UKC

Organisers of this open-category competition hope that it will unite people in a celebration of slab climbing.

Events focusing on one particular niche style of climbing such as the WideBoyz Crack Fest, the Beastmaker International Footless Festival and dyno competitions over the years have proved popular with devotees of these eccentric disciplines. Slab climbing, while more conventional than offwidth or footless bouldering, can be divisive. The fear of foot slips and sliding down the wall or the frustration of failing on the same move over and over make it an especially unforgiving activity. In recent years, slab fans such as YouTuber Anna Hazelnutt have tried to make slab climbing trendy, proudly coining the slogan: 'Slab is Sexy'. Those with an inclination for the off-vertical will descend on LancasterWall to participate in Slabfest on the 2nd of December, where all genders can compete in a rare open-category format. 

Read more

In reply to UKC News:

Looking forward to this!

In reply to UKC News:

As a self proclaimed ballerina with a beer belly, I fully endorse this! Sounds right up my street.

In reply to UKC News:

I am sure this post is going to get a ton of dislikes, but here goes. I can’t believe the gender debate has permeated into climbing! In my view the Western obsession with gender identity represents a significant affront to the emancipation of Women. Equality between men and women is woefully lacking, be it in sport, pay, work choices etc. I have no issue, whatsoever, with any person self-identifying with a particular gender, no gender, or anything for that matter. If one chooses to self-identify as a banana, or chocolate chip cookie, a man, a woman, or neutrality then so be it.

However, when this translates into sport, we have a very big problem. Men self-identifying as women and then competing in women’s sport is simply unfair to those women who have dedicated their lives to becoming the best they can be. We have seen this debacle play out in swimming and cycling, for example.

Yesterday on UKC, the news articles were full of fantastic achievements by women, both in bouldering and sport climbing, it was truly inspirational. Imagine if Ondra and Bosi self-identified as women, and now claimed to be the best female sport climbers and boulderers in the World. Would that really inspire female climbers to push the boundaries?

In reply to InC:

Did you actually read the article? They are specifically saying that they believe that slab climbing has less of a gender disparity since it relies more on technique as opposed to raw power compared to other styles of climbing. I guess we will find out whether this is indeed the case but it seems to me to be a very good opportunity to try it out.

In reply to InC:

I think that your post reflects Western obsession with negative. What is wrong with people trying to set up a sport where we do not have to have gender categories? Slab climbing is indeed ideal discipline to try it on. It is interesting experiment and I am looking forward to see how it works.

Ondra and Bosi do not have to change identity to be best. Otherwise, agree with you that women sport has to be protected, but again, why to bring it up here?

In reply to Ben Harris:

I think it's a competition for who can stare earnestly at a fixed point without cracking a smile? But I only looked at the pictures.

In reply to InC:

Whilst in part I agree, I see time and again in amateur 'friendly' climbing competitions that it's ability rather than gender that splits the field. Maybe that's got a lot to do with me living in Sheffield and there being some incredibly strong and dedicated amateurs of both genders.

Slab climbing is an interesting concept, as like the organisers say it really suits heavier climbers and those who lack upper body strength. Instead relying much more on technique which is something female climbers usually pick up much quicker than men, due to not being able to rely on physical strength.

Will be interesting to see the results statistics and how using age rather than gender to split people into categories influences this. It's not something I'd support at a professional level, but as a different way to split amateur climbers and just encourage 'fun' engagement I don't have a problem with it.

In reply to InC:

Perfectly fair point.

Entirely the wrong place to raise it.

Edit: If you know of any examples in climbing of the kind of gender self-identity unfairness you describe, it could make for an interesting discussion on a different thread. Otherwise it just comes across as inventing bogeymen to stoke culture wars, and we have too much of that elsewhere already.

In reply to InC:

It appears you've only read the title containing "gender neutral" and then started frothing. I also wondered if the article would start talking about self-identification / trans etc., and sure there's an interesting and nuanced discussion to be had there, but it's nothing to do with that at all - just a climbing competition with a single open category, because the style of climbing is typically based on attributes where there's not a significant advantage to being male or female (as compared to a footless or dyno comp, for example).

Anyway, let's have this list of the 100 best slab climbs in the UK so we can start arguing about that instead.

