Women's climbing festival

sherb wrote:Ted, yep. "Beginners' climbing festival" wouldn't have the same ring. OLH, love the word "fleece." At the same time there are also other good reasons for having a women's climbing festival other than marketing. I don't believe being "marginalized" is one of them. How can half (or actually, over half) the population claim to be / let themselves be marginalized? IMO my body/mind by being female makes me more different from men than the supposed societal restrictions. I'm not some 50s housewife either; I have a career in STEM and never had any problems due to my gender (problems due to long hours/work stress is a different matter). Reasons for a women's climbing festival: -You are that stereotypical climbing girlfriend, and want to step out of your BF's shadow -You live 2,000 miles away from your significant other (or BF doesn't climb) and don't want him to worry about your meeting guys (nor tempt yourself) so you climb with girls -You just got out a relationship and want to be with just girls for a while, plus couples are annoying -etc. Did not include physical differences because your partner never forces you climb in the same way they did. An elite female climber climbs much differently from me. If it is a belaying weight thing, then form a weight group climbing festival. As for height/strength, most of my female climbing partners are 6-13" taller than me (I'm <5 feet). And the time I got injured, I was actually climbing with a stronger female who pushed me beyond my limit (having the best intentions of wanting me to improve). There should be a men's climbing festival too, although there would be unfair outrage at that. Men suffer more after breakups because they don't have a close network of friends, and their suicide rate is higher than females (almost 3x higher). They also have similar rates of depression although the symptoms are not as readily recognized, and thus, they are ostrasized instead of helped. For some reason everyone is concerned about young girls being empowered to do well in school (and probably teach to the female mind) and forge a future for herself, but have we forgotten about young boys? Now there are ~30% more females in college than men. Men have been taught since youth to "suck it up" and "be a man" but no one should be dismissed and made to feel terrible about themselves like that.

I agree. Eating disorders are especially hard, because the attitude is "women have it bad, why do you care about your weight?" As a teacher, I see boys especially struggle in school, yet so many programs are focused on girls in STEM (not that there's anything wrong with that).

When women have climbing festivals (or pursue STEM careers), the response should not be "shut up, white male oppressor."

grog m aka Greg McKee wrote:A better way would be to have a women's HOSTED event that anyone can attend right?

Well then go do that then. Let them have their event. It's hard to avoid dudes in climbing.

Don't be that guy, Greg. Don't be that guy.

Max Forbes wrote:Women climb with women because men are shitty partners. It's not about inclusivity, it's about ladies kicking ass and sending hard.

Don't be this guy either.

grog m Greg McKee wrote:The event seems a bit ironic from my outside perspective so perhaps some of you will explain. The purpose of the women's climbing festival is to celebrate women in climbing and to inspire each other to new heights, great. This is built on the basis that climbing with men does NOT provide that experience.

I have successfully followed you so far.

grog m Greg McKee wrote:So to promote inclusion and combat exclusion, there is an EXCLUSIVE women's only event? Seems counterproductive to the inclusion part.

This is where you lost me. The second part does not flow from the first and this is why you are struggling with this, imo. I know a number of women climbers who are intimidated climbing with or near (often stronger) male climbers. Some of that is due to gender differences in communication styles, their other experiences with men, gender-based personality differences, etc. So I can state with high level of certainty that inclusivity is not the goal of all-female events. The goal is to provide a more comfortable, relaxing, and less intimidating all-female environment.

Hope this clear it up for you.

sherb wrote: How can half (or actually, over half) the population claim to be / let themselves be marginalized?

You're right, how can over half the population not allow themselves to vote until the 20th century?

BigRed11 wrote: You're right, how can over half the population not allow themselves to vote until the 20th century?

Going back to the beginning of mankind, men and women were each better suited to different tasks. Men hunted, women gathered.

Moving to agriculture, societies started to form. Men, not the ones to carry babies and by default run the household, worked outside the home including organizing the society ie politics. They worked outside the home and women worked inside the home. Each party had their job. Women did the laborious time consuming tasks of running a household -washing clothes/sheets by hand, chamberpots, sweeping & laying down straw flooring, dealing with lanterns, sewing clothes, making food without microwaves or gas/electric ranges, bringing in water without plumbing, dealing with ice blocks without refrigeration - took up much of women's time. There were more kids to care for because the child mortality rate was high. There was so much to do inside the home, they did not have time to work outside the home, so men worked outside the home to bring in money. Thus women left the politics and running of society to men, but ran each household (and they had a lot of influence over their men) and by default did not participate in voting.

