lady" is not disrespectful nor is it sexist. The fact that we, as IPSC, "recognize" that women are inferior to men...in the same way that children and old geezers are inferior to 'young' men...is what I find sexist. There is no reason in the world that women can't run heads-up with men other than, as Liota put it when we were talking about this very subject on the 26 hour drive back from the '03 US Nat's, a lack of desire. The top men seem to take shooting a lot more seriously than the best women, and it reflects. Even the military...the Army team's female was a A shooter (last time I checked), and the Air Farce team's token female is a mere C shooter. That just isn't right. And I don't see that we will have parity until there is no artificial stimulus to avoid true competition. When the top three female shooters at the US Nationals finished 59, 60, and 62 yet are rewarded as if that is a good thing...the women are being coddled to accept inferiority as a natural condition when it is not the case. Back on topic...I started shooting in Limited, and if I started shooting today would still start Limited...I find arbitrary limits on magazines to be silly and thus would refuse to play L-10, and like 1911's too much to haul out the TupperGlocks or WonderwhyIboughtaNine Alex Edited October 22, 2003 by Erik Warren Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vince Pinto Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Alex, The fact that we, as IPSC, "recognize" that women are inferior to men...in the same way that children and old geezers are inferior to 'young' men...is what I find sexist. Dude, please tell me you're not serious ................. How many international sports allow gentlemen and ladies to compete side-by-side directly against each other? How many international sports enable a lady to win, say, Open Division against gentleman competitors? Hong Kong and Sri Lanka, to name two regions, have both had ladies as National Open Division Champions - and I don't mean Open Ladies category - I mean Open Overall. In other words, the ladies kicked some mega XY chromosone ass. IPSC's Lady Category doesn't separate ladies from gentleman - they're both on the same match results page, and they are ranked by their results, not by their sex (nor by their age in the case of Juniors and Seniors). Ladies are not given a handicap against gentleman competitors - they face exactly the same challenges, with exactly the same shooting equipment and they shoot under exactly the same conditions. Sure, we allow some leeway when it comes to holster position, but that's not because ladies are weaker or inferior - it's just a fact of life that ladies have different anatomy to gentleman. And, for the record, my dictionary defines "sexism" as "discriminatory or abusive behavior towards members of the opposite sex". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted October 22, 2003 Author Share Posted October 22, 2003 Vince, Ladies are not given a handicap against gentleman competitors - they face exactly the same challenges, with exactly the same shooting equipment and they shoot under exactly the same conditions No, that isn't what I'm saying at all. What I am saying is that by recognizing them separately we (as IPSC) are telling them that they are just about good enough to play but not enough to be expected to actually win the match. The exact same thing as having a "black" category, or a "Jewish" category. We give the impression that we (again, as IPSC) view being female as a handicap...as being sub-par in some fashion. I'll go out on a limb and say that I don't expect an 8-year-old to run with the big boys, nor an 90-year-old, nor a person with no legs...but everyone else pays their money and takes their chances. No need for, as an example, a "fat white guy with a mustache and glasses" category...but somehow being female is categorized with children and old geezers as being a handicap. And that, friend, is discriminatory or abusive behavior towards...members of the opposite sex. The only place that should matter is first. Everything else is first loser, second loser, etc....and "special categories" show the contempt for the pigeon-holed "special people" since they are not expected to win the match and thus must be "bribed" with special plaques and trophies to continue to shoot. As if winning a $5 piece of pine is the reason we all play these games...and that, oddly enough, is the core of this thread. We seem to want to have millions of separate divisions so that everyone can bring their favorite gun and win something. We are NOT Cowboy Action Shooting. We should be rewarding performance, actual performance, against all competitors. The mag length and sight/comp limits set up Limited and Open rather well, and I can understand Production as a entry-level or duty/carry/realistic division...but an artificially created division pandering to the blissninnies in Washington (as well as the blissninnies foisted off on the population of certain silly states)...well, Alex Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ErikW Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Let me interject if I may... IPSC and USPSA do not force females into the Ladies category. It is the choice of the female registering for the match. She can choose whether to compete against the males exclusively or to seek additional recognition in the Ladies category. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 "...the term "Lady" is not disrespectful nor is it sexist." Every Lady is a Woman but not every Woman is a Lady. You got it right about a term of respect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loves2Shoot Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 What I am saying is that by recognizing them separately we (as IPSC) are telling them that they are just about good enough to play but not enough to be expected to actually win the match. The exact same thing as having a "black" category, or a "Jewish" category. We give the impression that we (again, as IPSC) view being female as a handicap...as being sub-par in some fashion. Huh? You are joking, right? Since when do women have the same strength as men? Sex has nothing to do with color or religion. Yes a few women have the strength of men, but a small percentage. How many women dunk in the WNBA? How many in men dunk in the NBA? How many women could compare with the stregth of the top 16 ISPC shooters? If there was no power factor, what you are saying might make some sense, maybe. Go to your next match and shoot 250 power factor and see if your scores don't go down. I'd bet $100 they would. Why can't they be expected to win? That's like saying seniors can't win, or Juniors. Max and Eric won big as "juniors." It is not the same comparison at all. Women aren't, as you put it, "sub-par" but on average they have much less arm/hand strength than than men. That counts in this sport, otherwise we would have women GM's, take men and make them shoot 250 PF and we would have much fewer gm's. We are not Cowboy action shooters, they have no real power factor, we do, and it makes a difference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Calling the Ladies category sexist is off the mark. As Erik pointed out it is the competitors option to sign up for it and that is as it should be. More importantly it is an effort to encourage more women to compete in an event that is overwhelmingly dominated by men. Highlighting the accomplishment of the women who do compete should encourage other women to gear up and join in. People tend to want to spend their time and money in places where they are accepted. The Ladies Category is a huge neon sign that says "Women Welcome Here." -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Ankeny Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Categories do not seperate shooters based upon being inferior or superior. OTOH, classifications do discriminate on the basis of inferiority. By putting someone in C class we are clearly saying that the shooter is inferior to an M class shooter. Oh my, the poor C shooters will have their self esteem crushed by the social stigma. I have a solution. Let's keep the categories and do away with the class system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 You are joking, right? Since when do women have the same strength as men? Not all men are created equal. There are female competitors who are larger than some GM's. I know the musculature isn't the same but we are not talking football here. At the actual power factors we shoot a woman should not be at a significant disadvantage. If you start talking about open guns then it becomes even less of a factor. My 11 year old could shoot my open gun just fine at major power factor and she isn't even big for her age. -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted October 22, 2003 Author Share Posted October 22, 2003 "Women are welcome here...BUT they are not as good as men so we have this special category for them to sign up for, since (wink wink) we know they won't win" Is that what the whole phrase is? I think that sort of thing is sexist. Women are not as strong as men...on average, sure. BUT our gear is SO heavily tailored to our own tastes and strengths that physical characteristics are statistically meaningless. Your score, as we all know, is based on YOUR hits and YOUR speed with a minimum power factor. Some choose to run itty bitty bullets and never miss the A zone. Some chose to run heavier bullets and take the occasional C/D hit. That is YOUR choice...and you optimize your gear for YOUR choice. Some like heavy guns, some like light ones...again, it is YOUR choice. Lets look at this in real life. I'm 6'3" 220, and bench press well over my body weight. My friend Chris stands 4'11", weighs 105 lbs, and while Chris presses proportionally more than I, Chris only hits 130 pounds. Chris is much smaller and weaker than I am. By your example, Chris should be allowed to compete in the big show AND in a "special category" because Chris can't compete with me, all things being equal, because of the disparity in size and strength. That is what you said. Does it change things when I tell you that Chris is a man? Alex EDIT: I don't like classes, either...they seem to reward stagnation at a arbitrary point and discourage improvement...IMO, of course...but that is the way the game is laid out...to keep some folks playing...and I don't take offence at it like I do at sexism. AW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tightloop Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Wakal have you ever shot against Athena Lee? Might make you rethink your point of view...She is tough. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 "Women are welcome here...BUT they are not as good as men so we have this special category for them to sign up for, since (wink wink) we know they won't win"Is that what the whole phrase is? I think that sort of thing is sexist. No "wink wink" intended. What fouled this for you? Did someone do or say something explicit to incite this notion of discrimination or were you bored and looking to find fault where there is none? -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Heiter Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Personally, I don't mind the ladies division any more than I mind Law, Senior, Super Senior, or Junior. I wouldn't mind if we had a handicapped category too because I've seen some handicapped guys do some incredible things on a range that I think should be recognized. As long as we're all competing in the same classes and you only get 1st if you earn it, etc. then I don't care if someone gets recognized for something else too because I still know who the best shooter at the match was. I do agree with Wakal about one thing. I don't buy the fact that physical strength has anything