UKC

The Women's Climbing Symposium this year was excellent. Such good workshops and speakers. I came away utterly inspired and totally psyched to put what I learnt into practice at the wall and into my daily routines. The speakers were fanatstic, with Mina leslie-wujastyk giving a very personal account of overcoming psychological barriers, Fran brown talking about managing stress and Rebecca Dent on nutrition- to name but a few!
The workshops were invaluable and I can now say I have been leaping like a flying squirrel with Leah Crane and and hanging off slopers with Emma Tywford.

I am very disappointed at the lack of advertising or discussion about this on UKC- if this was an event which men went to as well it would be all OVER the forums and news.
Understandably you might enquire why men, who were not allowed to go, would discuss it but I am implying more that UKC should be putting it on their news item maybe BEFORE the event as well as after (if that is actually going to happen...no sign of it yet). So please no bullish come backs on that one.

Anyway I hope to now go and use my newly found crushing skills to beast it all over the place.

UKC Edit: The report is here http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68482

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Why didn't you start a discussion on it?

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

I am sure UKC would have happily advertised the event, ask Alan for the advertising rates.

In reply to neuromancer: sure someone started a discussion about it a few days ago.. but very little response. surely that's about uys women being more proactive and communicative rather than UKC doing more.. afterall we are provided with a website with forums to be able to just that.. so more a reflection of maybe women not being quite as involved with posting on here?

hopefully it'll be up north again next year

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Last year the venue advertised but it sold out well in advance anyway this year, so if you're criticising the lack of advertising who is that aimed at?

There are qute a few Masterclass style events advertised here (and lots more that aren't) but it's not often you see a thread about them before or afterwards.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Hi Beth, I've sent you an email about this. Cheers, Paul.

In reply to neuromancer: I did! I got 1 reply

In reply to winhill: I don't mean advertising to sell tickets I mean to raise awareness that the event exists so people who are not aware of it can be (and hopefully get a ticket in time next year!)

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: I have been told that WCS didn't chose to be on the site for advertising which is fair enough to UKC.

Perhaps we have to look at the bigger picture and I am putting as much responsibility on women! Come on ladies, especially those who attended the event can see how much we rock and should equally be heard on these forums??

www.womenclimb.co.uk

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:
"I am very disappointed at the lack of advertising or discussion about this on UKC- if this was an event which men went to as well it would be all OVER the forums and news."

I agree - if it had been an event open to all, rather than a subset of readers, it probably would have been more popular.

I imagine that if i held an event only aimed at say : people of exactly 5'6.5" wearing green trainers and carrying a dead badger - It'd probably get less attention that an event open to all.

semi rant over.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

So what did you learn in the workshops? Any tips to pass on about how to hang slopers would be appreciated.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: what about you raising awareness, where's the follow on your site/blog. what did you learn was it good? could it have been better. before you launch at UKC for not doing an article write one and submit it if you would like. As for forums sometimes your post gets a reply sometimes it gets trolled and sometimes it gets lost in the masses of other threads on here.

As Mina said recently Climbing shouldn't be about gender lets just get out and climb as climbers.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: Sounds like you have a bit of a chip on your shoulder, to be honest.

In reply to pork pie girl:
Up north again and at 2012 prices?
I just simply couldn't afford the £60 ticket price even though I would have had access to free accommodation. A real shame because I would've loved to have gone.
(Perhaps they could forget the goody bags and cheapened the tickets.)

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Gender inclu/exclusivity is short sighted to me, it reaffirms difference and (only) excludes those who do not fit or do not feel that they fit into the gender binary. I have no problem with the idea of a Women's Climbing Symposium itself, plenty of interesting issues to be discussed there, but I'm not keen on the whole 'men were not allowed to go'. Interesting to muse at how this rule was conceived/enforced and how those practices are perhaps part of the problem.

thoughtsthoughts have them I have too many

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:


Perhaps this would have been better as a private message of complaint to the UKC management?

For my own part, I don't mind in the slightest if groups of whatever definition choose to have meets from which various sorts of people are automatically excluded. That's up to them.

But I don't see why they should expect those they have excluded from their event, to be avid to talk about that event, or indeed to have much to say about it, given that they weren't and couldn't have been there.

In reply to mp3ferret:
>

I'm 5'6.5" and have green trainers, just need to shoot a badger now to join the group

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

A trick for next year is the "So who's going to..." thread unless you are an organiser it's not so naughty really.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

This sounds brilliant. Would love to attend and take my daughters. In fact I'm sure many climbers would love to have attended.


If true, this is is pretty disgraceful and I hope this sexist programme fails.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Probably UKC thought it was not worthy of a news item as not enough people would be interested. The lack of responses to your previous thread suggests this may well be the case.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: I notice that you are sneakily advertising your website in your post.

In reply to Lukem6: It's not a coincidence that the symposium is for women and there has been no forum chat on it. My post on it didn't get "lost", it had a lot of views.
I do a guest blog on women climb, I'm not the owner however the owner did indeed do a blog on the symposium leading up to it and i am currently writing a piece, as well as out other attendee (so there will be 2 pieces) on the event. This will go up as soon as it is edited by the owner.
I didn't "launch" at the UKC. I had a very respectable e-mail from Paul at UKC about it which is nice as it shows pointing out a loss of information doesn't always have to be viewed as some kind of attack. Defensive maybe.
I would love for there to be no diff in between men and women in the climbing world- in regards to access, popularity, respect. But there are and I assume you are a guy? please tell me if I'm wrong. It is much harder to see the imbalance when you are on the majorities side.
Have a look at womenclimb.co.uk if your interested

In reply to Submit to Gravity: It's not my website.

In reply to Shani: Thanks for the positive response. It's so easy for a thread like this to become one of defensiveness than actually a constructive forum to look at how to bring more women climbers into the forefront of discussing climbing!

In reply to Offwidth: I did! I have replied this answer a few times on this thread.... oh well.

In reply to avictimoftheDrpsycho:

But it might make you wonder why facebook is a much better place for them to use to inform and disseminate.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Replace the 'no men' policy with women/blacks/Irish/gays/disabled and you'll see the problem here. Such prejudice is regressive and should be tackled.

I can't be positive about sexism. I would much rather see such inspiring climbers as those you've listed above on a climbing platform (not a 'female' climbing platform), in an environment open and accessible to all.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

I agree, it's disgraceful that women get news items and sponsorship for climbing things that lots of men have climbed and not received any media attention.

In reply to avictimoftheDrpsycho:


Give me a moment. This popcorn's still got 90 secs in the microwave, and I'm having trouble opening my deckchair.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: I am a guy yet my climbing partners are 80% female at the moment including my wife, and we always share Beta and give each other tips equally, the way it should be. Yes women climb differently but compared with a guy the same hight the problems become the same. Depending upon the human there can be a strength advantage to some and I've experienced some strong women who make the same errors in climbing as Strong male newbs.

The biggest differences are noticed at the start climbing, if you have done physical training and sports or a physical job your likely to start off with more strength. But with training and commitment, you could be as strong as Sasha DiGiulian, Chris Sharma, Lynn Hill or John Gill. Who ever your Idol may be.

I'd no idea WCS 2013 was on or planned - shame on UKC but equally shared with the organisers and the 1/2 dozen climbing walls I've been to in recent times where not a peep was to be heard - still it sounds like it was busy so they must have reached someone, I just don't move in the right circles...

Still my suggestion for next time (as last time) is route setting courses to address the massive gender imbalance there...

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

What an odd thread.

In reply to wert: true.. i wouldn't pay 60 quid to go... that's 10 passes at kendal wall or 6 trips top malham

In reply to duchessofmalfi:
>

Err, so save the 60 quid and go on one then......

In reply to pork pie girl:

That sort of economics can end up being dumb. Firstly petrol costs never seem to get get factored in secondly you might learn stuff that makes your trips better or just simply gives you a warm glow inside.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Here you go:

https://www.thebmc.co.uk/womens-climbing-symposium-2013-report

In reply to Offwidth:i'm sure there's absolutely loads to be gained from going to these type of events but we all have our preferences and reasons for doing what we do, for me this can change depending where i'm at with my climbing.. but for now i get a 'warm glow' from setting myself mini goals and achieving them, reflecting on what i need to do next and making sure i get out with people that are motivated and who are good company .. and willing to share the fuel costs!!

plus.. i wouldn't go down to london if you paid me

In reply to Team BMC: What a great rounded report!

