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

The way I got into running back in 2009 was with friends, doing a RfL 5k.  I would never have had the guts to do a more competitive / mixed race back then, as a very slow, previously very overweight mum, who'd never been any good at sport.  I was so nervous as it was and the camaraderie put me at ease.  I've done a couple of the 10k RfL since, as I like the friendliness, and I've run alongside friends who've seen how much I enjoy running and who also want to try a very non-competitive event.   I now do a fair few other mixed / more competitive HMs, 10 mile and 10k races per year, as well as doing some of the league races with my running club.  Of course now entering a race is no big deal and although I'll never be the fastest, or anywhere near, I'm an averagely experienced runner.  I think it's a great way for women like me to get into running, and I honestly would never have had the confidence to enter a race before doing it.  I don't see the problem.  As others have said, it's a fun charity fundraising event primarily, not a serious running event. But if it gives you the running bug as well, as it did with me, then everyone's a winner really?

Rob_Cooper wrote (see)

- where does the idea that It's a breast cancer only charity and therefore woman only/ mainly issue come from?

I think women have hijacked that particular agenda ........... slightly ridiculous .... cancer affects everyone ...... so the point still stands why you need to 'deliberately' exclude men ...... which is effectively what is happening here.

Imagine the VLM said 'Only men can enter' ........ wouldn't the sh.t hit the fan!

I think, David, that Nessie73 above you explains very eloquently why it's necessary. Taking it to an absurd extreme like you've done doesn't make any particular point.

Screamapillar wrote (see)

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.

 

That's a non argument though - who gives a monkeys about 99% of the stuff on this forum - nobody said that posting about something meant it had to be a major preoccupation.   

Yes in the scheme of things R4L excluding men isn't important - but there is still a principle of discrimination there and the argument it reinforces stereotypes about how women engage in sport.   I accept that set against that is the fact it maybe does bring some women into running who wouldn't otherwise so there are arguments on both sides and maybe the positives outweight the negatives - doesn't mean there aren't genuine negatives though.  

In an ideal world blah blah blah... But we all know that it's not an ideal world and never will be. So we work with what we've got. Things overheard once in a male changing room of a school, said to the boys by the male PE teacher. 'You ran like a girl' 'Stop being a big girls blouse'

Whilst these sayings exist and are used to reinforce stereotypes is anyone really surprised that some women feel as they feel about exercise?

If my bra was big enough I'd burn it right now!

Bottom line, it's not an equal playing field. Make it so and things will change, but first read up on the history of sport to find out how entrenched this stuff is and has been misogynistic until extremely recently.

(Disclaimer: This is probably patronising, I'm grumpy this morning. Lets all go for coffee and doughnuts please. Real doughnuts, and I want them before 8am)

If its any consolation, I  get into much worse debates on the Telegraph and Daily Mail sites ...... if this thread is a bit much for some people, you probably don't want to go to sites where there really is a bit of rough and tumble. No room for pansies in those comments sections.

There would be no room for pansies as the Daily Mail website is the preserve of the clinically insane and completely retarded.

Eggyh73 wrote (see)

There would be no room for pansies as the Daily Mail website is the preserve of the clinically insane and completely retarded.

I think you'll find that Im there quite often ......... so that proves you wrong .........right???

Eggyh73 wrote (see)

There would be no room for pansies as the Daily Mail website is the preserve of the clinically insane and completely retarded.

^^ what he said. also, I think that's the 3rd or 4th thread you have mentioned your activity in those threads, should we be impressed you debate on newspaper comment sections?

Marc.S wrote (see)

Eggyh73 wrote (see)

There would be no room for pansies as the Daily Mail website is the preserve of the clinically insane and completely retarded.

^^ what he said. also, I think that's the 3rd or 4th thread you have mentioned your activity in those threads, should we be impressed you debate on newspaper comment sections?

Not impressed necessarily .......... maybe silent admiration??

David Falconer 3 wrote (see)

 

Not impressed necessarily .......... maybe silent admiration??

You make enough noise for the rest of us

Thing is, Popsider, it does seem to be a major preoccupation for some. 

We've had this debate about a hundred times - once was enough. Everything that had to be said was said the first time. 

I just feel that anybody who gets wound up about exclusion from something that's not even a real race and that they probably wouldn't want to take part in anyway (note the emphasis) needs to find something more worthwhile to complain about.

"We've had this debate about a hundred times - once was enough."

So basically if a topic was discussed in 2004 ......... then unless you were around there to discuss it, too bad you've missed your chance. 

I bet I could point to similar threads for EVERY thread on this board where the point has already been discussed before.

So why not just lock the board down since everything has already been discussed?

That would be a shame - I get huge satisfaction from the annual threads from mid pack runners with a massive sense of entitlement whingeing that they haven't got a place in the London Marathon.

Davi

So why not just lock the board down since everything has already been discussed?

 

We haven't had an appearance of Hitler yet

Women's only races are much better from a spectating point of view!

depends on which sex rocks your boat 

I'm sure there's a men only races you can go to if you wish seren.

I think the whole point of women's only races was that they weren't getting enough attention. Now look, there's a walk4life race in every town/park going that you can watch. Although its not normally worth hanging around for the 2nd half of the field.

hehehe