<opens popcorn>

In reply to Ben Harris:

Yes.  I'm fascinated, as one who follows the gender debate, particularly around sport (both my sports - running & orienteering - now ban male-born & gone-thru-puberty transwomen from competitions, after some deliberations).  

I also agree with John Arran - "Perfectly fair point" by InC." My tuppence-worth? Have Lancaster Wall indulged in a spot of "virtue signalling" here?  I've seen many examples of visible "wokery" using this subject over the past few years. But ..... having SAID that, fair play to Lancaster Wall having a slabFest, & I look fwd to the outcome!  If we can have Crack comps / focus, why not slabs too! 

(oh, & I am regularly burnt off on slabs by "shorter people", who are usually more flexible too......  

In reply to UKC News:

Great idea! Enough of the burl.

In reply to InC:

While the point about safety/fairness in sport might be reasonable (although not relevant here) you don't do your argument any favours by insulting and trivialising the issue here. It's not a lifestyle choice, or a fetish, and while I can see that most people saying things like this are trying to say "I don't care how you identify", the actual effect is to also belittle at the same time.

In reply to InC:

As was pointed out the last time you posted, there is a Politics forum on UKC. Your pot-stirring might be more welcome there. 

In reply to UKC News:

If an event with no gender category is deemed inclusive, is having a separate veteran category exclusive?! 

In reply to UKC News:

I think a more appropriate title for this article would be 'gender inclusive' rather than gender neutral. Gender neutral seems as though the aim of the event is actually being dismissed (the celebration of mixed gender competition) for it's inclusive intention. 

Sounds cool though I love a good slab!

In reply to Ben Harris:

Yeah I am pretty curious to see this. The theory that the difference will be less on slabs makes a lot of sense. But it would be interesting to see if this is actually the case?

I don't know if there is any stats anywhere to back that up? Also my guess is that it might be different at different levels of climbing for example beginners, intermediate and pro climbers, where different factors typically influence how hard people climb. 

Really interesting concept and nice that it can be inclusive too. 😀

In reply to UKC News:

"dark art of slabs" LOL you need to get out more 🤣

In reply to Elsier:

Yeah. Reach comes into massively.  It's going to take some inventive setting not to present an inherent lank advantage. 

In reply to BARNEYHIGHROPES:

I think there is an overwhelming desire to put the word gender in as many locations as possible.

In the definition open slab competition there is no need to also add the word gender 

Open already says everything needed

My local pub has a gender neutral toilet and the sign on that toilet which of course says gender neutral toilet simply replaced they all sign which just said toilet.

In reply to Max factor:

Nonsense. I used to set in our local wall, and I'm an tiny with a negative ape index. My reach is a joke. I used to set some challenging slab routes which forced you to use balance, flexibility and footwork. Reach didn't work to bypass it as the routes meandered 

In reply to girlymonkey:

Agreed. Also, the quality of route setting at Lancaster, particularly the slab, means this event will be cracking fun for everyone I’m sure.

In reply to john arran:

I wanted to reply to the thread, but it appears the forum format only permits replies to individuals. Apologies, John, I chose you!

These are the facts: Lancaster Wall is going to hold a slab climbing competition.  Why not simply promote this as “a slab climbing competition open to everyone?” That pretty much sums it up. It doesn't matter if your slim, big, tall, small, male, female, neutral, it's a competition open for all. However, either Lancaster wall and/or the UKC news editors elected to include the words "gender neutral". A few years ago, these words would have little impact but in today's World, gender neutrality has a more specific meaning, from Wikipedia:

"the idea that policies, language, and other social institutions (social structures or gender roles) should avoid distinguishing roles according to people's sex or gender. This is in order to avoid discrimination arising from the impression that there are social roles for which one gender is more suited than another"

In my view, incorporating “gender neutral” into the news article, transcends the fact a slab climbing competition is being held, into something more. It was for this reason I posted my original comment, and I stand by this and the posting of it on this thread.

There is a palpable level of vitriol in several of the replies that, when viewed objectively, demonstrate some degree of hypocrisy.

In reply to InC:

You may have a point but it doesn't relate to this news article 🤔

In reply to InC:

Right, I mean what about those of us who like slab climbing but would actually rather perpetuate discrimination arising from the impression that there are social roles for which one gender is more suited than another?

