I was at the prize giving for an event today and noted that the male and female winners were treated a bit differently and the usual convention of male podium last was followed.

Now I’m not suggesting that the organisers are knowingly sexist but imo it isn’t on to treat the sexes differently. It would also be refreshing to see the womens podium being presented last.

Sure, it’s ‘just the way things are done’ but as Bert Russell said “In all affairs it’s a healthy thing now and then to hang a question mark on the things you have long taken for granted.”

Now I’m not suggesting that the organisers are knowingly sexist but imo it isn’t on to treat the sexes differently. It would also be refreshing to see the womens podium being presented last.

Can’t see what the difference is.

Treated differently how?

I can’t start frothing at the mouth if I don’t know why. I’m new to this.

Agree about men always being presented last, wouldn’t hurt to swap it round.

Can’t see what the difference is.

The difference between what?

It would also be refreshing to see the womens podium being presented last.

Ladies first?

Treated differently how?

The main thing was the male winner being given the opportunity to talk about his race / victory but the female wasn’t.

Not a big deal in the big scheme but scrupulous fairness seems to be the order of the day to me.

Did they have a vet / junior podium, did they get to speak also?

Id say they were a step ahead of many races in actually having a womens race at all.

Here’s a question for you. If a female had won the whole event would they have been on the top step of the podium for the final presentation?

What i’m getting at here is, is it like singlespeed categories? The have a first place of there own, but if they win the whole thing they get onto the top step of the final presentation.

Also, did the male winner win the whole race (assuming the women were racing at the same time).

The difference between what?

Ermmm! Who goes first.

Not just sexism.

Mrs Stoner is a good runner and often wins or gets placed. She now competes in vet 40 class.

I remember a few years back she came second in a local race but rather than be awarded the second women’s prize in the open class she was awarded the v40 prize. The second and third placed runners came in miles behind her. I was grumbling about this at the back of the room and it turned out in earshot was a club officer. I said it was insulting that she was awarded the lesser prize despite finishing ahead, he was a bit put out saying no slight was intended and that the vet prize was superior. When I pointed out that the running shop voucher was £20 for Mrs Stoner and £30 for2nd,and that the trophy (wooden carved thing) was bigger for second place than v40 he still didn’t seem to get it.

The issue is unthinking equality.

Men and women should by and large have equal rights. Sometimes one of the sexes may require more or less rights than the other. Sometimes they require the sole consideration of being “humans”. Such as voting rights, employment rights is all that matters. Sometimes not.

As men can’t get pregnant, say, women require additional rights (rather than men requiring fewer rights). That men don’t live as long should allow for a consideration that they retire earlier, but this is not yet something that is conventionally accepted, showing bias against men in law. As do the various judgements that judges make in childcare and custody matters. It is generally also not accepted men have equal rights in childcare matters. It is also noted that women have not been as successful in careers overall due to the requirement for maternity leave mid break, holding them back.

However regarding sport specifically, if you make a general presumption that the fittest women are not equal in strength to the fittest men, then like for like sport in most endeavors is a long way off – think football, tennis, marathons, biking, anything. As shown say in Tennis, with shorter matches, then it follows that the spectacle of the match or biking, and the speed and distance of the racing, the overall length of the competition or the time/difficulty will have been adjusted downwards for the women competitors.

As such, it seems that the longer, more remarkable spectacle takes precedence in any event, regardless of base sex. If there is a sporting event requiring more “sacrifice” regardless of sex, that should take precedence, however physiologically, I can’t think of anything that women would ever place first in over men, as sport requires strength, which men have the physiological bias for.

Intellectually, we should be even stevens.

Basically, we’re equal, but we’re not the same.

Here’s a question for you. If a female had won the whole event would they have been on the top step of the podium for the final presentation?

Don’t know. The female winner wasn’t close the top 3 males.

Did they have a vet / junior podium, did they get to speak also?

In the past people have been listed in their category (including vets, there were no juniors) but no vets prize was given.

Stoner, your story is ageism isnt it? the 2nd place was in the womens race? You make it sound like the V40 was a mixed category so not sexist at all?

As shown say in Tennis, with shorter matches, then it follows that the spectacle of the match or biking, and the speed and distance of the racing, the overall length of the competition or the time/difficulty will have been adjusted downwards for the women competitors.

This is a good general point. If you spend more time racing or do a harder course then a bigger purse seems justifiable.

In the case of the event I was at the women raced the same course as the men. I don’t think there was prize money.

V40 was women’s vet

Not just sexism.

Mrs Stoner is a good runner and often wins or gets placed. She now competes in vet 40 class.

I remember a few years back she came second in a local race but rather than be awarded the second women’s prize in the open class she was awarded the v40 prize. The second and third placed runners came in miles behind her. I was grumbling about this at the back of the room and it turned out in earshot was a club officer. I said it was insulting that she was awarded the lesser prize despite finishing ahead, he was a bit put out saying no slight was intended and that the vet prize was superior. When I pointed out that the running shop voucher was £20 for Mrs Stoner and £30 for2nd,and that the trophy (wooden carved thing) was bigger for second place than v40 he still didn’t seem to get it.

Which class did she enter?

Stoner – so still not sexist, but possibly ageist? more likely the commity decided that they consider it more prestigious to win the V40 so give the winner that.

In our local cyclocross league the 1st place vet or womens prize goes to the first person in that category OUTSIDE the top 3. So if your a vet and you get 3rd you get the 3rd place prize, the next placing vet gets teh vet prize. Thats prob how your other half should have been place (but would she have been miffed not getting the vet prize too?)

She entered the race, not a class. They classify entrants based on birthdates.

The point is why apply a handicap system with lesser awards to competitors that don’t need or want it?

Stato that’s exactly how I think it ought to work. Use the handicap system outside of the open placings for those that need the handicap.

And I said at the top of my post I was not talking about sexism but a different inequality

ladies before gentlemen……..

She entered the race, not a class. They classify entrants based on birthdates.

The point is why apply a handicap system with lesser awards to competitors that don’t need or want it?

POSTED 40 SECONDS AGO # REPORT-POST
In that case she should have been awarded 2nd overall and first vet,but organisers don’t like people rocking the boat.

I remember years back when I were a lad racing masters at SAMS there was an old girl by the name of Lydia Gould. She would race vets/masters,and usually win, as a warm up for the elite race, then often podium there too…

They do the women first so they can get home and put the dinner in the oven,

I remember years back when I were a lad racing masters at SAMS there was an old girl by the name of Lydia Gould. She would race vets/masters,and usually win, as a warm up for the elite race, then often podium there too…

Lyds is still around! Previously grand vet world cyclocross champ, she’s nails! Lovely too.

I was shocked by the unthinking sexism of ladies ogling at Rafa Nadal when he was changing his shirt on Friday. Honestly, treating him like a piece of meet for their gratification. It was his tennis not his body ladies…. 😉

men are faster, stronger, better, more intelligent didn’t you know? It’s a bit boring this Idea. Utterly tired. all us people are just in a wide spectrum of good at some things and bad at others!

Thinking about it… surely if we feel the need to differentiate categories then we’re beholden to treat the winners of those categories the same. It’s pretty patronising otherwise.

Not really. I am in vets categories. In the unlikely event of being on the podium it is still v likely that the younger winners would be better than me. It would be patronising to suggest otherwise IMO. They are the overall winners and that deserves recognition.

Thinking about it… surely if we feel the need to differentiate categories then we’re beholden to treat the winners of those categories the same. It’s pretty patronising otherwise.

Then in the case of the original post – every winner in every category would all go on the podium last, simultaneously.

Then in the case of the original post – every winner in every category would all go on the podium last, simultaneously.

Blimey, they’d need a fair few podium girls to hand out the trophies.

Off the top of my head, I can think of 2 women’s sports that are more competitive and more popular than the male versions; figure skating and gymnastics. At the Olympics, these events get the ratings. And they are a lot more competitive, because lots of girls take up gymnastics and skating compared to boys.

But I’m laughing too hard at

johndoh – Member

They do the women first so they can get home and put the dinner in the oven, to be outraged! 😆

Then in the case of the original post – every winner in every category would all go on the podium last, simultaneously.

🙂

or just change the order each time so that no one has precedence?

well i have to say in fell racing i ve seen my daughter carry off the overall trophy and the ladies, in fact always thought it was a bit ruff on the blokes as they only have the overall to aim for
#

To Stoner – should be different races and hence different prizes.

I’ve come second or third in Expert Women at MTB races – did I get a women’s trophy? Of course not. I also kicked the crap out of the Women’s fun field, but got nothing.

To the OP – yes, casual sexism is rife.

What is the correct answer here then? ditch the ‘women only’ category and have everyone race equally, or create a ‘men only’ to go the with ‘womens’ and ‘overall’? And then if you win the overall should you get your gender prize or does that defer to next person outside overall top 3?

Some women look damn sexy in overalls.

Equestrian events are completely unsegregated with respect to sex, only ability..

http://www.hellfirecup.com/prizes/
Some changes in the world with equal prize money for all 3 of the top categories.

In general I support Male and Female overall winners and unless there are license/qualification/points implications (elite cats that count for points for overall or other event qualification) that all age cats are eligible for the overall gender win.
Both should get the time to say a few words.

Charlotte Dujardin?

Jujuuk68 » I can’t think of anything that women would ever place first in over men

Snooker, Darts, Equestrian, motorsport, conkers, there as to be more!

Also depending on who shows up there are times where women could beat the men.