Women's "equality" came about because of technology; once the industrial revolution came about in the 19th century and technology started freeing up women's time, they could start working outside the home, participate in society outside the household and started wanting to participate in elections as well. At first there was resistance from men due to traditon, but with women's sufferage leaders they soon got the right to vote. The timespan between women's collective desire to vote and their right to vote was not that long compared to the history of mankind.

I'm not going to write a dissertation on this, but that's my hypothesis (based on research) in a nutshell.

I'm not anti-feminist, just fair; actually these days something I see which is unfair is that women work and often do the lion's share of the housework.

You might want to know that your entire worldview is historically, biologically, sociologically, and anthropologically wrong. While there are obvious morphological differences between biological men and women, gendered divisions of labor and patriarchy are NOT natural nor were they in place from the beginning. Men and women both hunted and gathered...there was nothing inherent to either sex that made them better at it. While women would obviously be more vulnerable during/after childbirth, this did not preclude them from leadership. In fact, many of the earliest societies were matriarchal (run by women), and primitive societies today tend to be significantly more egalitarian than our "modern" society.

Gender roles are artificial and were imposed to subjugate and control women. We've obviously come a long way, but there's no excuse to make up your own ideas about the past when we actually know what happened.

Primary document from 1866, offering responses to the common objections to women's suffrage:

slate.com/blogs/the_vault/2…

According to this document, some common objections included:

"Women, after all, are silly creatures"
"A women who takes proper care of her household, has no time to know anything about politics"
"I should not wish to hear my wife speak in a town meeting"
etc......

If you are actually interested in this topic, then you should read this document. I teach about this subject. OPINIONS are different from FACTS.

Edited to update link.

This issue isn't specific to climbing, or gender. I've participated in the discussion in tech, as well as the crafting/maker/hacker scene.

It's certainly not feminists raining on dude parades, either. One of the people who disagreed with me in the maker scene has already done more as a feminist than I ever will.

If, as a dude, you get a chance to climb nearby but not in something like Women Crush Wednesdays, I'd recommend it. I get a vibe that's worth encouraging. From a distance, so I don't mess with it.

This post violated Rule #1. It has been removed by Mountain Project.

Women are tired of being gawked at and flirted with.

sherb wrote:Greg, for the record I am female and I agree with you. However, IMO the festival being for just women is a gimmick, as it would draw less attendance without a theme & exclusivity. They like to emphasize the words "badass women" as a marketing tactic. Climbing does not make one better or more badass than any other group of people. Being exclusive can bring more membership- like "chicks with picks" & "chicks with nuts"- their prices are outrageous eg 2 days of sport climbing in Rifle for $600, 6 days of guided sport climbing in greece for $2,000 - just the guiding, not including transportation, airfare, food. I don't know any person dedicated enough to climbing to spend the time & airfare + boatfare to Kalymnos and want to pay $2k to only toprope. More like women exploiting women. So be glad you're not part of the group. **Deleting this post soon because I am tired of being antagonized by MPers for having a different view from the mainstream

I have also in the past (back when they were "With Picks") sneered at the idea, but I have through the years met many women who have gone through their programs and got to understand where they come from. Contrary to your other post here, women who are drawn to these women-specific events are not weak. Actually the opposite, a lot of them come from powerful positions or work in male-dominated industries, climb exclusively with men who treat them as equals if not as stronger partners. So maybe these women just want to let their guards down for a weekend and maybe feel vulnerable or strong without being called a "b" word.

For the record, I'm female and know Chicks Climbing/Skiing owners personally - I've seen how hard they've worked to bring the company/brand to where it's at and I wouldn't say they're into "fleecing" other women. They recognized the need and filled the niche. I'm pretty sure their domestic programs include some sort of lodging and always catered meals. And they have come a long way from their top-rope only "Chicks with Picks" days - many programs are open to all levels or they teach advanced techniques. Also, $2000 for 6 days of guided climbing is not much in the scheme of things. Anybody who has planned vacation especially to a foreign land, knows how much work it is. If I had spare $2K, I would gladly pay it to somebody to plan my vacation on a Mediterranean island with some climbing plus coaching involved, and all I have to do is to pack my shoes and board the plane.

Old lady H wrote:Hey, Greg, how's the hand? Best, Helen

climbing friend,

is it perhaps over-masturbation injury?

do not be crying on your exclusion from women's climbing festival. perhaps you have something quite better to be doing with your times? you may not be alive tomorrow myah?

crushing?

the crushing?

always crushing?

squeezing the bouldering rocks again and again until you would be transformed into savage beast?