In reply to InC:

Any statement has to be understood within a context, we are all familiar with words meaning different things in different situations. In the context of climbing competitions, there is normally a male category and a female category, but in this particular climbing competition, there will only be one category, as the skills it is testing are not affected by sexual dimorphism. This seems pretty reasonable to me, and my reaction was along the lines of 'cool, I could compete directly with people who I don't normally get a chance to'. 

I struggle to see how your interpretation fits with the context or any of the other information supplied. It doesn't seem like you're trying to argue in good faith, but rather, it seems like you have an axe to grind and you're bringing it to a neutral space. I think that's why you're getting pushback, not because of hypocrisy or whatever. 

In reply to InC:

Looking at the Facebook event for the comp on Lancaster Wall's page, the "gender" bit is the second to last bullet point on their post, so this shows clearly that UKC/Natalie  have made the decision to put "gender neutral" as the main focus point for the article.  https://fb.watch/oniSXP-0Hn/

Why would they do this? Virtue signalling? Show how "progressive" they are? You've been accused of "stirring", but I would suggest they've also stirred by bumping up that aspect of the comp in their headline. And I speak as a lifelong UKC fan / supporter / customer / user (of databases etc)

I'll get dislikes for this  ,too. 

In reply to Phil Murray:

To accurately and concisely describe the nature of the competition ffs.

In reply to UKC News:

I sometimes wonder what became of the Viz character “Major Misunderstanding”. His irrelevant invective always amused. 

In reply to deepsoup:

I'd have thought "indoor", "Lancaster Wall" &, crucially, "slab" & "open to all" do a perfectly good job being accurate, as (mostly) (or by deduction) indicated by Lancaster wall on their Facebook page.

Putting "gender neutral" as the first bit changes the emphasis, which is my point. 

"ffs" - oh dear.  

In reply to Patrick Surguy: 

Delighted that it'll be a fun event for you. Hope it retains that feeling despite the irrelevant nonsense being thrown at you here. Thanks for sharing your perspective and explaining it so well.

Please can we keep this thread on the topic of this competition and climbing competitions in general relating to how they are categorised.

Thanks

Alan

In reply to Alan James - Rockfax:

What is a slab?

I mean, one gender-neutral's slab is another gender-neutral's wall.

In reply to BARNEYHIGHROPES:

Why not just say "open". The word gender was almost inviting people to feel triggered.

Anyway, it's the horribly ubiquitous "......fest" suffix that I find offensive.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Open tends to mean open to all, as in any ability with no qualifying event.

Most competitive sports events including climbing are traditionally separated by gender. Others on this thread who are non binary have commended the use of language, and it certainly makes it clear and removes confusion or expectation of the normal sports categories. 

To me personally the removal of confusion is the important thing with the name. But if it also helps the trans and non binary community to feel involved and accepted, or even to normalise such identities (so people don't stoop to comments about identifying as banana) that's brilliant and to be encouraged 100%

In reply to Robert Durran:

You won't be attending my Christmas celebration of loafing then?

Festive Festerfest

In reply to Jenny C:

I'm pretty sure golf's Open has a qualifying tournament.

Anyway my point is that if it had simply said an open competition for men, women (and non-binary, if that is felt necessary) then there would have been an almost universal response that it was a good idea that made good sense with no further discussion; the language used was pretty much inviting the discussion and dissent which in fact resulted. But maybe that was the intention.

In reply to Phil Murray:

You write as if that's a bad thing.

In reply to Robert Durran:

Several-

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Open_Championship_format_and_qualificatio...

But the net is cast wide, and in theory anyone could qualify, if they perform well enough on the day- as opposed to the US Masters, which is invitation only, or US PGA which has a much narrower eligibility.

Perhaps “gender neutral” made the same point, more elegantly, in fewer words. Why is this so triggering for some people?

In reply to no_more_scotch_eggs:

Good question. I don't know, but it certainly seems to be. Maybe the word gender just comes with a lot of baggage these days. 

In reply to Max factor:

An an inherent dwarf advantage. If well set it will balance out.

In reply to Robert Durran:

I find it helpful.  That sort of language in a headline causes all the people you definitely don't want to be stuck in a conversation with to spontaneously out themselves.