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: I can't understand people who appear to be defined by their sex (or sexuality). It must get very tiresome.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Really, interesting how so (popularity I understand to be down to individual's taste- perhaps climbing simply appeals to more men than women), but access and respect?

Having said that, I know lots of female climbers and the walls are 50/50ish?

In reply to Shani:

+1

Personally, I think a gender-barred event is a massive step backwards. The organisers should be ashamed of themselves.

They are actively promoting *exactly* what is causing the problem in the first place.

In reply to John_Hat:

I'm inclined to agree. I don't think that deliberately setting yourself up as being 'different' is a very healthy thing to do.

In reply to ashley1_scott:

I just need the trainers . . .

In reply to John_Hat:

Absolutely. "Mina leslie-wujastyk giving a very personal account of overcoming psychological barriers, Fran brown talking about managing stress and Rebecca Dent on nutrition" sound like great presentations.

Framing this in a 'women only' context at best intimates that these women are somehow sub-standard to/can't 'compete' with men, and at worst repeats the sins of men-only golf clubs and the like.

I understand the intention here, but it really is misguided. Mina Leslie-Wujastyk, Fran Brown and Rebecca Dent don't need to ride a women-only ticket, they need exposure at a broader climbing event. If there is a glass ceiling preventing this from happening then THAT is what needs to be tackled. We shouldn't sell (female) climbers short like this.

What next - women-only climbing walls with easier routes?

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: It's sometimes hard to tell what all the genders of posters are on here, but there do seem to be lots of men telling the ladies what they do and don't need.

In reply to John_Hat:

So by that token you disapprove of the gay lesbian and Transgender Climbing club?

Would you be Opposed to a black and Asian climbing club?

In reply to Choss:

Yes if they had a 'no whites' policy.

In reply to Choss:

To be sure, I am happy that there is a "Women's Climbing Symposium" - it is the 'no men' policy that offends.

Even then, given that 50% of the population are women, I'd rather attend a 'Climbing Symposium' with a strong line up of women speakers - and women chosen not because they are women, but because they are interesting climbers.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I am male (not that it should matter - that is the whole point of my posts here).

I have told no one what to do. I HAVE opposed sexism.

In reply to Shani:


Worryingly, this already occurs. A friend of mine is a competitive boulderer. On one problem she was told that there was an extra hold that she could use because she was a woman.

She

(a) went apesh1t.
(b) refused to use the hold.

My personal view is that there are a number of problems with the climbing community where gender bias is an issue.

This includes, but is not limited to, that climbing walls and competition routes tend to be heavily overhung (1) (thus giving an advantage to men), or that some men appear to be patronising of female climbers or that mixed climbing competitions do not occur.

I think that climbing is one place where there is very little difference between gender. Men have greater upper-body strength, woman have lower centre of gravity and smaller hands and feet (so smaller holds are bigger), etc. It all evens out.

However having a women-only event is increasing the size of the problem, and does the opposite of help.

(1) despite there being very little heavily overhanging rock in the UK.

In reply to winhill:

Classic stuff.

Shauna is consistently Britain's most successful competition climber over the last few years.

In the last week on UKC she's been criticised for:

sending mixed messages with a charity calendar (sexist in a bad way)

organising a successful series of events aimed at increasing participation and knowledge for female climbers (sexist in the other bad way)

appearing on the front of a well known climbing magazine but (gasps) in a non-climbing environment (just plain wrong and sexy and sexist and just plain wrong)

Good job she doesn't fall off too much.

In reply to Lukeva:


Access I can see, to a point, particularly for youngsters. Certainly 20 or 30 years ago when I was growing up, there were far more opportunities for boys to try climbing than there were for girls - both through school, and through out of school youth clubs. I'm not sure to what extent that's still the case, though.

In reply to avictimoftheDrpsycho: It was just an observation from a quick read through the thread, now just observing who gets all defensive.

In reply to John_Hat:

Agree with much of what you put there. Of course there will be differences in strengths between men and women at a 'population' level just as there are differences between heavy and light climbers (can't ever see someone over 90kg climbing 9a - the skin tension on the fingertips would be immense).

The thing with the above is that a personal account of overcoming psychological barriers, a talk about managing stress and a talk about nutrition are three things that absolutely transcend gender and so this really is a missed opportunity to unite beyond sexism.

In reply to avictimoftheDrpsycho:

Conversely being a knuckle dragging penis wielding oppressor is a bit outdated and will only get you a shag in Yarmouth...

To illustrate whats wrong I noticed an advert for a female climbing partner in Sheffield in the last few days. It has had 370 views but only one genuine reply....

In reply to Shani:

Then organise a mens symposium to discuss them with Appropriate Speakers if you feel men have missed out.

Women are Entitled to a women only affair.

They often feel less Inhibited, less intimidated, away From men. Thats why women only wall Sessions are increasingly popular.

In reply to win hill:

I'll defend UKC here since I think you are over-reacting


If you study that thread you'll find there was far more support than criticism. In fact most of the criticism was more just people airing discussion points that put forward a point of view. I think this is a very bad example for you to bring up in this context.


No-one is criticising anyone for "organising a series of events etc." There are some questions about the women-only aspect. That is not the same thing.

Alan

In reply to Choss:

Does this apply to men? If so, do you support men-only golf clubs?

In reply to Shani: Do you think this women-only climbing workshop is comparable to men-only golf clubs?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Yes as both explicitly exlude people based on gender.

In reply to Choss:


I've got a video about that...

In reply to Shani:

I dont Support golf clubs full stop.

Having a men only session at a wall would be Entirely different to saying this is a men only wall.

I would have no objection to a women only wall Though. Its about historical Power relationships.

If you feel demasculated by Progressive Female Emancipation, thats your Issue.

In reply to Shani: At that simplistic level, you are correct.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Actually Alan it was you who introduced the whole mixed messages thing IIRC, if you didn't introduce it you echoed it. The other numbers, less interesting.


I added 'for female climbers', this is the third year in a row it's happened on UKC, same old shit slung about. Only difference is that this year it's after the event.

If you could sell out an event without taking the shit or you could sell it out and take the shit, which would you do?

It raises an interesting point though, BMC were actively promoting it on facebook and participating in the fb group, less so on UKC, were UKC left out of the loop on purpose or just neglect?

In reply to Choss:

I'm not a member of one, so I guess I don't support them either. Not sure of the relevance of this though.


Replace 'men only session' with 'white-only'. Now do you see the issue?


Yes. Let's learn from the past and not repeat historical mistakes such as excluding people based up gender, race and sexual orientation.


I don't feel demasculated and I think you are projecting a little here. If you read my comments above you'll see I've championed the climbers mentioned (who just happen to be female), and supported that they be brought on to a broader climbing platform as it sounds like they have a lot to offer fellow climbers. I've also championed the tackling of any glass ceiling that prevents them getting on to such a broader climbing platform.

My 'issue' is with sexism.

In reply to winhill:

You definitely need to re-read the posts if you think there was anything there that was a dig at Shauna.


Total over-reaction again. This is a discussion forum, things get discussed, which can involve tricky subjects.


I think this has been dealt with higher up. BMC promote anything you give them - they don't have to fund their site based on any advertising income.

We had a lot of communication with both Steph and Shauna. We offered them some promotion which they turned down since by that time it turned out that they had sold most of the tickets. We agreed to run a report and Paul Phillips, who attended the event, is putting it together now.

Alan

In reply to Shani:

So the black Professional footballers association, afro carribean Social club etc, are wrong are they?
So you do oppose the gay climbing club then.

Myself i am neither a woman, gay, TransGender, black.

Therefore, its none of my business to tell any of Those groups how they should represent themselves. I dont think its for you to tell them how to either.

In reply to Choss: Or you could ask, is having a children's climbing club being ageist?

In reply to winhill:

"It raises an interesting point though, BMC were actively promoting it on facebook and participating in the fb group, less so on UKC, were UKC left out of the loop on purpose or just neglect?"

The event is part supported by the BMC, that's why we promoted it online and in social media.

In reply to Choss:

As long as they aren't discriminating against other races/sexes that's fine. Do they say that white/straight people are not allowed? Or can I bring my white friend to a black climbing group meeting?

