Somebody's done well there.
Brilliant! I'm sure this will become a great resource for us to understand better the history of British women's climbing.
Starting Dorothy Pilley's Climbing Days, recently, it did cross my mind that Pat Kelly and those around her were perhaps a hundred years ahead of their time. But, perhaps that obscures how radical the early twentieth century was.
> Somebody's done well there.
Can’t quite work out if you’re being a git or not.
Wondering what's in your mind?
I wonder why the three down votes?
More likely a dislike of lottery money being given to an organisation that discriminates against membership on grounds that, if a men-only club was doing such, would render it ineligible to receive such funds.
What's sauce for the ganders should be sauce for the geese.
So... misogyny, then?
> So... misogyny, then?
Sounds like a valid point for interesting debate to me. Would anyone even dare to attempt to form men only cimbing club nowadays?
I guess the thumbs down indicate a taboo subject then? 😂
> Sounds like a valid point for interesting debate to me. Would anyone even dare to attempt to form men only cimbing club nowadays?
Sounds like a dreary debate that's been done to death and tends to involve well-meaning people who are nevertheless refusing to acknowledge that context often matters and that fair treatment of two people or groups isn't always the same as exactly identical treatment.
> So... misogyny, then?
I regard misogyny in exactly the same way as I view misandry.
What we have nowadays (to a degree) is a reverse of the sexism, racism etc. that went on in past times. This is quite probably what has fuelled the right wing, racist, homophobic (etc., etc.) backlash which has produced Trump, Brexit and Johnson.
Unfortunately there are those who do not understand that equality and fairness means that everyone is treated equally and fairly TODAY, without any reference to what OTHER PEOPLE may have done or said IN THE PAST.
It is wrong to have male only Mountaineering Clubs - it is equally wrong to have female only. Those persons who established single-sex clubs are now all dead, and it's about time every last vestige of their outdated views died also.
I have the same views regarding any and every division in society based solely on a view that one group is "us" and the other is "them". We are all people, plain and simple, and the sooner we unequivocally treat each other as equals the sooner the world will be a better place.
So your argument, essentially, is that racism and sexism are now completely solved problems, consigned to history? I don't know what world you're living in but it does sound great.
You do realise this grant is for a project to "bring to life and protect its 100 year history".? Even if the club were to close tomorrow based on your peculiar views, it seems to me this project would still be worthwhile.
If a male-only club were to apply for a grant to "protect its 100 year history", don't you think it most likely that the application would be refused due to its discriminatory membership rules.
They're not solved, but people need to act in a manner that excludes sexism/racism, not harp on about it, and certainly not, as some people appear to be doing nowadays, claim that their sexist/racist actions IN THE OTHER DIRECTION are justified because they are only "getting their own back".
The historical perpetrators of injustice are dead or dying off - don't blame the children for the sins of the fathers (or mothers).
> The historical perpetrators of injustice are dead or dying off.
Did you read the part about this being a historical project? The core aim of the heritage funding is that more people are involved in heritage, and a key way to achieve that is to ensure that the heritage we document is diverse.
Climbing history is male dominated, to an enormous degree. Some of that is because more men were climbing, some is because as a result they were climbing harder and therefore more newsworthy routes, some is because women were excluded from organisations that could have shared knowledge and access and funding. From my own research it seems there were plenty of women who simply didn't want to report their ascents for a variety of reasons. The reason a men's club would be rejected if they applied for this funding is because their history is already well documented.
Not all single gender clubs are about oppression. The Pinnacle Club had to form because they weren't allowed to join other clubs - that wasn't them excluding men. That might not be the case now, but there's a strong case to be that female-only clubs are relevant because women are still a minority in climbing, particularly trad climbing which is the focus of the Pinnacle Club. Asking whether it's relevant or necessary is important, but characterising everything gendered as oppressive is showing your hand here.
I've got a few friends in the Pinnacle Club and was also invited to their Annual Dinner as a guest this year on behalf of my local mountaineering club. I'm a young bloke and have only ever been encouraged by Pinnacle Club members when I have been on the crag with them and have not seen a single hint of anger toward/ hatred of men (as a group) from any member (I have seen certain members express displeasure with certain men behaving in an unpleasant manner but that was due to substandard behaviour by the individual men involved). They were really very hospitable toward me at the dinner in fact. This is contrasted to a joint meet I ran with a male only mountaineering club a couple of years ago where I heard a variety of misogynistic remarks which were neither funny nor necessary.
Climbing and Mountaineering have historically been pretty male dominated activities, the Pinnacle Club and the Ladies Scottish Climbing Club both serve to provide a mutually supportive and encouraging environment for women to be able to get involved in Mountaineering with their peers. Even in local clubs with a decent balance of genders (the Oread is roughly a third female as a rough guess) you do still occasionally get meets where there is a single woman or only men on a meet (not because anyone has been discouraged, just the way things pan out occasionally). Men on the other hand will pretty much always be able to find a bloke to climb with in any club which they are a member of.
The history of the Pinnacle Club is also a significant part of the history of female Mountaineers/ Climbers within the UK and if the club (of around 200 members) does not have the funds or expertise to record that history it could well be lost permanently.
The big national clubs like the SMC, the CC and the FRCC etc have much bigger membership bases (and presumably cash reserves) available to draw on for experience and funds for a project like this, however they don't have as much work to do anyway as the history of men's mountaineering is quite well documented so they would instead be focusing on the history of their members.
TL:DR The Pinnacle Club has a purpose to help people enjoy the mountains and they don't harm anyone else. Mens only mountaineering clubs provide a place where weird misogynistic views persist and don't serve any purpose which could not be served by a club accepting Men/ Women/ whatever else people identify as.
> I regard misogyny in exactly the same way as I view misandry.
You're a walking justification for misandry. And I say that as a man...
'I'm much better than people understand. I'm a much better climber than they realise.' It's only with hindsight that Johnny's statement, despite being mildly tongue-in-cheek, was proven to be correct. Rarely has anyone moved on rock like the...