In reply to d_b:

I expect that is true from more than one perspective!

In reply to Robert Durran:

I'm just here for the slabs.

In reply to Jenny C:

Is there any real gender demarcation at these low key climbing comps – doesn’t everyone try the problems, and record successes/failures? I imagine it's only of relevance if you actually win something. 

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

Yes same problems, but when it comes to prizes you are only competing against your own. 

A bit like any track based running race, both genders do the same run, but in different events. 

In reply to rsc:

I doubt it.

jcm

In reply to Jenny C:

So the only difference between this and other informal climbing comps is that there are fewer prizes on offer. Quite cunning of the organisers really.

In reply to UKC News:

Generally I have found climbing to be a very equitable pass time, with few racists. Misogynists or homophobes, but I have noticed a prejudice against larger people, but at last, a competition where us fatties can compete on equal terms. A real step forward in the world of equality. I off to eat a few more pies, and continue my training. 

Remember, a weighted foot never slips, so the more weight the better. 

In reply to Robert Durran:

I don't know the first thing about golf but the tennis "opens" all still have gender categories, so the term "open" alone definitely doesn't imply the noteworthy difference in this competition, and your full wording here doesn't really suit a headline. In fact, even your full wording makes it clear that everyone's welcome but people could still assume that there'd be gender categories as is common.

In reply to Jenny C:

I've never been to one but are you saying that at low key, Slabfest type, competitions, the female/male/vet/kids categories go separately round the problems at different times?  

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

Pretty sure they all go together with most marathons and other ultra distance runs. Ok not track, but my point is that many sports give no allowances for ladies, we do exactly the same competition but just against other female athletes.

In reply to UKC News: I’ve read this thread a few times and I’m still not sure wether I think calling the comp gender neutral is a good thing , a bad thing or that I don’t care . I m probably closest to the last one . What I do think is that banning a poster who presents a clear and eloquent argument for the first one , even though I might disagree with what they are saying , makes it difficult for me to decide . I know this because I clicked their profile wondering if they were actually somebody I know . I texted said person who I know in real life and occasionally have spirited discussions with , they said they no longer post on here . There are lots of people on here who I disagree with but whose opinions I value when forming my own .I think if whoever decided to call the comp gender neutral didn’t consider that the above discussion would take place then they are very naive.

In reply to mike123:

Did they?  It wasn't at all clear to me what point was being made, but the general tone seemed to against having a gender-blind, open competition (or 'competition') whatever it was called.

I didn't see the posts that were deleted so I can't comment as to whether the ban was justified.

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

Depends if it's a comp or a league type thing. When I've done comps, men and women are often on different problems but for stuff like boulder leagues you do the same problems but your performance is judged against your peers.

It's actually quite interesting to see how you'd compare against the opposite sex. When I used to do the Depot boulder league, my score would often get me into the top 3-5 in the open women's category but that same score would see me finish way further down in the men's. I'm not sure there were many (or any) occasions where the female winner would have also won the men's, though some would've made it into the top three.

I'll be interested to see what happens with this comp. Though my gut feeling says that, despite the talk of the gender neutrality of slabs, it'll be won by a man. 

In reply to Luke90:

Yes, I think it is probably difficult to come up with a snappy headline that wouldn't trigger the sort of responses seen in this thread. Unisex Comp perhaps?

In reply to climbingpixie:

If I remember rightly FBO14 a lass called Shauna* totally wiped the men out on the qualifiers. But yes, the ladies were on different problems for the finals.

* Although she is a rather special climber, so maybe not fair as an example of equal ability between genders.

In reply to Dave Garnett:

To be fair, I don't think there was an objection to an open competition in terms of gender.

What seems to be the problem is certain that have been programmed by the media they consume to get triggered by the term 'gender-neutral' and start throwing around flippant disparaging remarks about minorities. 

In reply to midgen:

I love how this verb conjugates!

“I think for myself.”

”They are programmed by the media.”

In reply to Dave Garnett:

The others were more of the same, but posted repeatedly and getting more and more strident, after repeatedly being asked by the mods to stop derailing the thread with the off-topic 'gender politics' wrangling over the terminology.  Then, after eventually being locked out of this thread, he started another one specifically to whinge about being 'censored' by the mods.  They're actually quite reluctant to ban people, but that'll do it.

In reply to Dave Garnett: I’m not sure we are talking about the same person as their posts are still here , they however , are not . I’ve said a few times that ukc is the only social media I read or post on . I think 38 years of climbing all over the world from font to first ascents in the Himalaya mean I can on occasion offer something useful . In return I can ask a gcse maths question for my son and get a well written solution  in less than 15 minutes and  an incredible array of other very random  things. I fear I m too long in the toothbrush ( amusing predictive text) to risk loosing access to that by posting something on gender politics that runs the risk of my option being misunderstood or misinterpreted to have my account suspended . 

In reply to climbingpixie:

Maybe, but I think that avoiding setting ridiculously reach-dependent cruxes could make it pretty even.  My experience is of being burnt off regularly by women on slabs both indoors and out.  All it takes is excellent balance, flexibility and boldness, and I've known plenty of women who've had all of that. 

In reply to Dave Garnett:

Martin Boysen (in a UKC article) said strong fingers are essential to climb hard slabs!

In reply to mike123:

It's really easy to avoid having your account suspended. The vast majority of posters manage it all the time.

Rule 1 - Try and avoid getting in bun fights especially if they are off topic.

Rule 2 - If you break rule 1, then contact us directly before going off on a public rant when your posts are removed.

Alan

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

I nearly added strong fingers but when I’ve failed to get up a slab it’s always been a flexibility and balance issue.  And lots of female climbers have strong fingers - and small hands, which is also useful for those excruciating matching moves on tiny holds.

In reply to Max factor:

Definitely. Just at the Depot in Sheffield last night and while I seemed to be much better at doing the matching, footswapping etc moves on a slab than my male mate, there were so many blacks where I couldn't get off the ground due to reach. I suspect I probably am more flexible than a lot of strong blokes (ever short climber has done that corner problem where you have to manually lift your foot up into the splits...) but I honestly don't know how you avoid height giving a significant advantage (or more often, a notable sandbag if you're better a certain cut off). 

Feel like comps split by height rather than gender would make more sense for this kind of climbing.

Or just make a conscious effort not to think about a range of heights but actually be a range of typically *male* heights.

In reply to Jim Hamilton:

It probably largely depends whether we are talking about true friction slabs or actually off vertical wall climbing which can be intensely fingery.

In reply to Queen of the Traverse:

It's possible for the opposite to be the case where hand holds are close to feet so taller climbers will tend to get 'bunched up'.  Crimps might be much easier to use if they're at shoulder height than in front of your chest for example.  And speaking of crimps, taller climbers tend to have bigger hands and fingers (and feet), so holds will tend to feel a bit smaller.  Oh, and I guess shorter limbs could equate to more power in a leg-press - is it easier to do a pistol squat if you're shorter?  Not sure, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if there's the odd move where you have to rock over onto a foothold and then press it out to straighten the leg with no hands.

Every problem with tend to suit one body size/shape better than another, but if the setters are clever I think there's potentially quite a bit they can do to make it so that height isn't so much of an advantage.  And maybe even the odd 'stopper' move if you're taller than a certain height instead of shorter.

In reply to Queen of the Traverse:

The route setters would need to have a good think to avoid being unfair to short people. Maybe the answer is to use loads of really rubbish holds rather than a few useful ones.

In reply to Jimbo C:

Maybe the answer is to have a few setters of different heights and genders working together. I used to often test moves for my taller, male colleagues of they were trying to ensure it was inclusive enough for our younger climbers. It's good to have a varied setting team

In reply to UKC News:

Forgive me for being cynical here but this all looks like marketing to me.

1. Organise a comp so you can charge more for entry on a winter weekend.

2. Use terms which are known to be controversial to describe the event, thus ensuring a raft of free publicity as it is discussed on a forum that is known for opinionated argument.

Ker Ching!

Well done Lancaster wall, I like your style.

Admittedly, I am feeding the beast by posting this.

