You know these women only running event things ...is there a particular reason

Well in truth you can run any race for charity you want. There's nothing to stop anyone raising funds for whoever they want at any event they enter. You certainly don't have to run a charity organised event to raise funds for charity if that is your objective.

Some women do have issues doing sport with men. Someone earlier laughed at the thought of womens only night at the swimming pool, but I know my local swimming pool still has one. Many gyms also have a womens only night. It's a great shame they feel embarrassed or uncomfortable doing sport with men about, but you can't hide from the fact these things exist exactly for that reason.

The atmosphere at these events can be totally different too. I know for a fact having been down to support someone at the Glasgow womens 10km once that the final pen at that race was full of women in normal everyday clothes and shoes and full make-up, not running gear. They all walked from the off. To them it was a day out event not a race. Folk like that would never turn up at a local club organised 10km. The women club runners in the first pen who would easily thrash me in a 10km would, but to them it's just another race or PB attempt.

David Falconer 3 wrote (see)

Screamapillar wrote (see)

What's the justification? They raise a lot of money for cancer charities.

And what Dude says.

So women will only bother raising money for cancers that affect women if they can run in women only events ..... if they have to share an event with men, then bugger it, no funds to fight breast cancer.

Yeah right.

David, did you actually read my post or did you just go off on one again?

Both men only and women only races raise a lot of money for charity and, in my view, that justifies them. In fact it's pretty much the only thing that justifies them since they aren't really races at all - they are charity fun runs. I think that's something that everyone needs to bear in mind when they are jumping up and down and getting all indignant.

The bottom line is that there are a few "running events", which aren't even proper races, which exclude members of the opposite sex. There are some women who enter these events because they aren't comfortable running alongside men. And why should anyone give a toss? Most of them aren't even runners. Maybe next time they'll sit in a tub of baked beans instead. Maybe they'll just send a cheque. Maybe they'll support another charity entirely. 

Why make an issue about something that isn't one?

Haha, ok in the interests of keeping the peace I agree with you Screamapillar

(is that an annoying reply or not?) lol.

kittenkat wrote (see)

I used to question women only races, I have no problem with racing men because I beat most of them But I soon realised that I very much come from a background of being good at sport and confident in it.

Men generally have more confidence to just go out and do it, women don't and there are lots of reasons for this, of course including how women have been excluded historically as sport was organised by men for men (did my degree in this shit all those years ago).

I have done a few women only races, and it's actually an atmosphere that does bring out the confidence of some women who wouldn't race otherwise and yes, it's also great to be leading a race, not that I need that on a personal level but it's pretty cool. However one of those races I talk about had Jo Pavey in it, so I didn't win that one!

 

What KittenKat said! My wife has happily done the Race for Life, but just wouldn't want in general to do any other running event. It's all very well for people to denigrate the idea, but it's a simple fact that some women don't have the confidence, for whatever reason, to do events that involve men. It's not 'the' solution to the problem, but it's certainly one route to it - certainly if from running a women-only event they get the confidence to go beyond that.

...and while we are at it we should have woman only football matches, woman only pubs, woman only schools, woman only forums and woman only shopping centres...(actually you can have the last one).

Joking aside, making exclusions just because one group doesn't much like another is a sad act in this day and age, 'charity' or otherwise.

What i'd like to know is this.

Are they allowed to wear i-pods in women only races?

Rob_Cooper wrote (see)

...and while we are at it we should have woman only football matches, woman only pubs, woman only schools, woman only forums and woman only shopping centres...(actually you can have the last one).

Joking aside, making exclusions just because one group doesn't much like another is a sad act in this day and age, 'charity' or otherwise.

Having done RFL a couple of times, it has,nt actually got anything to do with not liking another group/running with men.I  believe its more a comaraderie type thing..........I mean most do it in fancy dress, wigs etc and run with tabards dedicating their run and money raised, to relatives and friends who have won the fight against breast cancer or lost it.....in fact I think it would be a brill fund raising idea if they let guys run these races , but make them dress up in pink .I would,nt recommend these runs for serious guys though most ladies power walk the course and walk /run in groups so you can,t get pastYou competitive guys would soon get hacked off

I really really can't think what the issue is here. Some women want to run in women-only races. So what? End of the world for some, it seems.

It's a point of principle about discrimination - we don't accept that in other areas of society so why is this any different?

If men were allowed to run it wearing pink then that's fine. To exlude them full stop is not. Don't assume I'm always competitive and wouldn't wear pink for a good cause...

but isn't all sport discrimination................apart from horse riding which other sport do women and men compete againgst each other.........

as a women i can't play in a mens rubgy football or hockey team or vice versa........this isn't on ability its in the rules.........

in most sports they have a separate event for men and women.............the only reason that the majority of races are for both men and women is that its easier and cheaper to do it that way.........as soon as it is set up for serious runners then they seperate the races  like in teh olympics.

Should also add that R4L is a fundraiser for Cancer Researh UK, which as best I can work out covers all types of cancer (prostate, testicular, lung to name a few) - where does the idea that It's a breast cancer only charity and therefore woman only/ mainly issue come from?

Rob_Cooper wrote (see)

 

Joking aside, making exclusions just because one group doesn't much like another is a sad act in this day and age, 'charity' or otherwise.

Um... It's not because one group doesn't like the other at all.

Rob_Cooper wrote (see)

It's a point of principle about discrimination - we don't accept that in other areas of society so why is this any different?

If men were allowed to run it wearing pink then that's fine. To exlude them full stop is not. Don't assume I'm always competitive and wouldn't wear pink for a good cause...

The Bobby Moore runs exclude women. Care to comment Rob?

My point is who really gives a monkeys? There are more genuine matters of discrimination to get wound up about for those who really want to.

Seren - professional sport yes, then physical differences often make it sensible to have a split. But as you know there would be many woman (you) in a 5k that would kick the butt of many of the men (me) so you can't really use the same justification for R4L. Add to that we are talking about a cancer charity in this case, which is an issue that affects everybody, then the splitting/ excluding part seems unjustified.

Bobby Moore Run - same charity, same principle, still wrong.

the majority of women in the R4l aren't racing it and so are in a different catergory to you or me..........but they are taking part in some exercise so that has to be a good thing.......

Rob_Cooper wrote (see)

Bobby Moore Run - same charity, same principle, still wrong.

And still not very important in the grand scheme of things.

I don't see R4L as a running race, it's an event. It's never marketed itself as a race, it isn't a race.

I don't understand why people can't get their head round that.

as KK says, R4L is an event that is going from strength to strength. It has encouraged some women to take up running, but lots don't, they just do this event every year. It's a great atmosphere, lots of camaraderie and lots of touching stories, people who have survived cancer and people who have lost those to cancer come together to a) celebrate/commemorate and b) raise money for cancer research.

I really do think that if men participated that it would change the event from what it is.

Men and women are not the same - who would want it?

for example: