Manatees Dooo Eeeet!!! (Page 38)

I still read Slowtwich regularly. There is currently a discussion titled: Why the discrepancy in depth of field between pro women and men? with the original post starting out; "Looking at the results of IM Tulsa today, and also looking at long course racing over the last several years, it seems like the top tier of men are more competitive than the women. For example today at IM Tulsa, the 10th place male was around 18 minutes back of first place while the 10th place female was over an hour back."

This could have been an interesting and thoughtful discussion however, from my perspective at least, it seemed like a lot of Type A men getting together to discuss women.  They seem to have settled on "women have different interests than men."

None of them mentioned PAY, for me, at least, that would be a big factor.  If I was trying to make a living at triathlon, making enough to live on seems like a good starting point.  How about the value placed on women's sports? (I am not referring to prize money, I'm pretty sure that you couldn't count on making a living at that.  I'm thinking sponsors -- the whole package.)

When thinking about recruiting people into sports, how about the fact most coaching programs seem to treat men and women as the exact same thing when perhaps one or the other needs more recovery or more endurance sessions or whatever?  Nutrition products assume the same.  Equipment often the same (have you ever looked at the cycling products made for women versus men?)

Anyway, they got me a bit worked up about the topic!

Yes to all of this. It wasn't too long ago that women were excluded from all medical clinical trials b/c they didn't count or were too hard to account for b/c of their cycle, or women are just small men mentality. Finally, the medical community started realizing that women have different physiologies than men and can and do experience disease differently, e.g., heart attacks often present differently in women than in men.  As many here know, I'm a fan of Dr. Stacy Sims and her efforts to show that women are, in fact, not small men and what works for men in training etc does not necessarily work for women. One big example is intermittent fasting - that is not something a athletic woman should do, while it can be great for men.  

Anyway, gotta love the mansplaining in ST!  

Mansplaining! Exactly!

I just read the ST thread on why women pros aren't grouped more tightly in finishing time  - wow! Janyne good on you for getting in there and at least getting some female perspective into the man fest of explaining why women do or don't do what women do or don't do  I noticed that the thread also changed focus from why the big difference from front of pack pro women finishers v farther back finishers  to men are bigger and faster than women and even HS boy track stars can come close to beating women pro track stars.  Classic.   

What are you favorite bike shorts for long rides?  I've been wearing Terry Bella shorts and I like them a lot. In the past, I've found it useful to have two brands/models to rotate for my long rides. 

Last week, I had a pair of Desoto 400 mile shorts SPLIT while I was on the trainer. It was one of my two newer pairs too.  I think there must have been a flaw in the fabric.  The split was in the inner thigh area but below the chamois seam.  It's not a place that I would have tugged and it was not in a "rub zone." 

Anyway, I am down a pair of shorts and will be price watching something.

I generally just wear tri shorts regardless of distance and have been wearing a couple pair of Orca shorts for forever - I probably need to check that they aren't see through at this point! When I started training for my first IM I thought I probably should buy real bike shorts for those long rides and bought a pair of pearl izumi bike shorts, but the extra padding seemed to effect the hamstring tendinopathy I was just recovering from, so I stopped wearing them. I found them otherwise very comfy and of high quality.

Jim, your perseverance is EPIC!!  Tough day out there for sure, big congratulations!

Robin K-C - retirement, true retirement at last!!  AHHHHHH!!!!  Enjoy! 

They forced me to do some research!

According the the National Federation of State High School Associations (NFHS), in 2015-2016schools are providing about 1.2 million fewer chances for girls to play sports in high school as compared to boys -- 3.32 million girls participated, while the number of boys was 4.54 million so 27% fewer opportunities.

Let's think back a few months to the NCAA basketball tournaments.  Think about how the men's championship was marketed?  How the male athletes were treated?  Now let's compare that to the women's tournament?

OK, now let's think about the softball tournament versus the baseball tournament.

I'll need to look for it, but within the last few days there was an article about how the NCAA was screwing over women's sports  by the deal they made with CBS for the b-ball tournament.  NCAA keeps saying women sports don't make the money while viewship for those sports is up and growing -despite the 3d class treatment they get. 

Edited to add: Here it is

Yup.  Other huge examples:  women's national soccer team vs. men's national soccer team.  The disgustingly glaring disparity in how the men's Olympic hockey team was introduced during the Winter Classic (I forget the year, sorry!) vs. the women's Olympic hockey team.  The women were all lined up and names read quickly and without fanfare.  The men came out to fireworks, pyrotechnics at each announced name, a hero's welcome.  It was stomach-turning to me as a woman and a hockey player.  Since women's hockey has been permitted in the Olympics in 1998, the US women's team amassed 2 gold, 3 silver, and 1 bronze medal. The men's team won 2 silver in that same time frame, yet they rarely get the attention the men do.

OMG, I'm gonna have to give up the ST conversation between this comment

My wife does triathlon and if Lucy and Rinny are doing it...she will certainly consider doing it. (especially the makeup. She often points out how Lucy's makeup doesn't budge. Lucy because she looks great and makes things interesting and Rinny because shes a mom too.

and this one

I wonder if it’s relevant that for many women, there is some overlap between the age at which they are peaking in terms of athletic performance and the age at which they are in their prime childbearing years.

How could they not understand that it's the marketing, stupid?

I'm not shooting from the hip here, this is from an actual study, not someone mansplaing that football is so big it makes it seem like women are not participating in sports at the same rate as men and that totally makes up for all the things.

Gender marking is a common issue women face in sport media, and this term represents the verbal and visual presentation of male athletes and men’s sports as being the norm, while rendering female athletes and women’s competitions as secondary (9). Examples of gender marking are present in many women’s championships like the Women’s World Cup, the Women’s NCAA Final Four, and the United States Women’s Open Championship. When looking at the similar events for men’s sporting events, one will notice that they are never qualified with a gender moniker, which sets the tone as the male event being the standard and the female event being marked as the “other” event. A study (15) found that sport commentators often participate in gender marking for women’s events but not men’s events. It was found that gender marking occurred an average of 27.5 times in women’s sporting events, but none in men’s sports.

Another issue women face in sport media is a focus on femininity, heterosexuality, and sexism. Essentially, sport media reinforces patriarchal sovereignty by focusing on female athletes’ femininity and heterosexuality, which serves to degrade their athletic accomplishments and athleticism (9). The most common theme of sexualization in sport for women is in reference to their appearance, which many studies have observed that print media focus on the physical appearance of women athletes much more than their athletic skills or abilities (21). According to these studies, the most referenced was make-up, hair, and body shape for women, but this was rarely, if ever, focused on with men. This shows that physical appeal and aesthetic appeal highlight the idea that gender inequalities are the norm in the media (21).

Exactly! Why do some people seem to think that this is OK?

Thank you for your thoughtful response.

You are correct, prize money is the same for the men's race and the women's race.  That doesn't mean that the total compensation package is the same, though, since most professional triathletes make a lot more from sponsorship deals than from races.  While men and women pros often compete in the same races, that is not always true.  Also, just because it's the same race, does not mean that the coverage is the same.  Think about NBC's Kona coverage, for example? They will show how many professional men? And they say, Ryf won. Again. 

Of the top 30 paid athletes, only one is female --  Naomi Osaka. 

Speaking of the NBA. Why is it the NBA and the WNBA and not the NBA men's division and women's division? Or PGA and LPGA? Are they not all professional golfers?

I don't know that anyone here is picking on triathlon specifically but the fact that the conversation wen on to women have equal access to sports and if they are not participating, it's because they are not interested in participating.  I'm just saying that this is the wrong premise to start from.

P.S. Today they wanted to know if majorettes and marching band color guard were included in these numbers -- 3.32 million girls participated, while the number of boys was 4.54 million so 27% fewer opportunities.

Try emailing Desoto - I had a weird tear in mine once, and when I emailed with photos, Tracey Desoto herself emailed back. It turns out it was probably user error on my part, (it was not along a seam and I had in fact taken a spill recently - all though I thought the shorts should have endured such a spill - anyway) plus the shorts were older than I remembered (it was a unique design so she pinpointed the exact season I purchased them, making them past the 'warranty' period) ... but she ended giving me a really nice discount on my next pair anyway.

Thanks for the tip!

One recent year -- 2018 or 2019 -- they cut away from the women's race leaders at a critical time to show a top 10 men's finisher (TO?) cross the finish line.  Not the winner, mind you, but another finisher.  Then the coverage stayed with this other male finisher and interviewed him.  Again, at a critical time in the women's race. 

Men have been around longer than women?

At any rate, this goes to the point that I tried to make above: Examples of gender marking are present in many women’s championships like the Women’s World Cup, the Women’s NCAA Final Four, and the United States Women’s Open Championship. When looking at the similar events for men’s sporting events, one will notice that they are never qualified with a gender moniker, which sets the tone as the male event being the standard and the female event being marked as the “other” event.

Let's sit here and recall the not-so-olden days when women's athletics were discouraged because out uteruses would fall out if we exerted ourselves.  This was a prevailing mindset into the 1970s.