In reply to InC:

This is both ignorant and entirely divorced from reality. Why do you ask us to imagine Ondra and Bosi identifying as women - something which is simply not the case - and expect us to take you seriously? Your argument is built on prejudices based on fictions. The fact that you claim to be accepting of trans identities and then say something as deeply insulting and transphobic as "If one chooses to self-identify as a banana..." says it all. You are not being honest about the fact that you are a transphobe and that your entire approach to this issue stems from that, plus too much time watching self-professed "intellectuals" on YouTube. Your appeal to "the emancipation of Women [sic]" is no more genuine than Tony Blair's citing of women's emancipation as a rationale for invading Afghanistan. If you cannot tolerate an open competition in which anyone can participate, then the problem is with you.


 

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

Took longer than I expected for a brand new account to pop up and moan about this.

Complaining that a business is trying to attract customers is at least a novel angle though.

In reply to deepsoup:

Absolutely don't disagree that there are some moves that can be harder for the shorter but unfortunately at most walls the assumption of what is a 'normal' height range tends to disadvantage people of an average female height more than an average male (obviously there are people of all genders who don't fit this, but 5'3" isn't short and yet there plenty of times when the placement of a hold is really hard for me in the same but opposite way to what you say - it's too high for me to usefully use).

If they are really thinking about this fair play; I got into bouldering at one of their other walls and generally really enjoyed the setting TBF.

In reply to Stuart Williams:

Observing, not complaining.

Actually congratulating on the approach. I have been recently caught out by an unknown (to me) comp where I ended up paying 2x normal entry for less climbing. With this publicity, I am making an informed choice.

As climbers, we like to think of ourselves as a cut above others however, we still fall for daily mail style sensationalism.

In reply to Queen of the Traverse:

Who knows, but the news article suggests they're working on it.  (And that they'd agree with girlymonkey about the importance of diversity in their setting crew.)

In reply to UKC News:

Is this competition open to all? I can't seem to find a reference in the article or on the website with details on how to enter? It seems to imply that they want all abilities, so I assume there is not a qualification process.

Anyone got an entry link?

In reply to Jenny C:

No offence intended; you use the terms lass and ladies. Are you reluctant to use the term women?

In reply to Pedro50:

It really is a minefield out there. I was once told I couldn't refer to a woman as my girlfriend because she wasn't under the age of 16 (and I should hope not too!).

In reply to Pedro50:

I was deliberately trying to be (sarcastically) derogatory to Shauna.

As for women/ladies. I used the term which I personally (as a female) prefer, no fundamental objection to either I just prefer ladies in most contexts. So 'ladies complete in the women's finals'.

Heaven forbid if I'd said girls! Although when talking about a group of mates (age 40+) that's actually my word of choice.

In reply to deepsoup:

Yeah as I say I really rate their other walls and setting and know some of the folk involved in them so fingers crossed - my comments were more general observations; def not anything aimed at them specifically.

Have to say I think this is generally a really interesting project and would be tempted to go myself if I'd had more notice.

In reply to UKC News:

Sounds great, wish I could go with my sister who would whip my arse!

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

I didn't see any 'sensationalism' in the use of the term 'gender neutral'.

I think it's probably only Daily Mail readers who do. There's an easy solution to that.

In reply to captain paranoia:

Nuke them from orbit to be sure?

In reply to Phil Murray:

It’s Political Correctness gone mad, I tell you!

In reply to captain paranoia:

You are correct, I think the term I was, rather poorly searching for was dogwhistle.

I am sticking with my publicity stunt view. 85 posts on the thread. If I had a financial interest in Lancaster wall, I would be very pleased 😁

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

Sensationalist or dogwhistle, really doesn't matter; I don't see it as either. I'm sure regular Daily Mail readers have been primed to be triggered by that phrase. But, as I said, that's easy to solve; just stop reading that hateful rag.

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

I think you have a rather inflated view of just how influential a bunch of bickering gobshites on here are.  I doubt it'll have much of an effect on the numbers on the day.

Though I guess the ongoing argument did at least inspire you to register your brand new account and jump in to the forums here five minutes after the other guy got banned, so there's that.

In reply to deepsoup:

Your suspicions are wrong I am afraid but nice try.

Ads come and go quite swiftly here, this one has certainly been worth the investment.

As for my view on the politics of it, I am very sanguine. If a style or a handicap system can be developed for all to compete, great. Equally if we wish to focus on specific groups in a comp then great. Maybe we can crown the uks top ginger climber.