"Just follow your heart. That's what I do."
- Aleks Zebastian
- Aleks Zebastian

Ted Pinson wrote: Gender roles are artificial and were imposed to subjugate and control women.

So you are saying, without the communication means we have now, men all over the globe in many established societies all decided to control women? I didn't say "from the beginning." In fact, I excluded hunting and gathering, and said, "starting from Agriculture". You don't see a connection between the Industrial Revolution and suffrage/women's rights? What do you think the impetus was for women to strive for social equality?

Are you trying to spread dislike for men and have people believe, left to their own devices, men have the worst intentions? I like to think gender roles evolved that way because of the way of life and technology of the time, and not because men are naturally oppressive and terrible people.

doligo wrote: Contrary to your other post here, women who are drawn to these women-specific events are not weak.

Excuse me, queen of misreading, when did I say the women who attended these events are weak? I named many reasons for attending a women's specific festival, and none of them included being weak.

sherb wrote: Excuse me, queen of misreading, when did I say the women who attended these events are weak?

You didn't explicitly say so, but the post below implied certain weakness. But you are right, I may be misreading...

sherb wrote: Reasons for a women's climbing festival: -You are that stereotypical climbing girlfriend, and want to step out of your BF's shadow -You live 2,000 miles away from your significant other (or BF doesn't climb) and don't want him to worry about your meeting guys (nor tempt yourself) so you climb with girls -You just got out a relationship and want to be with just girls for a while, plus couples are annoying -etc. Men have been taught since youth to "suck it up" and "be a man" but no one should be dismissed and made to feel terrible about themselves like that.

sherb wrote: Men have been taught since youth to "suck it up" and "be a man" but no one should be dismissed and made to feel terrible about themselves like that.

sherb wrote: So you are saying, without the communication means we have now, men all over the globe in many established societies all decided to control women?

Not necessarily, though this did happen. The primary reason for the widespread nature of patriarchy is adaptive radiation. When studying isolated societies, one can observe many different models.

sherb wrote:I didn't say "from the beginning." In fact, I excluded hunting and gathering, and said, "starting from Agriculture".

Did you not directly reference hunting and gathering? What did you mean by this:

sherb wrote:Going back to the beginning of mankind, men and women were each better suited to different tasks. Men hunted, women gathered.

?

sherb wrote:You don't see a connection between the Industrial Revolution and suffrage/women's rights? What do you think the impetus was for women to strive for social equality? Are you trying to spread dislike for men and have people believe, left to their own devices, men have the worst intentions? I like to think gender roles evolved that way because of the way of life and technology of the time, and not because men are naturally oppressive and terrible people.

The industrial Revolution certainly gave birth to the modern women's liberation movement, but this wasn't the first time gender roles were challenged. Not sure where the rest of your post is coming from, as I was essentially arguing the exact opposite of that (and am a man). My point is simply that gender roles are artificial.

doligo wrote: You didn't explicitly say so, but the post below implied certain weakness. But you are right, I may be misreading...

Gotcha. I'm sure there are other reasons, which is why I wrote "etc." but the reasons listed are not implied to mean women are weak. In fact, I wrote:

sherb wrote:An elite female climber climbs much differently from me.

implying we could both attend the women's festival, so strength is not a reason to go or not go.

I did not list reasons such as:

• women want to be with only other women- because then men should form a men's only climbing festival to be with only other men.
• lesbians who want to meet other women instead of men- because that is another category.
• women who don't want to be hit on- because then men should form a men's festival excluding women so they are not constantly accused of hitting on women when they're not.

My intent when I wrote "men have been taught to suck it up" or "be a man" is from my observation it seems like the world is so focused on elevating girls these days that the boys are forgotten. Any concerns men have are dismissed and they are accused of being "privileged" for even having concerns.

Ted: Stating "men hunted, women gathered" was to set the stage of the pre-politics/pre-voting time. We were talking about women's suffrage in particular.
Gender roles may be to a great extent artificial, but likely influenced by the general physical and physiological (including some general tendencies, behavior, mental processes) differences between men and women. I'm not going to pretend we're exactly the same, just with different body parts.

Right, but women also hunted, and men gathered - that's precisely the problem with this mentality. Archaeological evidence reveals that many of the first societies were actually matriarchal (which is where the goddess worship cults originated).

Ted Pinson wrote:Right, but women also hunted, and men gathered - that's precisely the problem with this mentality. Archaeological evidence reveals that many of the first societies were actually matriarchal (which is where the goddess worship cults originated).

Don't worry, we're headed that way.

Yes, clearly...based on the 45 female presidents and 0 male presidents we've had?