In reply to Choss et al.: Seriously how many times are you planning to throw the ball back at each other with arguments like "would a plumber-only bouldering wall be ok?"

The only question is would any club discriminate actively against a gender/race? For instance if you apply online will it ask if you are black/gay/a man? If you are not will it reject your application? If so, it is discriminative. I don't think afro-caribbean clubs would do that for example (and I know one that is happy to welcome people from any background).

This symposium was really rejecting men from attending? No man was allowed to buy a ticket and there was a gender box on the online form to book the tickets (greyed for men)? I doubt that...

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I guess we're being ageist by only allowing over 16s to smoke and over 18s to drink. This is one of the few 'ists' that can be defended.

In relation to climbing, a few points stand out:

1) Are there any adults at a children's climbing event. I'd guess so.
2) Can parents attend a children's climbing event. I'd guess so.
3) Why would an adult want to attend a children's climbing event (paticularly if they were not an instructor nor a parent of an attendee)?

In reply to drolex:

I agree. Ball batting Back and forth etc. Agree to disagree etc. Good Point well made.

Weve now Heard Officially From UKC and BMC office on this Matter.

We just need john redheads Take on this one and this threads complete!

In reply to Shani: Are you a scientist?

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: As per the woman only workshop, I understand that any group performs differently when around similar people, if this similarity happens to be gender then so be it. From a coaching perspective it is sometimes a valuable moment to teach people a lesson they may already know but in a different environment, thus furthering the skill. Some people feel more comfortable around their own gender and some times more competitive. Simply trying what you enjoy in a different environment can help in many different ways.

So from a coaching perspective I understand the benefits of women only workshops.

From a personal perspective it does sadden me that I'm not allowed to go I feel I'd learn a lot seeing how people do moves and use their bodies to achieve a climb in ways I may have not yet thought of. Climbing with my wife and the girls at the wall has really helped my technique.

Should it be Womens only, Who cares. Someone found an opening in the market and used it. Congrats to them.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Alan, are you saying that a man was allowed to attend? Is this "Pauline" Phillips or did he have to go in disguise?

In reply to John_Hat:

What an absolute crock of rubbish John, patronising in the extreme.

Women can perform on rock, at any angle, equal to men.

Women only events can help re-address the imbalance of gender parity in climbing and society.

They can encourage women, in what is still a male dominated sport....that is changing, but more needs to be done.

In reply to drolex:

Oh yes - there are men only clubs and women only clubs. I've not heard of any clubs in the UK using colour as a bar to joining.

I do think that there is a difference in creating a club as a means for a minority to meet up with other members of that minority, and creating a club as a way for a majority to keep a minority out.

So a men's only climbing club could hardly be created to give men more opportunity to climb with one another, could it? After all, men get to climb with other men, or in men only groups all the time! It must therefore exist to keep women out.

But a women only climbing club might offer opportunities for women to climb in all female environments which might not otherwise exist - it is a way for women to meet and climb with other women.

So I could see good arguements for a group for stay at home dads, or a men's knitting club or something like that...

In reply to tlm:

what you Said.

Youre just Better At saying it.

In reply to Carolyn:

All the young climbers clubs at the walls I frequent seem to have more girls than lads, so it appears to have improved.

In reply to Choss:



I don't have a problem with a bunch of women organising an event for women per se. My worry is whether it actually helps those women integrate with the (male dominated) climbing scene as a whole or whether it increases whatever perceived barrier exists by reinforcing the notion of being 'different'. Maybe some people just want to stay 'different' ?

In reply to GrahamD:

Then thats their Choice. If so, so be it.

In reply to tlm:
I am pretty sure that would be illegal. You can have a club intended for women, where you expect to find mostly women and being a man in it would be odd. But I don't see how they could legally refuse a male member.

" A club cannot refuse membership, or grant membership on less favourable terms (such as by applying different conditions or fees) because the person has a protected characteristic – disability, gender reassignment, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex or sexual orientation. "
http://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/85...

Would they refuse women? I hope not, that would still be a case of discrimination.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: Well, you certainly have UKC talking about this event now...

I am definitely going next year!

In reply to drolex:
.

There must be ways around this- The Masons for example do not allow ladies to join?

In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:

Maybe we need to change our vocabulary to address this. Take the word dominate for example. I don't see many men at my local wall dominating women climbers.

I do see a lot more men than women though. the English language is so diverse that there is not only one word to describe something. Maybe we need to find a less negative word than 'dominate' when there are more men who are climbing but NOT dominating women?

let's stop picking on male climbers by saying that they are predominately sexist or perceived as sexist just because there are more of them. Pick on them when they actually are sexist!

If we want to discuss sexism in sport then choose a exist sport such as football, that ticks far more boxes to get wound up about.

In reply to Choss:



I agree. Provided that's what they want. Shame though, I prefer climbing as an all inclusive passtime.

In reply to Lukeva:

Don't they?

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/freemasons-launch-recruitmen...

In reply to Lukeva:

There must be ways around this- The Masons for example do not allow ladies to join?

Yes, clubs can still be single gender, religion, etc: -

"The Act maintains the previous exceptions allowing
clubs to restrict their membership according to
race and sexual orientation and extends it, in line
with the extended protection from discrimination,
to also cover gender reassignment, pregnancy and
maternity, religion or belief, and sex".

In reply to tlm:

Your post made me wonder if we genuinely are still a tiny minority.... If you look at the UKC survey, then yes, only 13% of respondents are female, but BMC membership has changed from 16% female in 2002, to 25% female in 2006. https://www.thebmc.co.uk/participation-in-climbing-mountaineering
There is no recent data, but I bet its gone up- if at the same trajectory then a third of members are likely to be women.

UKC is certainly a very laddish place, but way more so than the climbing world in general. (Something for Alan James to ponder?)

I also suspect its a generational thing. I'm an old biddy by climbers standards and don't know that many female climbers but when I go to the wall there are loads of younger women around. I expect but may be wrong, that women are better represented on the indoor scene rather than outdoors....

Now a womens winter symposium would be something I'd definitely sign up for!

In reply to Oceanrower:

haha... Ok maybe they do!

Lots don't though:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6521703.stm

It would appear private clubs can let in who ever they want, but if they let both men and women in it must be on equal terms (just asked a solicitor).

Sort of off topic from OP

In reply to MJ:

Yep just been told the same, odd and old fashioned IMO

In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:

I have no idea who you think you are replying to, but I think you are being un-necessarily trigger-happy here and frankly unpleasant. What I said was:

"I think that climbing is one place where there is very little difference between gender. Men have greater upper-body strength, woman have lower centre of gravity and smaller hands and feet (so smaller holds are bigger), etc. It all evens out.".

So we are actually in agreement.

In reply to MJ: Ah ok. I stand corrected then.

"Example
A mixed-sex rugby club wants to encourage more women to join because participation by women is disproportionately low. It therefore runs a series of “taster” sessions open only to women, to encourage them to come along and try out the facilities. This is likely to be allowed under positive action provisions, as a proportionate way of encouraging more women to participate."

I love the use of "likely".

One day I swear I will understand all this positive action stuff.

In reply to Lukeva:

Yep just been told the same, odd and old fashioned IMO.

Not really.
Some groups will naturally want exclusiveness and if you allow one section of society to have those rights, then you have to allow others the same.

In reply to Team BMC:

Didn't the BMC pay for posters before as well?

But the BMC didn't promote it on UKC? It doesn't come up on the searches.

In reply to The Lemming:

in this case, dominated means .....participation..(most would understand that).. and there are historical reasons for climbing being a male-dominated sport, which have been slowly changing over the years, initially due to some pioneering women (role models) ....now these reasons are varied but one of the main ones is patriarchy which is slowly being eroded away, but that cause is far from won in many societies, in our society and sub-cultures like climbing.

If women and men are not pro-active in readdressing the balance we will be take many steps backwards. It's because some people are pro-active - like the Women's Climbing Symposium, Chick With Picks, the BMC, and women having more of a voice etc (and other reasons such as the increase in climbing walls and hence more exposure for climbing to a population) that there are more women climbing.....which is a great thing as climbing encourages healthy bodies and minds.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

No it wouldn't. It is because indoor climbing is shite. The event wouldn't interest me and many outdoor climbers on here regardless of who is competing. I don't even subscribe to the threads about indoor walls and the nonsense that goes alongside it.

