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

2nd February Sport section of the Guardian- not one sentence on womens sport in the whole issue. If even the right on papers don't represent women what hope is there? They'd sooner report on the poor state of Welsh rugby and a load of premiership poseurs. So I hardly think RFL is going to challenge male dominance of all things sporting. I suppose if we all ripped our ovaries out and waved them  in mass protest it make a  "Sun Spot"  paragraph.

Just saying.,

oh god who upset monique?

i don't know if i'm on the correct thread  or indeed if anyone will comment 

on my point of view.

either way i'm not bothered

but when i was younger i used to wish i was the only man left in a world full of lovely

ladies.  

not too sure if that dream would work now as i'd hate to be stood on the pavement as twenty thousand women , most wearing ipods , jogged past me doing  a ladies only marathon.

 I'm in tears at the thought of it.

The only thing that bothers me about RFL and the like (and "bother" might be too strong a word, more of a niggle really) is the fact that due to it's "unique" atmosphere it will never be taken seriously as a running event thus reinforcing the whole problem around the very misguided notion that real races are "intimidating" and women are better off doing their own thing.

I think it's brilliant that RFL has introduced many women to running, but I don't think it's just the "women only" aspect that attracts them. The organisers have created a very emotional event where women come to raise money and celebrate someones fight against cancer or to run in memory of someone who lost the battle - this is why they come to run and I can't help wonder if they could maintain or even build on that special atmoshere even if they let us men join in - but perhaps not, I don't know.  

But what I do know is that there are thousands of alternative races available and despite my belief that it's a misguided concept, it isn't something I should be too worried about.

Interesting thread (and I know it's a bit old but here's my (very long) two penneth anyway).

As my starting point, I think it's useful to acknowledge Cancer Research UK's stated reason for keeping RfL women-only.  Apparently they've done "research" which indicates they would have fewer participants if they allowed men to take part.  As I understand it, this means they asked some previous participants and the majority said they'd prefer it to stay women-only, and that's good enough for CRUK.

If my understanding of their research is correct this seems shortsighted to me - they would need to also survey potential participants (many of whom are currently excluded).  If considering whether to turn a carpark into a playground would you just ask the drivers who use it at the moment, and make a decision based on their views?

Of course the fact that many women, in their survey and on this thread, have been quite clear that they found RfL a non-intimidating event.  Without that they may never have taken part, and in some cases it encouraged them to start running elsewhere.  This is positive and shouldn't be ignored.

But I think that rather than concentrating on the restriction of gender it's more useful to consider the focus of the event. 

 - Is it a race where everyone wants to win, or at least concentrates on their position? 

 - Is it a slightly less competitive event which still focuses on getting a good time, or beating a PB (like parkrun)? 

 - Or is it completely non-competitive, a purely charity event where time doesn't matter at all; the important thing is to finish, hopefully raise some money and awareness, and perhaps serve as a kind of tribute to a friend or family member who has been affected by whatever it is the charity is about?

Despite often being called "races", many mass participation events these days are a combination of the above, with internationally famous atheletes at the front, and one-time charity "runners" in fancy-dress at the back and everything in-between.  

I would suggest that the important thing for RfL to ensure it remains non-intimidating, is that the focus stays non-competitive.  It's about charity, cameraderie and having fun, none of which are exclusive to either gender. 

Notably RfL is about all kinds of cancer, but I would point to the example of the MoonWalk which is specifically for breast cancer.  Of course men can also get breast cancer, but MoonWalk has been marketed as a "girl's night out".  Their "thing" is that everyone wears a bra.  They are very clear that there is no focus on going fast, no prizes, and in fact, no running.  And yet, they are happy to allow men to take part - apparently men are about 1% of the participants.  And I have to ask whether a small percentage of male participants dressed like this guy:

 ...would really ruin the entire event for all the women involved?  Because if not, to object for the sake of is just unreasonable.

So is any of this important?  And if so, why? Aren't there bigger things to worry about?

Well I don't buy the idea that because there are bigger issues we can ignore the smaller ones, should we only ever care about one thing at at a time? 

I don't buy the idea that if you are raising money for charity you can behave how you like because it's for the greater good. 

I don't understand why it might be OK to discriminate based on (either) gender any more than it would b

(continued due to some limit being hit?)

I don't understand why it might be OK to discriminate based on (either) gender any more than it would be to discriminate based on race.

And consider a man who has lost a daughter to cancer.  The UK's biggest cancer charity is holding one of the events of is biggest highest profile series in his home town.  His grandaughters, who have lost their mum want to take part and they'd love him to join in.  But he can't because he's a man.  Would you tell him to go and start his own men-only race if he feels so strongly?  Or tell him he can marshal if he wants to.  Because that's what CRUK would tell him.  And it might not matter much to you but it's important to him.

I'm obviously fairly new to these forums, but my understanding is that women's only races are so designed so as to keep mouthy, boorish blokes who run 6 hour marathons off no training away from women who just want to get on with their running in peace, right?

33riggins -- Did you have anyone particular in mind? 

33riggins wrote (see)

I'm obviously fairly new to these forums, but my understanding is that women's only races are so designed so as to keep mouthy, boorish blokes who run 6 hour marathons off no training away from women who just want to get on with their running in peace, right?

Ha ha, love it

Taxi Driver wrote (see)

33riggins -- Did you have anyone particular in mind? 

It certainly gives that impression, and I'm even wondering if it's a snide pop at me following my admittedly overlong and arguably opinionated waffle.

But I've certainly never done a 6 hour marathon so I guess not.

No, not you Tarantula