to do with it. I think you can get a gun set up so that you can handle it no matter how strong you are. I think the lack of women at the top has more to do with numbers than anything else. If I take a random group of five men, I'm probably not going to have anyone in the group that can run a 4.5 sec. 40. If I take a random group of 500 men, my chances of having a great athlete who can run that time increases. IMHO, that's what we're seeing in USPSA. We have such a large group of men that it's natural that we're going to have 50 or 60 superstars. I have no idea how many women are in USPSA but if we encourage women shooters, start getting more women out there shooting, and people start teaching their daughters to shoot at the same age that they teach their sons, then it's just a matter of time until we start seeing the female superstars. Actually, I think we've got some of them out there already, they just haven't quite gotten there yet. Personally I'd like to see more female shooters and if anyone has any suggestions on how to get them out to the range, I'd like to hear them. I think it would be good for the sport and since I'm still single it wouldn't hurt me to get to look at something besides old fat men from time to time too. Oops, sorry. Guess that was kind of sexist of me. John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spook Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Other (read: most) sports completely seperate the results of the men from the results of the women (or juniors from seniors). In most sports women and men don't even compete directly against eachother. I think IPSC is pretty cool with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rhino Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 How many international sports allow gentlemen and ladies to compete side-by-side directly against each other? Pro golf, Olympic-style weightlifting, olympic-style wrestling, horse racing . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted October 22, 2003 Author Share Posted October 22, 2003 jhgtyre: Fouled? Hmm? A person can't coldly and logically express an opinion about the sport on this board...a board full of deep-thinking fast-shooting adrenaline junkies? Sounds like someone boxed into the corner with facts and now starting a personal attack. I had expected better. Yes, I have shot against Athena Lee, she is a very nice person and a decent shooter. So what? She is the woman's world champion...but didn't even finish in the top 16 of men. But she received a nice little pat on the head and a "...good girl, here is your plaque anyway, you are the best woman here"... See how condencending that sounds? This discussion broke out of a thread about divisions now and in the past. As one intimately involved in the purchase of trophies and awards for quite a few major matches, it is pretty silly how many a big match "has" to set up. D-M (or GM) in Open, Limited, Limited-10, Production, Revolver...then top woman, LE, military, senior, super senior, junior...because if you don't, some left-handed red-headed handicapped shooter from Ulan Bator will whine because they "deserved" a special award and didn't get it. I work for the government (sigh, my secret is out) and I spend half my day in hellfire and brimstone lectures about the evils of sexism and racism...and the other half fending off inviations to sexist and racist government-sponsored events. Either we live with the fact that everyone is a person equal under the law (or rules), or we live with the fact that we have set up special little protected classes where some are more equal than others. And IPSC, as the best and brightest of the shooting sports, should (IMO) have more of the former and less of the latter. Alex PS I noticed no one has commented the situation with my friend Chris. Hmmm...maybe we are shortist A Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loves2Shoot Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Lets look at this in real life. I'm 6'3" 220, and bench press well over my body weight. My friend Chris stands 4'11", weighs 105 lbs, and while Chris presses proportionally more than I, Chris only hits 130 pounds.Chris is much smaller and weaker than I am. By your example, Chris should be allowed to compete in the big show AND in a "special category" because Chris can't compete with me, all things being equal, because of the disparity in size and strength. That is what you said. Does it change things when I tell you that Chris is a man? AW I said nothing about that. You said having a category for women was the same as one for people of different colors or religions. I merely pointed out that your argument has serious flaws. to make rules for larger groups you have to look at averages, not extreme examples. On average, men are bigger and stronger than women, that is not sexist, it is just the way it is. jhgtyre, Large doesn't mean strong and agile, and those do have a impact. There are many "fat" guys who are stong, and can be quick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 jhgtyre: Fouled? Hmm? A person can't coldly and logically express an opinion about the sport on this board...a board full of deep-thinking fast-shooting adrenaline junkies? Sounds like someone boxed into the corner with facts and now starting a personal attack. I had expected better. No personal attacks intended. Fouled is used in the sense of something that has turned distasteful or offensive. It seems that the Ladies category has become this for you. You might check your own post for personal attacks. So far I haven't read any facts that point out the discriminatory nature of the Ladies category. Opinions abound but where are the facts? -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 jhgtyre,Large doesn't mean strong and agile, and those do have a impact. There are many "fat" guys who are stong, and can be quick. Exactly my point. Just as large doesn't necessarily equate to strong neither does small necessarily equate to weak. Hey at 6'2" and 270# I am quicker than I look so I have to agree with your last statement! -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake Di Vita Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 What's the difference between top lady, top junior, top senior, top d, top c, top b, top c, top a, and top m? None of them won but still got a plaque "anyway." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wakal Posted October 22, 2003 Author Share Posted October 22, 2003 Exactly. But there are no federal laws and huge professional lobbies against "C-ists" but there are against sexism. I'll try to be blunt (well, more blunt)...stacking ability groups is one thing, but blatantly stating that women are less than men and so must have their own special "competition group" is just plain wrong. Saying an eight year old can't run with a 30-year-old is one thing, based on bone growth, muscle development, and lack of coordination due to same. Saying a 30-year-old woman is inferior to a 30-year-old man because she is a woman...in a sport like ours where size and strength matter very little, overall...is something else. I see just two ways to look at it...either we are shamelessly pandering to women so that they will shoot our sport and are waiting with baited breath for the first female Grandmaster (paging Kay...oh, Kay...we know you can do it), or we are saying that they will never run with the top men and thus need a special category to fulfill their sense of accomplishment. The first is rather grotesque and the second is flat wrong. IMO, of course. Discuss... Alex PS in my example using my friend Chris (real guy, BTW), he is half my mass and 5/6th my height. In my squadron, we have much more variation between males (height/weight/strength) than we do females. Basing a difference of ability on those factors is false, prima facia. AW Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Loves2Shoot Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 I think you use the word inferior too much, and inappropriately. Different doesn't mean inferior. What about Top Law, Senior, Super Senior, Junior do you think they are awarded because they are inferior also? There are lobbies against everything, that doesn't mean it makes an point of veiw legitimate. Oversize your grip and triple the weight of your gun and THEN tell me it doesn't make things more difficult, come on get real. I would love to see you take a gun in the same proportion as Athen Lee to her Limcat and shoot it and tell me size doesn't matter, that would be one freaking huge and heavy gun. What they do with what they have is amazing in my book, I won't begrude them a high lady award. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhgtyre Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 Since no evidence of sexism seems to be available I will offer evidence to the contrary. When I take my daughter to a match GM's approach me and tell me how great it is that she is competing. They offer advice and encouragement. When my friend takes his son to a match GM's approach him and tell him how great it is that he is competing. They offer advice and encouragement. I notice the same thing happen when new shooters, regardless of gender, or age, show up at our club. I have certainly benefited from the same sort of advice. Have I run into sexist people? Sure I have. Both male and female. I have also encountered racists, ageists and about every other "ist" you can think of. As far as I can tell they are in no greater numbers at the range than they are in my office. Fortunately their numbers are small in both places. -ld Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfinney Posted October 22, 2003 Share Posted October 22, 2003 I have no problem with recognition for High military, High Law, High Senior, High junior, High Lady, etc.... why begrudge everyone some recognition when they can get it? I don't think its sexist, just a motivational tool to make it more competitive for those that want to compete in the special catgories as a "side match" type thing. After all, on the real overall scoresheet they still finish in Class and Division where they actually shot - it is what it is. There are no automatic match wins given just because of a special category. Heck, half the "sponsored" shooters out there are only competitive in their own niche, either by Class or category; more power to them if they can get some recognition and freebies out of it, by being awarded some trophys. But where I get disgruntled is where I see someone publishing a shooter's bio saying they have been IPSC World Champion, USPSA Open National Champion, or USPSA 3-Gun National Champion..... (check out last issue of Front Sight), when what they should have said was that they were High Lady at those events. Kinda misleading. There are many women, senior, junior, military, etc shooters out there that can probably whip me at a match. And if they do so, more power to them. But if I come in 10th overall, and a woman comes in 30th overall, take the High Lady title and be happy.... just don't say you were the Champion. I might not have won a plaque, but I still beat her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SiG Lady Posted October 23, 2003 Share Posted October 23, 2003 On average, men are bigger and stronger than women, that is not sexist, it is just the way it is. I totally agree... and I'm female. And feisty. And small. And deal with sexism every day. But not too terribly much at the shooting range (maybe that's precisely why I go there so damn' often!). If I perform well, the guys have to (and manage to) accept that. More often than not they're genuinely complimentary. If I perform poorly, they usually discuss technique with me intelligently if I want to do so and compare their own challenges. Amen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now