I am however following great climbing stories from fantastic climbers who happen to be women (not because they are women) like Lucy Creamer

http://www.ukclimbing.com/articles/page.php?id=5908

Emma Twyford

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68419

In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH: I struggle to see the bar to women climbing. The venue is open and accessible to all, it can be done alone or with another man or woman.

How white and middle class it is is more of an issue in my opinion.

In reply to MJ:

To me that is odd. Some clubs will only allow men to join because they are old fashioned- just my opinion. Let's face it if a man-only golf club didn't want women to join it is likely that the feeling would be reciprocal

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Evasive, did you post that the calender was sending out mixed messages or not?


And people just love knowing the same shit's coming every time.

"by that time"?

By which time? On facebook they ran a poster design competition, which was well in advance of ANY sales.

So the opportunity passed by until nearly all the tickets had been sold?

In reply to Snoweider:

That is a bit of a sweeping generalisation. I acknowledge that our Readership Survey figures only give a disappointingly small percentage of women as UKC Readers, however that is not the same as this being a laddish place. I suggest you look at our news page and articles before you denounce the whole site with comments like that.

You possibly meant UKC Forums is a laddish place. I would dispute this, but at least I can see where you are coming from.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

Yes, I meant the forums obviously! Sorry.

I was referring to readership rather than content and for info I read lots of your excellent news and articles which is the main reason why I log on.

Why do you think that the registered users are so male dominated? Do you think there is parity with the ratio of men:women in the wider climbing community?

In reply to winhill:

I can see the reasons for doing it the way they have and I don't think it is a major issue, but I do think it sends out mixed messages. Pretty much what I said in the other thread really. Hardly critical, just an opinion.

I stand by my statement that your initial post was a big over-reaction when you consider what was posted on that thread, especially if you consider my comments to be the worst of the minority of comments expressing some misgivings about the calendar!


I'd say that it is completely different 'shit' this time. The last two time it was deliberately provocative posters which, wait for it, provoked a reaction. This time it is a point of principle which seems to me to be a legitimate thing to debate on a forum. I personally have no feelings either way; I can see reasons for keeping it all female, and I can see why some people object to that.


We don't seek out these things. If the WCS felt they could promote themselves via their own channels then fine, it worked well. I really can't see what your problem is here.

Alan

In reply to Snoweider:

I don't think the 87:13 ratio reflects the wider climbing community, although there is no doubt that it isn't 50:50 there either. I suspect something like 70:30 might be a closer figure, but that is off the top of my head.

Why don't we reflect that? Well it may be that our readership is closer to 70:30, but those who regsiter tend to do so for the forums and forums the world over are male dominated (well most of them).

It is an area I would like to work on though.

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax: Perhaps they're setting up a women-only forum as we speak. Nothing at all like a male-only golf club.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I think you are right, there are probably lots of lurkers out there of the female persuasion. Its an interesting question though, why don't women register for these sorts of sites? Given the success of mumsnet its obvious the format works in some instances.

In reply to Lukeva:

There are. It's further down the document linked to (pg 8). You can have a club restricted to people of a particular "protected characteristic", but it can't then discriminate on the basis of other protected characteristics.

"Clubs and other associations for people
who share a protected characteristic
The Act allows private clubs and other associations (except political parties) to restrict membership to people who share protected characteristics."

I.e.
You can set up a women's only club, but it can't then discriminate against disabled women
You can set up a sports club for disabled people, but it can't then discriminate against disabled women.

I assume you can also set up a club for people with more than one protected characteristic, so long as it's defined in the governing document.

In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:

Populated is indeed a better choice of word, and if chosen changes the context and perception of the reader, wouldn't you agree?

Which sounds more positive and which sounds mor oppresive?

Mostly male populated activity

Mostly male dominated activity.

Politicians and diplomats fully embrace the choice and phraseology of words so as not to offend or to get a positive message across. We too can do the same by not choosing negative words to describe us men folk.

Being selective in our use of the English language, something that I am fumbling round with, will be gust as powerful in changing the hearts and minds of all and will have as strong an impact on the nonexistent glass ceiling of the climbing world.

Or we could just have male climbers dominating left right and centre?

Words and context, they make all the difference.

In reply to The Lemming: If you say so. I just thought it meant there were more men climbing.

In reply to drolex:

From your link:
"The Act maintains the previous exceptions allowing
clubs to restrict their membership according to
race and sexual orientation and extends it, in line
with the extended protection from discrimination,
to also cover gender reassignment, pregnancy and
maternity, religion or belief, and sex."

It is perfectly legal to have men only or women only clubs...

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Yes, more men climbing and a perception for right or wrong of men dominating in the climbing world.

Lets choose to use another word, rather than dominate?

In reply to The Lemming: Conquered?

In reply to The Lemming:

There is no point pussyfooting around. Men do dominate in climbing - if only by sheer weight of numbers. The debate here is how women can best change this position (if there is the appetite to do it of course - it might be that climbing will never appeal to women in the same number as men)

In reply to Snoweider:

"UKC is certainly a very laddish place, but way more so than the climbing world in general. (Something for Alan James to ponder?)"

I'm not sure that is fair. People say way more on the web than they would in real life. What you need to compare UKC with is another website in another activity/sport. Alan has at least put stuf up about laddish posting (and acts on it) which I'm sure isn't universal.

In reply to GrahamD:

Yes, some women and men have the appetite to change the old ways, and many of them have been for the last 100 years+ (some of course ignorantly say, what is the problem or sit on the fence).

Positive change is only achieved by action, and also recognising that there is a problem in the first place.

Climbing should appeal to all, it has the capacity to change a life; the freedom of the outdoors, physical and mental conditioning and challenges; it can be part of a life well spent.

Crikey - UKC laddish. Some people lead very sheltered lives I think.

E

In reply to Enty:

To find an example of laddish behaviour for you I just searched back through this thread to find some examples of some fairly sexist language and it looks like they've been moderated!

In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:

Yes and that is what I have sought to do on here; challenge sexism.

Putting the politics to one side I see an opportunity for UKC here. How about commissioning Mina Leslie-Wajastyk to write a personal account of overcoming psychological barriers, Fran Brown to write an article about managing stress and Rebecca Dent to write a piece on nutrition?

In reply to Shani:

I think there is value in events for minority groups (which women obviously are in the context of climbing when you look at participation levels across the board).

The whole point in these events is that they are specifically for that minority group. Allow the majority to take part and they become like any other event.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: I think its a pity you couldn't start a positive thread about what a great time you had instead of a man-bashing one. I am unlikely to go to a female only session, but if I was considering it, then your attitude would put me off.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Neat and well-articulated logical approach from Eva Lopez...
http://en-eva-lopez.blogspot.com.es/2013/11/about-all-female-climbing-event...

In reply to Snoweider:

I don't know about a 'tiny' minority, but women are still most definitely in a minority. At the wall tonight, there were about 3 women (including myself) and about 30 blokes.

It also depends on where you look - on a nice sunny holiday in spain at a bolted single pitch crag, I see more women and children, or at places like windgather. But when I've been out in more exciting weather, or to more exciting venues, then the number of women seems to drop....

In reply to GrahamD:


But also, one of the things that I have always liked about climbing is the blokieness of it. I like not brushing my hair, rolling around in mud a bit and using insults as a way to show affection to my mates. I don't really want my climbing experience to be any different, and the women that I have met and liked through climbing tend to be women who also like things to be a little bit roughfty toughfty....

When I have climbed in all women's groups of more than 2, it does seem to lead to a different sort of atmosphere, which is nice to experience now and again. I think I can count these occasions on one hand, in over 20 years of climbing. So I don't think that creating opportunities for women to climb with other women, see other women climb, and learn techniques etc from them is exactly shutting men out.

In reply to tlm: I'm really not sure why some of the 'blokes' are so against a few women, who are a minority in climbing, getting together and enjoying an all female event. I don't know why they want it, I don't want an all male climbing event, but that's not the point.

