sick of this feminist bullshit

[RuMR]

agreed!

[RuMR]

now...about those Men's Climbing Clinics?!? WTF are they?? How come the chica's get a gender specific one and we don't!!! That's just plain discriminatory in my book...and don't get me started on the ladies night crap at bars!!!!!

 

[foolscongress]

no doubt things have gotten better, but it's also true that women were discriminated against on major climbing expeditions within our lifetimes. though women were included on some of the big national expeditions in the 70's and 80's it's also true that some were expected to cook (above bc) and do the washing up. i'm sure it didn't happen on every trip, but it happened. you'll forgive me for not providing the references until i've had a chance to dig a couple books out of the closet. as someone mentioned earlier, this kind of behavior (and other types of unequal treatement) prompted arlene blum et al. to put together all-women's climbs.

 

the discrimination i'm thinking of is not when men say, 'i won't climb with you b/c you have boobs'. i think bob's right; that rarely happens, and i don't know anyone who would put up with it, man or woman. the discrimination that's hardest to eradicate is more subtle. the kind of discrimination that identifies 'feminism' as an idea that seeks unfair advantage, when it has only ever tried to promote equality under the law and fair treatment for both genders. our language is probably one of the best measures of how women are viewed. there are many, many more crude terms for women and/or based on women's body parts than for men. and the terms tend to be much more insulting. to say someone is a dick isn't nice, but it doesn't carry too much weight. to call someone a cunt is pretty serious business (unless you're english, who seem not as offended by it). and the list of female-associated insults is very long: bitch, whore, slut, cooze, feminazi, etc. the more bad words you know and use to describe a group, the more prejudiced you are. the argument that 'i have lots of female friends' isn't that convincing if one often refers to women as bitches, whores, sluts, etc.

[foolscongress]

 

i don't think ladies' night drink discounts are meant as a kind-hearted bonus for women, or to exclude men. it uses women as bait for guys who will then show up and buy them full price drinks. and part of the reason for the existence of ladies' nights, i suspect, is to induce women to come to bars full of guys who don't treat them all that respectfully.

[RuMR]

...ok...so explain the women's climbing technique classes!

 

Is there some sort of technique required of women that is differnent than men???

[marylou]

Women's climbing technique classes are probably a lot like women's ski clinics. The curriculum isn't all that different, but the boy/girl dynamic is gone, and women won't feel as stoopid asking dumb questions.

 

Me, personally, not a big fan of these kinds of classes, because sometimes they teach to a little lower level than I'd like, but for some women, it's a way to get them interested in doing the sport without feeling so self-conscious. Nothing wrong with that, really.

[foolscongress]

i know why they're offered, and that's because some women feel more comfortable learning around other women. i teach at an all girls' school, and, though i doubted it before i started there, teenaged girls do learn better in a unisex environment. (there's tons of good research on this, but i had trouble believing it before). men and women interact differently, and women aren't generally socialized to react well to the kind of sarcasm, horseplay and rough affection guys often like, and they don't learn as well around it.

 

so, those classes exist because women like them. you can't join one, and yeah, that's a kind of discrimination. it's true that, being a member of the majority that gets most of the social benefits like i am (white, educated, male), we sometimes have to bear being excluded. but there's a difference in being excluded as part of the power majority; for us, it's a rare annoyance and a feeling of 'it's not fair'. for minorities, it can be a constant fight to get the same basic rights.

 

women's only ice classes exist in part to spare women a feeling they are lesser, which is something you get to experience daily if you're female. they're not excluding us because they think we're inferior. usually, though, when the majority excludes a group (say, blacks from country clubs), it IS to send the message that the excluded group is inferior.

 

yeah, it's not that simple, and there are tons of exceptions, but life is easier for us most of the time. that much is clear, i think. sorry so rambling; it's a complicated topic for me to write about.

[foolscongress]

jesus, marylou, it took me three paragraphs to do what you did in four lines.

[specialed]

On a related note, women look just as stupid as men in shorts over poly-pro. So whether you are male or female: JUST SAY NO.

[foolscongress]

man, i've always thought that was the height of climbing cool, like, the will to be different and unfashionable. so what's the alternative? i can't go walking around in my polypro bottoms or running tights. i have to go and photoshop half my climbing pics now.

[fern]

you can wear polypro. just don't layer with shorts.

[Winter]

This reminds me of Sears objecting to the cover of Smell the Glove because it was sexy ... I mean sexist.

[RuMR]

...women won't feel as stoopid asking dumb questions.

 

but see, this is the problem...its the WOMEN who are feeling stupid of their own accord...why is that??? A beginner is a beginner regardless of gender...Women bring it down on themselves...

[carolyn]

...ok...so explain the women's climbing technique classes!

 

Is there some sort of technique required of women that is differnent than men???

 

YES! Absolutely. I can explain more later if you like. I gotta run for now, tho.

 

[RuMR]

...ok...so explain the women's climbing technique classes!