In reply to Ennerdaleblonde:

Let’s pretend they charge £20 per entry (which they won’t) and 100 people enter at that price point (which they won’t) as a consequence of what you think is a publicity stunt (which it isn’t), turning over £2,000 is hardly seismic for anyone with a financial interest in the wall now is it?

In reply to Robert Durran:

Girlfriend is fine because it's usually paired with boyfriend so both men and women are being addressed in the same way. Same with stuff like 'going out with the girls/boys' sort of thing. I just find it grating when it's used to refer to a woman in a context where you'd feel a bit weird calling a man 'boy'. 

Anyway, my dislike of being called a 'girl' is far outweighed by my loathing of being called a 'female', which I just find gross. At least girls are human!

In reply to climbingpixie:

I totally agree with all that. I was told that I should have been using the word "partner", but I think that implies all sorts of things which weren't there at the time.

In reply to UKC News:

I'm still just waiting for the list of 100 best slabs 😁

In reply to Lhod:

https://www.ukclimbing.com/logbook/ticklists/best_slab_climbs_of_the_uk-170

In reply to JonesE:

Doesn't Satan's Slip (E1 5a) deserve a palce in the list?

In reply to Max factor:

Number 82

In reply to Dave Garnett:

So it is. my eye stopped scanning down the list at Three Pebble Slab (HVS 5a) so I didn't see it in the list of E1s. 

That climb has a lot to answer for. Or rather its grading does. 

In reply to Queen of the Traverse:

Manchester Depot has a mixed setting team, I'd be surprised if the others don't? Always interesting watching them try to break each others' beta, modify problems to ensure they aren't too height-ist etc.

In reply to galpinos:

Interesting. I don't know about the Sheffield team. Then again is worth remembering you can have tall female setters!

In reply to Queen of the Traverse:

No idea of their actual height, they don't look tall......! Last reset I saw was too male and two female setters doing a circuit. No idea if this is the split every time, I would imagine not as female setters seem to be comparably rare.

In reply to UKC News:

If nothing else, surely this thread will prompt someone to put up suitably balancy and technical route and call it Gender-Neutral Slab.

In reply to UKC News:

Who won? Was it someone who identifies as male?

In reply to JLS:

Yup…

https://lakelandclimbingcentres.co.uk/slabfest-2023-results/

In reply to JLS:

Depends which category you look at, surely. If you consider senior as the "main" category (it certainly had the most entries), then judging by names and a quick Google, the top three seem to be:

1st. Woman

2nd. Man

Joint 3rd. A man and a woman

Looks like the formula worked.

In reply to JLS:

It doesn't specify, but judging by the names actually nope. 

Well, except in the veterans (over 45s).

Emily C. won the juniors.  In the seniors (17-44) it would seem from the list of names that female competitors came first, equal third, fifth, sixth and seventh.  Top ten senior qualifiers looks to me like a 50/50 split.

In reply to Luke90:

If you look further down the winner of the senior final was Neil Mawson. I don’t think he identifies as a woman. 

In reply to Luke90:

Indeed. Seems like a good spread of forenames which may or may not suggest a male won.

In reply to squashmiller:

Oh yes.  Dur!  Well I feel a bit silly now.

But it does still look like Luke90 was quite right about this bit: "Looks like the formula worked."

In reply to squashmiller:

Isn’t he pretty… tall? Probably just lanked everything.

In reply to JLS:

The whole point of gender neutral is that they don't call out the gender of the winner. But yes, would be good to know if they successfully managed to set problems that didn't give men an advantage.

In reply to squashmiller:

My bad, I hadn't realised I was looking at the "qualifying" results. Strange order to present them in! Nevertheless, two women in the top three suggests it wasn't terribly unbalanced.

In reply to Luke90:

You’re right it wasn’t unbalanced. I went and it was a great event. There was a quality range of problems that had something for everyone.

There were one or two problems that people who, I assume, identified as women absolutely walked, which men, I assume, really struggled on, and vice versa. The remainder seemed well set for all genders.  

Only curiosity were the age categories, which I thought needn’t apply to a comp like this with both old and young doing well on the day.

That’s just sour grapes from me though having been excluded from the final due to entering the V45+ category, rather than the seniors. 😂