In reply to marsbar: Please tell me how the following is a negative beginning?
"The Women's Climbing Symposium this year was excellent. Such good workshops and speakers. I came away utterly inspired and totally psyched to put what I learnt into practice at the wall and into my daily routines. The speakers were fanatstic, with Mina leslie-wujastyk giving a very personal account of overcoming psychological barriers, Fran brown talking about managing stress and Rebecca Dent on nutrition- to name but a few!
The workshops were invaluable and I can now say I have been leaping like a flying squirrel with Leah Crane and and hanging off slopers with Emma Tywford"

I followed up by pointing out the lack of advertising then I ended on another positive note.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:


I don't like being automatically cast as the villain of the piece by feminists, just because I'm a man--it gets my back up. And I'm not, I'm really not, the villain of the piece. I'm totally on their side, which is partly why it annoys me!

If some women want women-only meets that's fine by me, and I can see why they might. But if they're going to do that, then they can't complain if men have men-only meets. Or gingers. Or whatever. And they can't expect everyone they've excluded by definition to be raring to praise their event.

In reply to Tim Chappell: Maybe you can change your user name to 'Evil Tim'

I don't think men only events are generally a problem, but there is a difference if your in a minority, and men-only golf clubs are hardly comparable to an annual women's climbing event, unless you look at it from a very simplistic viewpoint.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: I'd just like to point out that by making it gender separated, men who are inevitably quite different to women purely down to testosterone, will not learn how to better accommodate women partners. Men and women more often than not quite clearly have very different attitudes to risk, the way they approach climbs and how they respond to pressure. However it is not always something that is picked up on by men (or women for that matter) and actually it is a vital part of better integrating the fairer sex into this excellent game of ours. How are people with such differing sets of values and motivational drives supposed to work well together if they don't understand each other?

The most important thing is that we can learn from one another - men have something to learn from women climbers and once you have worked out how the other works it no longer needs to be an intimidating bond we share but can provide a truly rich climbing partnership in which the male and female attributes are both well represented and which can provide what the other needs to succeed. And none of this you will achieve by being separate from one another. Perhaps these womens symposiums, rather than concentrating on how to make climbing fair to women, should concentrate on how to get men and women to climb well together in a more supportive atmosphere.

In reply to mike kann: Totally agree.
Unfortunately If it was a mixed gender symposium it would be "dominated" by men, and might put off women. Wouldn't have put off me though so I don't think I should really generalise like that. My partner is a male climber and I learned with men and now regularly climb with both men and women and learn equally from both sets.
I think my feelings of having women only event have been reflected nicely on this thread by Michael (UKC) and Choss and feel like we will be going around in circles if I keep reiterating- appreciate you seem new to the thread.
I actually said to my partner it was a shame he wasn't able to go, and it was. I still agree making women feeling more empowered in the climbing world is important. I wish more women used these forums.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

One of the other posts at the top of the thread said the event sold out. If the event sold out then the organisers gauged the level of advertising and publicity correctly.

In reply to mike kann:

Most men I know are more than happy climbing with women, and do so quite often. They don't need to 'accommodate' their women partners. They just enjoy their company and climb in partnership with them. Climbing is a sport which seems pretty unsexist to me, with climbers being taken on their own, individual merits.

>Men and women more often than not quite clearly have very different attitudes to risk, the way they approach climbs and how they respond to pressure.

Isn't this just true for every individual? I know men that are a lot less bold than me, and women that are far more bold!


If you want someone to understand where you are coming from, then why not just explain your individual stance to the individual concerned?


I tend to climb with people that I have something in common with and who I work well with. They may be male, they may be female, but it has never seemed a problem to me?


I didn't think it was 'trying to make climbing fair' to women? I thought it was just providing women with an opportunity to climb with and learn from other women, which is not very often available to us? But then maybe I have misunderstood the point of it - after all, I wasn't there.

In reply to tlm:

what tlm said.

I used to climb (and still do) with a number girls, all of whom climbed harder than me - see Gemma on my photos. Never bothered me in the slightest. I suspect most male climbers feels the same, those that have a problem probably still live with their mums.

i know that Lyons would wup my hairy arse on the rock, great - good to se a woman climbing at a nails level.

In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:



You clearly think there is a 'problem'. Can you define what it actually is ?


I don't see why, just X factor or football don't appeal to all. Climbing will never truly appeal to people who cannot overcome a fear of exposure or who don't want to get their hands dirty. Climbing will always appeal to a limited demographic.

In reply to John Rushby: I live with my mum (sometimes), and I don't have a problem. Do you have a problem with men who live with their mum?

In reply to tlm:

Good post tlm! it seems the OP is, if not offended herself, is offended on others behalf.
My personal stance is that I have no problem climbing with anyone just as long as they are competent.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Do you keep any cats and call them, Oedipus?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I live with my mum (sometimes), and I don't have a problem. Do you have a problem with men who live with their mum?

Do you run a Hotel?

In reply to tlm: I am certainly not saying that it applies to everybody. However I still maintain that it can be a problem. The number of times I've seen boyfriends get fruss with their missus because she's not doing it the way he thinks she should... I guess my point is that not everybody thinks of explaining how they feel about things - I think this is a conversation I've probably had with only a couple of partners - one of them being a female. It's not through want of trying either - in my experience guys are usually a bit inhibited and too macho to talk sensibly about the way each others actions affect their performance. Perhaps being in an environment in which talking about these sorts of things is a bit easier would help men develop there male partnerships aswell. Just a thought like...

You may not be risk averse, and you may know guys (just like I do) who are more risk averse. But that's not really the point - you have to factor in that in some cases it's true - blokes mostly have more testosterone and approach climbs in a more powerful and brutish way than many girls, who often work out problems using technique - are you seriously telling me that learning from somebody who is shorter and weaker than you and yet can do much harder climbs than you isn't beneficial - that in a comfortable less aggressive environment many guys wouldn't learn more? I have no doubt that lots of blokes would learn stackloads from the likes of Lucy Creamer et al. and the idea that a symposium would be dominated by men is rather sad, after all we're not all pumped up nutters hell bent on making womens lives a misery. The fact is the leaders would all be female which would add quite a different spin on the whole thing. I know from climbing with female guides its quite a radically different experience than climbing with many male guides and all I'm getting at is that by excluding men, you're doing a diservice to both men and women. It's more or less inevitable that they will climb together so why not embrace it and come up with a different way of thinking about it which seems to be what Shauna and lucy are aiming for? And to be fair, if girls want to learn specifically from girls there are any number of female instructors they could go to - this question of accessibility and learning from other girls is a total non problem!

In reply to mike kann:

mike, with such a specific training need you'd have to ask someone to design it for you or cvome up with it yourself.

The WCS is one day and isn't about men and wimmin climbing together.

In reply to Snoweider:


No need for an apology Snoweider, that was just an overly aggressive and obtuse response from Alan James - 99.9% of the time people use UKC to mean the forum, Alan's suggestion that you 'possibly mean the forum' is expressing some faux umbridge at the perceived slight.

Unless he's trying to ban the phrase and insisting everyone refers to "www.ukclimbing.com/forums" instead.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

It's not magic sauce because it's 'just an opinion'. Is it your opinion thhat women shouldn't have a minute amount of girlie fun along the way to becoming the country's most successful competition climber?

I didn't say I considered your's the worst, I'm not sure what you think my reaction was, let alone why your weaving strawmen. I posted three events that occurred, which you denied but then said they did occur?

Your memory isn't as good as mine, you could always check.

Katy Whittaker said it best:

There are lots of women out there crushing grit but everyone is just doing their own thing. There are obviously way less women out there climbing than men, so when you narrow it right down into a specific area like hard grit there are never going to be loads of women doing it.

I don't think we need to make a big deal out of it; it is how it is. I personally don't think first female ascents are a big deal, especially on grit. I don't want to be noticed for climbing something just because I’m a girl. I compare myself with the guys I climb with and want to climb just as hard....I am mainly inspired by the people I climb with. I really feed off their psyche and motivation and I love climbing with people who are enthusiastic.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: It may just be that more men climb because they dont have shoes and handbags to go and buy.

In reply to Shani:

You need to knit some fancy spaghetti to make that relevant to the WCS.

In reply to winhill:

Perhaps read that last sentence from Katy again then?

In reply to Shani:

This is lazy, which sentence?

The last one in the interview was:

I know nothing about cricket!