 

Is there some sort of technique required of women that is differnent than men???

 

YES! Absolutely. I can explain more later if you like. I gotta run for now, tho.

 

 

you've got to be kidding me??? All the women i climb with climb the same way i do, only better! Seriously...

[specialed]

The Mountaineers don't discriminate!!!

 

[RuMR]

yeah they do...they wouldn't let me and my goat join...now hand it over BIZATCH!!!

[specialed]

Don't call her it. You'll hurt her feelings.

[glassgowkiss]

ok as usual the topic drifted waaaay away from what i was saying. it wasn't about gender differances or other shit like that. my point was that this woman in particuar writes a book about the events that took place many years ago. first of all there is nothing more you can write on this topic, since people involved are dead. so there is no chance to obtain information first hand and charachters involved can answer to any of it. it's an analysis of an analysis. and to play is safe she wraps it into a nice "feminist package"- so nobody can critique her- that's all i'm saying and that's what i call bullshit. a little fucking honesty can go a long way.

there were at least a dozen books written on this subject. on the other hand why not write about some female climber, who is still alive and does high altitude climbing? hey, maybe because she could not write a bunch of hyped up bullshit and make money off it. or maybe because it's much easier to be called on your bullshit by people who are alive? like i said - a little honesty please....

[JayB]

"the kind of discrimination that identifies 'feminism' as an idea that seeks unfair advantage, when it has only ever tried to promote equality under the law and fair treatment for both genders."

 

I am for equality under the law - but the extension of this definition to such an extent that one must deny the obvious physical and behavior differences between men and women that manifest themselves on a population level is a bit much.

 

Opinions may differ on this one, but IMO the reason why climbing is and will probably always be a male dominated activity is the the physical and psychological traits required to enjoy and excel at the activity are present in a higher percentage of men than women. There are women that have these traits in spades, and men that lack them entirely, but when you look at a the entire population it's hard to conclude otherwise. If you are a woman, and you climb, you will have to reconcile yourself to the fact that most of the people who participate in the activity will be male, and that the culture and lingo that pervade it will reflect this demographic reality.

 

As far as the derisive-euphemism-as-proxy-for-a society-hostile-to-women argument is concerned, I think that there's probably at least as many for the male reproductive organs. The reason why they don't cary much weight is that men don't respond to them in the same way - which is to say that no man worthy of the title is going to go sulk in a corner and consider himself a gender-victim because someone used a term for his private parts in a derrogatory manner. Ever. Much less dedicate entire textbooks and college courses to the study of the way the English language unfairly victimizes and men and maleness.

[marylou]

I am for equality under the law - but the extension of this definition to such an extent that one must deny the obvious physical and behavior differences between men and women that manifest themselves on a population level is a bit much.

 

I've never heard anyone of either gender claim that women and men were alike in any conversation on this subject, ever.

[catbirdseat]

... my point was that this woman in particuar writes a book about the events that took place many years ago. first of all there is nothing more you can write on this topic, since people involved are dead. so there is no chance to obtain information first hand and charachters involved can answer to any of it. it's an analysis of an analysis. ...

Stephen Ambrose wrote a book called Undaunted Courage about Lewis and Clark who have been dead for two centuries. It is arguably the best book ever written on the explorers. The idea that an author can't write about dead people and make a valuable contribution to literature is laughable.

[AlpineK]

If I was choosing an event to go to and I had the choice of watching a slide show of a woman doing some bad ass climb or watching another woman analyze the same woman through a filter of feminism I would choose the former; I can't even imagine going to see the latter.

 

I work in a male dominated field. Of the 20 or so companies I know of around Seattle I don't know of one that would turn away anyone who applied for a job and showed that they had the work ethic and aptitude to do the job. Yet I could count the women that worked in my field and lasted more than a year on one hand.

 

I don't think that women face any challenges that men don't in my field; I just think it illustrates the diference between men and women.

[specialed]

That is sad. Women with chainsaws are sexy.

[forrest_m]

jeez, i think i'm writing a "me too" post to CBS...

 

glassgowkiss wrote:

my problem with this situation is: she decides to write a book about events that took place many years ago and the players are dead. so people described in her book can't respond to so called "facts" in her writtings. there was always unspoken law among alpinists not to write about people who are no longer with us. some things are better left alone.

 

yeah, it's such an unspoken law that apparently nobody else has ever heard it. for better or worse, the vast majority of climbing literature deals with death, that's what makes it interesting and meaningful. and, yeah, what CBS said, books about things that happened a long time ago can be valuable, it's called history.

 

if i understand you correctly, your other main objection to the book is that instead of focusing on the latest cutting edge alpinism, it chooses some less cutting edge climbs to talk about. it disturbs you that these are chosen because they are five women who climbed a single mountain, and that criteria doesn't interest you. it appears, from the promotional material, that the author is using this selection process to make a point about women and society, though of course, we don't know what that point is, since neither of us have read her book. i have no further comment.