What is the point of Women's Only Tri's? (Page 4)

Gull,

Sorry about your first wife man!

I go back and forth on this issue. I've done women only tris and I like others find that they're not really all that competetive. The women are more into the community than racing. It was a big shock when I did my first co-ed tri and found that NO ONE was walking the course. And it helped me up my competetive level. I guess I get to have it both ways. I can do a women's only tri, just to do it and have fun. And I do co-ed tris to kick butt and really race. There's

I just want to say I'm wearing PINK today! PINK is a female, women-exclusive color. I wish to convey girliness and I don't care what anyone makes of it or if anyone feels threatened by my wearing this exclusionary color. It flies in the face of the stereotype of being a Type A, no-nonsense, direct, non-submissive, power-preferring INTJ that I am - and I enjoy confounding anyone who doesn't get it or get me.

I'm a GIRL and I like it. I'm strong and I'm soft. Get over it!

End pink rant.

Just a question here...

Most of the women here said they wouldn't have a problem with a men only race

And since the women only races are promoted as a place where women can feel all warm and fuzzy. A place where beginners are encouraged to join in a nonthreatening event, therefore men are not welcome.

Would you feel the same about a men only race that was promoted as the "World's toughest endurance event"? Where only the most hardcore, butt scratching, chest thumping and serious triathletes are encouraged to race. Therefore only men are welcome

Again, just a thought...

Another feminist.

I've never done a women's-only tri. It just never appealed to me. I am not uncomfortable a bit with men and I just figured I'd be so far back, I'd never even see the super-competitive people (I was right). I also wanted a full-flavored tri for my first (I also didn't see the point in paying an extra $25 for the same distance!). I like my beer strong, my whiskey straight and a little horseradish on nearly everything. I'm just that kinda girl. I wanted the whole kit n' kaboodle, that which is brought by men that is good and that which I knew I might not like. Ironically enough. One person in my first race just kept on encouraging me more than anyone. And it was a man! LOL!

However, I see the value in women's only tris and that's why I'm going to be a swim angel at one this weekend. I think it's awesome that women have a non-intimidating way to get into this way of life/sport. I want to be their to encourage these brave souls through what can be the scariest part of a tri and hopefully, get to see them cross the line, something most of them probably never dreamed they could do. I think it's neat. It's not something that appeals to me, personally (someday, when I'm a richer woman, I'll compete in one), but I think it's something of value and not something meant to scare or offend men. Just to NOT scare women.

Don't they have those in the desert? Where they literally thump their chest, bang drums, etc. Ok, maybe they aren't competitive events, but events where men are encouraged to be hairy, butt scratching MEN. www.burningman.com

God bless 'em, that's what I say. Give 'em their own triathlon too.

Well, it would certainly need to be a quadrathlon, where the fourth event is ball-scratching for endurance.

Sorry chickadee, but your "exclusivity" has been breached. Yours truly is wearing a Land's End CLEAR PINK dress shirt with his slate gray suit this morning. And I don't feel the least bit girly.

That's such crap. There are plenty of man-only, white-only and youngins' only things only the exclusion is implicit rather than explicit. Yes, a few women, blacks and old folks may occasionally do these things, but they are not hospitable at all and few, if any, can stay there.

I don't consider myself a feminist. Personally I'm not really interested in doing a women's only triathlon. It could be partly because there are none in my area, and I don't see the point in travelling far (closest one is at least 9-10 hours away) in order to do one, when there are perfectly good races close to home.

I'm not American, so I don't get the whole Title IX thing (I know what it is, and why it was needed, it's just not part of the Canadian landscape). I participated in little to no sports once I turned around 11, simply because I didn't want to. When I decided to do a triathlon, it just didn't occur to me that I would not want to do a co-ed one. After some of the race reports I've read about the laid back attitude (which is great if that's what one is looking for), I think that I probably prefer the more competitive environment (though I am by no means competitive. I'm happy not to be last.)

I would agree with the OP, that I just don't get these races. That being said, they seem to be very popular, and other people enjoy doing them, so I see no reason why they shouldn't continue to be part of the scene.

Are men in any way, shape or form affected by a women only race?  Does Danskin or any such triathlon take away from what we can do?  No, absolutely not.  Every season men still have more races available than they could ever sign up for.

What's the big deal?  Women only, men only, old people only, whatever.  I don't care, as long as nobody is losing anything.  I think it's great to provide more people an opportunity who otherwise would never try the sport out. 

I think women should be allowed to compete head to head in any sport, as long as no standards are lowered and they don't get any different breaks than the men.  An example mentioned earlier..the PGA Tour.  If a woman, or even a 15 year old girl can beat men on thier own ground she should get the credit she deserves for being  a phenom athlete. 

Here's what I have a problem with.  The before mentioned example where a girl fought to get onto the rugby team and then got hit and sued the player and the school.  Of having firefighter/police/military PFT standards relaxed for women.  In combat the enemy isn't going to go any easier on you because of your sex and training shouldn't set those expectations.

As far as Title 9 goes, I can see where it's needed but I hate it.  I think it needs some serious re-tooling.  In my college because of title 9 men lost the soccer and wrestling teams.  No new women's teams were added, but they took away 2 major sports that broke the hearts and spirit of a lot of athletes.  These guys didn't do anything wrong but suddenly they were told they couldn't play their sports anymore, some of them were scholorship kids too.  There has to be a way to level the playing field without taking away from anybody.

If there is an insano course made up and only men are allowed to compete, cool.  But if women want to run the same course and have a "toughest woman" competition there better be no bitching from the guys.  If the toughest woman's time comes in faster than the toughest man, I'll be the first to tell her "way to go."

Can't we all just get along? 

Edited by dibujob 2005-07-12 11:02 AM

I'm a feminist. Do you hear me grunting or pretending like I'm a man? No. The point of feminism isn't to make women into men, but to let women be who they are as individuals. Even if you find that offensive or 'manly'.

What if a woman could pick up a grown man, throw him over her shoulder and walk out? Would it still bother you? Some women can do that (not me, but I've sure known some). What if it was determined that it's was safer to leave a burning building being dragged because of smoke inhalation on a big, strapping fireman's shoulder? Makes sense that it could be. Would you still whine about being dragged by, god forbid, someone with tits?