Or your quote:

I really feed off their psyche and motivation and I love climbing with people who are enthusiastic.

Either has equal relevance, I'll go with the cricket.

In reply to winhill:

"I don't think we need to make a big deal out of it; it is how it is. I personally don't think first female ascents are a big deal, especially on grit. I don't want to be noticed for climbing something just because I’m a girl. I compare myself with the guys I climb with and want to climb just as hard."

Positive action highlights and exacerbates problems, and creates problems where they really don't exist.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

Whatever the comments on this thread, the event as covered in Paul's report, looks like it was a really positive event that everyone had a great time at.

http://www.ukclimbing.com/news/item.php?id=68482

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

I think the comments on this thread are largely if not overwhelmingly supportive of this event. I'm supportive of the WCS and its aims - it is any explicit mandate to 'exclude' on the basis of gender that draws ire.

In reply to Shani: Talking about problems that don't exist, I'm not sure you've explained what the actual problem is, or the problem that the WCS will create? Do you think it'll cause a rift in the climbing fraternity?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Re-read my last post.

In reply to Shani: You don't like the fact that it excludes men, so the problem is that men can't go to the WCS? It's just one, small, annual event that you're not allowed to attend. I'm sure there are plenty of other events you can go to.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:


Bit like the Nuernberg rallies then?

In reply to Franco Cookson: At last, somebody's invoked the Nazi argument! Doesn't that mean I win?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

My god, you're right. Godwin's Law!

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Yes, and that the thread is now over.

In reply to Choss: Until next year anyway...

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

>Do you think it'll cause a rift in the climbing fraternity?

Of course it won't because, as previously noted, the majority of climbers are men. What it might do is affect how well women are accepted into that fraternity if (some) women insist on being viewed as special cases.

In reply to GrahamD:

The problem is that in the past women were not actively encouraged to participate in many sports.

That has changed massively over the years because of role models, events, legislation, support, education, peer support and funding.

However many recognise that there is still a lot of work to be done. Events like the Women's Climbing Symposium are part of this.

You will always get a backlash, as witnessed on this thread; always best ignored but it will always happen.

Looking at the even bigger picture: a lot is being done to encourage people to take up sports and exercise. This is good on an individual level and good for society as a whole.

In reply to GrahamD: OMG! I never thought of that! :O

In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:

There is no backlash against the WCS. The 'backlash' is against any policy of exclusion based upon gender aka 'sexism'.

In reply to Shani: Ladies toilets?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Look, I've told you, you won this argument a few minutes ago under Godwin!

Cheers,
Chris

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Belgium? You can't imagine the suprise I had when standing at a urinal trough letting out a steamer and trying to hit the soap cakes, when three stunning Belgian girls walked in with nondescript reactions while I was flustering and apologising, but then realising that women don't bee in troughs... When I went back out it was all laughs at me.

In reply to Milesy: Everybody likes to try and hit the soap cakes, especially when you've had a few too many.

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax: Good all round report! I'm still buzzing from it.
Managed to flash 3 problems I couldn't even get my head around last week using things I had learned in the workshops.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Would you be able to find me one that has as much depth, breadth and interactivity close to where I live, all in one event? Because I've tried and kept my eyes open for a while now, and I certainly haven't been able to.

Excluding anybody on characteristics that they are unable to change is morally wrong and deserves social and legal censure.

In reply to neuromancer: Are you joking?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I'm probably more light-hearted than joking, but the case remains that it looked like a bloody good event, I would have loved to have gone with my girlfriend and learnt a lot, and neither of us could find a valid reason why not that wasn't somewhat morally questionable.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

I don't want to get too involved because we had this thread last year - although with a greater focus on high heels I seem to recall - but you know fraternity means brotherhood, right? Women can't by definition join a fraternity because we don't have testicles. So it's probably better to use a word like 'community' if you're talking about inclusivity.

(sorry if you knew this and were being ironic!)

In reply to Alyson: I do know that women don't have testicles.

In reply to Michael Ryan - UKC and UKH:

As part of a general health campaign, fine, we as a country should be encouraging an active lifestyle.

Should people be 'actively encouraged' into climbing specifically rather than just trying to ensure that there are no actual obstacles in their way should they want to participate ? I don't think so. I would like to see men and women climbing on exactly equal terms which means exactly the same level of self motivation required in all cases. I don't see exclusively Women's Climbing Symposium as part of the process of removing barriers to entry into the larger climbing fraternity - you obviously disagree.

In reply to Alyson: BTW, I'm not that clever. But I suspect you know this already.

In reply to GrahamD: Not a fraternity! Women can't join a fraternity! <head/desk interface>

In reply to Alyson:



I've just made that mistake again ! I deliberately didn't use the term community because its not really that either - its too disparate a group of interests with so little actual overlap to really be a community.

In reply to Alyson: Can women fraternize?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

No, and neither can men!

Not with a Z in Britain anyway. How Colonial.

And surely the Feminine of Fraternity is Simply Maternity?

In reply to Choss: Not with a Zee?

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

And as to women not Having testicles, reminds me of a tv quote.

"And what about Those of us without testicles?" "The victims of Tragic Accidents you Mean?"

In reply to Choss: Emmerdale?

In reply to mike kann:

You obviously climb with a different sort of set of blokes from the ones I know. Your description just sounds so alien to me! The blokes I climb with climb in quite a careful, controlled and pretty technical manner and don't seem to have testosterone induced rages, but are quite civilised, intelligent, articulate and thoughtful! I can see why you write as you do if your experience is so different from mine.


Heh - I'm not the one arguing that men ARE like this!


I'm not excluding anyone! I didn't organise the symposium or go to it! Why don't you organise a woman led mixed symposium if you would like to go to one?

I just think that women don't often get to climb in an all female space and it is hard to actually climb with a group of women. Yes, you could pay to hire one female guide, but that isn't the same as being a majority, rather than a minority for a change. I don't really see why anyone would begrudge women who want it the chance to experience this, for them to see if it is different?

I prefer to just climb with my own mates, both male and female, but I don't begrudge women climbing together if they want to. When I have climbed in all female groups, it HAS been a different experience in many small ways, which add up to a significant difference.

In reply to GrahamD:

I don't see any women insisting on being viewed as special cases? I just see women wanting the pretty rare chance to climb in an all female situation, with other women?

In reply to Choss:

No, that specifically relates to motherhood.

Paternity - maternity
Fraternity - sorority

In reply to Choss:


No. Maternity is the feminine of paternity.
Sorority is the feminine of Fraternity.

you would have to use something like 'siblinghood' if you wanted to be none sexist about it...

In reply to Alyson:

And that surely relates to the film, Grease.

whats wrong with Using brotherhood and Sisterhood? Everyone Understands them, even me.

In reply to tlm:

"The Collective"

Sounds Better i think?

In reply to tlm:


I guess its a frame of mind thing. Do you see this sort of event as a nice adjunct to 'climbing as normal' (an event for climbers who are women) or a model for a way forward for climbers (an event for women who are climbers)?

If its the former then its not really an issue (for me at least as I can't get worked up about a one off event which excludes men's participation. If its the latter, however, and looking to climb all the time in an all female situation IS asking to be viewed as a special case and not a healthy thing to aspire to.

Most people don't chose their partner on sex - they partner on climbing compatibility

In reply to Choss:

The 'massive', to include the yungstas ?

In reply to Alyson: Can you save me some effort and tell me what to think about it?

In reply to GrahamD:

Well, when i first read the thread Title
I did think it was about a British Female Junglist outfit Having a poor Turnout at a gig.

In reply to tlm:

I think it's quite lazy stereotyping to be honest. I've seen blokes like this, but they've usually been non-climbers having a go. I've also seen women with shit technique, highly technically gifted male climbers, plus shit male climbers, strong women etc. Climbing must be one of the least gender-biased sport there is.

In reply to Submit to Gravity: Are you stereotyping non-climbers? Shame on you.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Yes I am, but that was industrious stereotyping. It's the lazy stereotyping that gets me, and blokes called Mike are by far the worse at it...

In reply to Submit to Gravity: Fairy Nuff.

In reply to Choss: I think that what with Godwin's Law satisfied and now a grammatical criticism we can probably mark this discussion over.

In reply to planetmarshall:

Not without agreement on whether God exists, and if so, is he a woman.

