Gatekeeping in the community

Is the lack of permadraws on sport cliffs and traditionalist’s refusal to bolt cracks a form of gatekeeping in climbing? Are less financially able people being intentionally kept from climbing by the high cost of gear required by first ascentionists who refuse to properly and permanently protect “their” climbs?

No

Jack V wrote:

No

How can you possibly justify this? If FAs really do have dominion over “their” routes, then they also have the responsibility to make them accessible to anyone who wants to climb them regardless of financial means, especially routes on public land.

ryan climbs sometimes wrote:

So weak zzzzZzzz

Fair enough. Can’t blame a bored unemployed person for trying though.

John Clark wrote:

How can you possibly justify this? If FAs really do have dominion over “their” routes, then they also have the responsibility to make them accessible to anyone who wants to climb them regardless of financial means.

What bullshit. How goddamn entitled can one be as to think that another person is responsible to make protectable features ’safe’ (safety lies with the climber, not the gear, just check out how many accidents occur on ‘safe’ sport climbs) for ‘poor’ people. A lot of ‘poor’ climbers put them up in the first place. You have really embarrassed yourself.

John Clark wrote:

Is the lack of permadraws on sport cliffs and traditionalist’s refusal to bolt cracks a form of gatekeeping in climbing? Are less financially able people being intentionally kept from climbing by the high cost of gear required by first ascentionists who refuse to properly and permanently protect “their” climbs?

Why are you focusing on those who choose to bolt certain climbs and choose not to bolt other climbs? Why is this post not focused towards gear manufacturers that continually raise the price of new gear? Additionally, these manufacturers have the funds to maintain liability and safety standards. To assume that first ascensionists and those maintaining crags, such as climbing coalitions who are typically non-profit organizations, have the same ability, physical and, mainly, financial, to not only create but maintain the safety of every route and every crag to allow for complete access like a gym, is naïve of you.  

Quit making me miss Trevor with posts like this. But also, I’ll play along….per the 8a threads; climbing as a whole is gatekeeping against those who are weak and unmotivated. 

John Clark wrote:

Is the lack of permadraws on sport cliffs and traditionalist’s refusal to bolt cracks a form of gatekeeping in climbing? Are less financially able people being intentionally kept from climbing by the high cost of gear required by first ascentionists who refuse to properly and permanently protect “their” climbs?

No because it takes more than draws to climb. Who should supply the ropes, harness, shoes, helmet? Who should supply the packs, water bottles, etc. Who should supply the ride? There are many organization that help facilitate people getting out. Just as there many organizations that help facilitate people doing many other activities.

John Clark wrote:

How can you possibly justify this? If FAs really do have dominion over “their” routes, then they also have the responsibility to make them accessible to anyone who wants to climb them regardless of financial means.

No

Pull yourself up by your bootstraps and buy a cam

Traditionalists "refusal" to bolt cracks, lol. Why in the F would you bolt a perfectly good crack line? Learning trad climbing technique involves learning how to place protection effectively, they go hand in hand. If trad gear is too expensive, go bouldering. 

Cosmic Hotdog wrote:

Traditionalists "refusal" to bolt cracks, lol. Why in the F would you bolt a perfectly good crack line?

Cause it’s limestone   

Peach would like to speak to John Clark's manager. This is the place to lodge complaints of this sort, correct?

John Clark wrote:

Is the lack of permadraws on sport cliffs and traditionalist’s refusal to bolt cracks a form of gatekeeping in climbing? Are less financially able people being intentionally kept from climbing by the high cost of gear required by first ascentionists who refuse to properly and permanently protect “their” climbs?

Yes. So?

Holy cr@p.  Based on replies alone he gets at least a 3/10 

All for practically zero effort.  

John Clark wrote:

Edit 2: Have I been out of the game long enough that people forgot who I am and think I’m serious?

No

very funny

F r i t z wrote:

Peach would like to speak to John Clark's manager. This is the place to lodge complaints of this sort, correct?

My manager says I need to stop trolling. Cheers.

City of Reno, Parks and Recreation Volunteer Information

Thank you for your interest in becoming a volunteer!

Drop-in Volunteers, individual or group: These volunteers perform a single-day task without much public contact or participate in a single-day event. Volunteer Applications are not required but accepted.  These volunteers must sign a Volunteer Release of Liability Form (under 16 years of age, parent signs) and sign hours of service on a Volunteer Time Sheet.

Continuous Volunteers:  Volunteers 16 years of age or older, who have recurring, scheduled tasks with Parks and Recreation and varying amounts of required supervision.  Three forms are required, a Volunteer Application, a Consent and Disclosure form, and a Reno PD Criminal History Background Investigation form. 

John Clark wrote:

Is the lack of permadraws on sport cliffs and traditionalist’s refusal to bolt cracks a form of gatekeeping in climbing? Are less financially able people being intentionally kept from climbing by the high cost of gear required by first ascentionists who refuse to properly and permanently protect “their” climbs?

I'll take a MAGA rally over this any day.