In reply to planetmarshall: I don't finish work until half five though!

In reply to planetmarshall:

It has been Round the block more Times than an illegal minicab Driver

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: One last question then. Are men allowed to go to the WCS?

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

Wouldn't worry about it. There was an all women climbing symposium, you probably wouldn't have gone if it had been for both sexes anyway.

I'm too much of a punter to get much out of it in any case. Training, nutrition, what's that? If I can't climb it with cold fingers, a hangover and scared sh1tless, it's unlikely eating the right sandwich before the route is going to make much difference. ;0)

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: Have written some of my thoughts on the event here - http://www.averybusylife.blogspot.co.uk/2013/11/womens-climbing-symposium-w...

Interestingly I was asked by a (male) friend, if I thought men could learn from women. My response was that ANYONE can learn, it's about whether the individual in questions wants to learn and develop. Many of the sessions on Saturday were focused on key performance criteria - some of these were particularly pertinent to women (particularly the psychological aspects), but would still be of relevance to men IF they wanted to learn and commit to applying that learning. Though I do feel that in a women-only environment it is easier to discuss the mental aspects and fears around climbing performance, which may often be poo-pooed by men (or which women don't feel they can raise when around male climbers for fear of showing weakness).

The day was a master of organisation, so hats off to Steph, Shauna and team for putting on a great event and thanks for all the hard work that went into it.

In reply to GrahamD:


I think that idea has only been voiced by you! I've never heard any woman ever say that she only ever wants to climb with women. Still - I guess we all have different views, and if that is what you aspire to, then good luck with it.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS: I *think* (though don't quote me) that men could buy the talk-only tickets, but the coaching was restricted to women.

In reply to Ali:


I hope so, given the dominance by women of the education sector! (was he really being serious???!!!!)

In reply to Ali:

That sounds sooooo patronising.

In reply to Shani:

Really quite depressed that people seem to think a woman only event is the same as a whites only event!

Sexism in any meaningful definition must go hand in hand with power. Therefore a womens only event is NOT the same as a mans only event. Nor is a afro-caribbean event the same as a whites only event.

Really this is like GCSE level understanding.

In reply to JayPee630:

Therefore a womens only event is NOT the same as a mans only event. Nor is a afro-caribbean event the same as a whites only event.

In essence, it's exactly the same i.e. there is discrimination.
However, who really cares if groups of people want to meet up exclusively with other people of their own gender, etc.

In reply to MJ:

Quite, but having had the event, to then bleat about why people weren't talking about it really takes the biscuit. I can't help thinking the OP is a troll.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

This. +100 internets to S2G

In reply to MJ:

Only if you're a strange pedant that ignores the context in which it happens. In any meaningful way it is not the same at all!

Women are discriminated in society at large so therefore cannot be accused of discrimination when have women only events in-order to be able to avoid some of this discrimination briefly. Same with BME groups as well.

Seriously, this is pretty basic understanding og power stuff. The counter arguments are very Daily Mail-esque!

In reply to JayPee630:

That's a pretty basic paradigm based on society as a whole. So you're telling me that a white male who is the only white person employed in a company where all the other employees are afro-caribbean and his immediate supervisor is afro Caribbean can't be discriminated against in the workplace because he's a white male. Rubbish.

In reply to teflonpete:

No, of course that can happen, because we're not talking about individual specific cases, but societal trends. Sigh.

In reply to JayPee630:

>very daily-mail esque

In a moment you are about to call out male climbers to check their privilege, and the descent of this argument into tumblr activist philosophy will be complete.

This isn't the sixties. Women aren't an oppressed minority in the climbing world. Every climbing club I've been a part of has been incredibly representative of the general population; and if not, why should we assume that this is because there are some strange barriers to entry that women face in climbing?

An awesome event was put on that many men (myself included) would have liked to have gone to and were excluded. This both implied the necessity for the exclusion of men (based upon some very hazy moral principles and social understanding - essentially what you just said - "avoid some of this discrimination briefly" - is "we need a women's only climbing event because most male climbers are misogynists) and reinforced any sense of annexation the climbing community might have had regarding gender in climbing.

Generally pretty po-faced, but that's the last I'll interject on the matter.

In reply to neuromancer:

No, I'm not about to do that in a moment at all.

Women as a category ARE discriminated against in the climbing world, as that is just a microcosm of the world as a whole where they are. I have seen it, and so have all my female climbing mates time and time again. Not at the level of seriousness that some people face oppression and discrimination, but at some noticeable level all the same.

So, therefor people who feel like this should be supported when they want to organize there own events to have a space free of it.

I don't recall the event up at the ice factor in Kinlochleven all over UKC either? I didn't see a news item and if there have been any forum threads then they have been under the radar as well.....

In reply to JayPee630:

I thought we were talking about a climbing event.

I would love for some women to tell me what the bars are to women in climbing. I am open-minded, but I'm sure they will apply to the majority of men too.

I have to say, it really boils my piss to read some of your and the OP's whinging - you should realise (as a human being, not as a woman or a man) how bloody lucky you are to live at this time and in this country. Find something worth campaigning about.

In reply to neuromancer:

You tarred all men as misogynists, I never said or even hinted that might be the case! Seriously if you feel hard done by cos of this event it's pretty hilarious and petty!

In reply to JayPee630:


Just to clarify, I don't have an issue with the event at all - it sounds great, run by some cool and inspirational people. It's the bloody moaning tone of the OP that irritates me.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

Hmm, OK that's different but not the impression of what's annoyed you by the posts I've read of yours!

In reply to JayPee630:

Erm, I don't think I was whinging, merely pointing something out. And people are not specifically talking about 'bars' but that sometime women find women only spaces better to learn and do things in than mixed spaces.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

Likewise, I'm glad it was a good event and beneficial to the women that went. I couldn't care less that men were excluded from it, Caerfai, St Govan's and Stanage haven't got any "no women" or "no men" signs up on them.
What sticks in my craw is the condescending twaddle trotted out by Jaypee and some others.

In reply to JayPee630:

I genuinely would like to know what the issues are. I have a daughter, she's 11. It concerns me that the media portray orange woman with fake tits as positive role models for her (although she's far too smart to be taken in by it); it concerns me the amount of actual sexual abuse women suffer, even now in the UK (as evidenced by various threads on here over the years); it doesn't concern me that if she wanted to be a climber it would be harder for her being a woman.

And I'm not angry; just prone to irritation

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

I think the issues are the same as in society at large (although for sure I'm willing to accept the argument that climbing and climbers are as a whole less discriminatory than most similar groups might be).

But climbers are not perfect and female friends I know still suffer everything from wolf whistles, patronizing behavior, through to sometimes even rape and sexual abuse - shock horror, climbers can be bad people!!

In reply to John_Hat:

John, I disagree. We all need a bit of inspiration because one of the main reasons a lot of people don't fulfil their potential is that they don't believe in themselves. Climbing is male dominated and can come across as a macho activity. That isn't helpful for encouraging women's confidence and self-belief. So anything that promotes female confidence and self-belief can only be a good thing. That could be a hard female ascent or a symposium such as this. If they sat there and moaned about how climbing is hard if you're a woman, it would not have been helpful. But clearly this is not what happened. I know someone who went and she came away inspired and motivated. That can only be a good thing in my book.

In reply to John_Hat:
Off topic but most hard sport routes in the UK are overhanging!

In reply to JayPee630:

But climbers are not perfect and female friends I know still suffer everything from wolf whistles, patronizing behavior, through to sometimes even rape and sexual abuse - shock horror, climbers can be bad people!!

Rape?

In reply to JayPee630:

If anyone has been raped I think you should tell the police, not bring it up in a 'climbing is sexist discussion'. I don't think you can that say that women who climb are more likely to be raped.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

i dont feel excluded if the ladies want to have their own event.

gays, africans, jews and communists can all have them too, im cool with that.
in return tho, me and my crew of coffee junky expat clean aid dry toolers expect to be left alone when our day comes. youre either on the bus or off the bus.

In reply to FreshSlate:

Calm down everyone, and maybe read what I wrote. I never said women were more likely to get raped if they climb!!

It happened ages ago, and TBH I think in a discussion about sexism it's entirely appropriate to mention it as someone asked for examples of things that have happened to women as a result of sexism, of which rape is an example of that at the extreme end of the spectrum.

BTW, it was reported, but thanks, she'd not have thought of that... <sarcasm>.

In reply to MJ:

Just as a question, do you think 'women who climb' are as likely as those that don't to suffer from some form of sexual harassment and/or abuse as those that don't?

And before everybody gets all irate again, I'm not saying that would have suffered at the hands of 'climbing men' but 'men' generally (possibly some of which whom (shock horror) climb/mountain bike/fell run/etc etc.). So, in this context I think it is ONE reason why women only events should be supported if some women want them.

Have a read of this http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/rel/crime-stats/an-overview-of-sexual-offending-i...

In reply to JayPee630:

It happened ages ago, and TBH I think in a discussion about sexism it's entirely appropriate to mention it as someone asked for examples of things that have happened to women as a result of sexism, of which rape is an example of that at the extreme end of the spectrum.

Was the rape as a result of sexism in climbing?

In reply to Beth-Cath-T: It's the same with most sport groups. Womens Rugby World Cup and 6 Nations pass by un-noticed as with the football!!

E

In reply to MJ:


I'm not sure I can answer that as how would I know!

But I don't think climbing exists as this world that's separate from the wider world, so it happened as a result of sexism (and all the other things that contribute to rape) yes.

And that I think is what people are struggling with and being defensive, realizing that the hobby we have is not some little bubble where everyone that does it is perfect, but has the same f*cked up dynamics as everywhere else in most part.

In reply to JayPee630:


Nobody is struggling or being defensive, they are bemused by your ludicrous shroud-waving and denial that an event blatantly based on sex-discrimination - an event which only women are allowed attend is not discrimination? Of course it is, by definition.

As for rapes, you are of course right. I always find it a terrible nuisance having to step around a woman being raped at the climbing wall, especially when they won't stop screaming, while the female genital mutilation that goes on in the bouldering room is incredibly messy.

As the Yanks would say, you have "ishews".

In reply to JayPee630:
>

See, I thought the logic of the WCS was that women are built differently to men, and wouldn't it be cool to structure some training and discussion so that it was tailored towards women, and so they could learn from other women. I've not climbed with a single woman who bemoaned the lack of 'a space' to climb 'free of.. oppression and discrimination'. I have yet to feel oppressed at a climbing venue.

Likewise, I thought the logic of the ticketing was simply that if they sell 30 places to men, that's 30 fewer women who can attend, which starts to defeat the object of the exercise. I had no idea there was so much sinister sexism at work. Perhaps if they agreed to sell tickets to men with unnaturally wide hips they'd keep everybody happy.

In reply to JayPee630:



I'd really like to understand how you see this manifesting itself ? because its not my experience.

If it is true, and there are people who are (probably) unconsciously discriminating against women - do you really think a women only event won't reinforce the stereotype you think these people hold of women ?

In reply to MJ:


No, it isn't the same.

One is the opportunity of members of a minority to meet up with other members of that minority.

The other is an opportunity for members of a majority to shut out members of a minority.

A group of stay at home to look after the children men meeting up to share experiences would be a better comparison.

In reply to neuromancer:

Women aren't an oppressed minority in the climbing world.

I agree. They aren't oppressed, but they are a minority.

When did you last see an all male group out climbing? When did you last see an all female group?

In reply to tlm: It's the same reason that some gay people feel the need to have a gay pride parade, but straight people generally don't. It's not symmetrical, if that's the correct word.

In reply to 1poundSOCKS:

Yeah. that is exactly it.

In reply to tlm:

I think its a given that there is a different dynamic when you get an all female group together. Working in outdoor ed I see it all the time with teenagers- to generalise, its a positive learning environment for girls. All-male groups have their own dynamic too, which can actually be detrimental to group members rather than positive, so I understand why an all-female symposium is a supportive place to learn and progress and why some men feel left out.

To turn the argument on its head, I was invited to a male climbing partner's stag do. He said it seemed wrong not to have me there. I had a great evening, but sensed that some of the lads found my presence at the event inhibiting (which was probably a relief for me and the stag). Nevertheless, having a girl at a male event changed the dynamic.

In my experience climbing is generally less sexist than mainstream life, but it is still sexist. This topic has been done to death.

In my view this thread, apart from going round in circles and making a some male contributors feel aggrieved has highlighted a need for more climbing and coaching symposia for all. Perhaps if there was more available for everyone the men that were not able to attend the WCS would not feel so left out.

In reply to Snoweider: I'm sure they'd find something else they were left out of.

In reply to Alyson and tlm:

Thanks for the rational explanations. You both do far more for promoting feminism and understanding of the benefits of minority targeted events than some of the other posters on here.

In reply to Alyson:


Put like that, it is entirely reasonable. Build, body shape, muscle distribution etc vary (they do within sexes of well of course, massively), but it is quite normal for sports to have some sex-specific training.



Glad to hear it, this really was a ridiculous strawman, but not quite as ridiculous as people introducing arguments about rape, not to mention the the Guardianista's Godwin equivalent, gratuitous introduction of a reference to the Daily Mail, rather like accusing anyone who disagrees with you of witchcraft.


Frankly I doubt if they would be swamped by eager men. I actually heard about this event beforehand, thought the ticketing policy and buzz around it was a bit off, but didn't get particularly het-up about it - as a white, middle-aged, English man, I am fairly used to being sneered at and disparaged for all manner of real and imaginary offences by Guardian readers, the normal response is a weary shrug. But to have an extended whine after the event about blokes not talking about something they were never allowed to attend in the first place is rather taking the biscuit.

In reply to Simon4:

I thought she 'whined' about there being no discussion on ukc? (which is not made up of only men)? Don't appropriate our times of being moaned at mate!

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

im pretty sure id avoid a 'men only' climbing meet.

In reply to Simon4: Well now I'm in a pickle. If you insist on agreeing with me, please at least do it without using the words 'sneer' or 'Guardinista', you make me feel unclean

In reply to tlm:

No, it isn't the same.

One is the opportunity of members of a minority to meet up with other members of that minority.

The other is an opportunity for members of a majority to shut out members of a minority.


If one group of people can meet up under a certain criteria, then all people should be afforded the same right.
Additionally, your statement "The other is an opportunity for members of a majority to shut out members of a minority" is a bit disingenuous, in that it implies the exclusion of a minority is the primary aim of the meeting.

In reply to Misha:

Yes and I seem to read more often about women redpointing sport routes in the 8s than leading E7 and above? So John's argument really doesn't stack up as if steepness was such a problem you'd really expect women to excel more on trad routes.

In reply to MJ:

The point is there is no need for majority groups to have their own get togethers (since they dominate anyway). It would be rather pointless.

In reply to MJ:


Hmmm... are you sure that you think this? Under all circumstances? You can't think of any exceptions?

In reply to JayPee630:

You said:
"But climbers are not perfect and female friends I know STILL (my emphasis) suffer everything from wolf whistles, patronizing behavior, through to sometimes even rape and sexual abuse - shock horror, climbers can be bad people!!"

But with the extreme example of rape you were talking about ONE event (and did this really need bringing up?!) years ago. So your above comment was inaccurate and really rather misleading.

In reply to Simon4:



I wouldn't have gone; I find all-women spaces very intimidating.

In reply to Submit to Gravity:

I wouldn't have gone, not worried about all-women spaces but I'd have spent the 60 quid on diesel to go climbing. ;0)

In reply to Alyson:

If the cap fits ...

The original post, and subsequent ones were clearly intended to be provocative and offensive, not just a discussion of a climbing seminar (which as you point out, there may be valid reasons for orienting it toward women, these however were not the ones given).

It is a little rich to come back and play the victim card if people are then provoked and offended, even if one can argue they ought to be used to it by now and hence not rise to the bait.

I hope this thread isn't driving a wedge between the sexes!

In reply to Shani:


If nothing else it illustrates that opinion is not 100% behind women only events as being the best thing for women climbers. Some think it is, others see it as potentially that wedge which makes it harder for women to get into the mainstream.

In reply to Beth-Cath-T:

The responses to this thread by the various pathetic hard done by 'willy wavers' makes me embarrassed to be male. Get a life FFS.

AW

In reply to AndrewW:

^^^This^^^

In reply to AndrewW:

Stool bory cro