I love it too.
I love it too.
Shud Up-
This may be off the point, but I actually think Marla does make an issue of her blindness, and the way she actually appears to go out of her way to make it a non-issue is all just part of the publicity. If she made it a non-issue, then why does every story you read mention her disability. And why does she go to the school for the blind before the Boston Marathon with the press in tow. I think she is a great athlete, but I also think she makes her vision an issue by trying to make it a non-issue.
Back to the question in hand. Several years ago someone (not sure who) suggested that race prize money should be handed out by performance between the men and women than by place. So, all the prize money is placed into one hat, and then drawn out of on place according to the ranking of performance. This mostly would mean that a man would get the first spot in most races, but then you would have also those instance (such as London with Paula's time) where a woman would get the top prize. Probably will never happen, but you never know. Women's running has great runners, just not the depth like the men.
Marla's Publicist...... wrote:
Shud Up-
This may be off the point, but I actually think Marla does make an issue of her blindness, and the way she actually appears to go out of her way to make it a non-issue is all just part of the publicity. If she made it a non-issue, then why does every story you read mention her disability. And why does she go to the school for the blind before the Boston Marathon with the press in tow. I think she is a great athlete, but I also think she makes her vision an issue by trying to make it a non-issue.
My friend, Marla will do what she can to educate and inspire others regarding disabilities in general and blindness in particular when opportunity arises. Her level of blindness IS a non-issue to her...it's others that she must repeat her story to for the 43,127th time that turn it into an issue. Her feet are her publicists.
16x, I like your style on this issue and agree that women oughta receive equal pay.
flourescent wrote:
i love this thread and i love how 16x never actually says anything of substance but instead insults and comebacks that take away all her credibility with their rediculousness
16x has attitude. Great for her, especially on this issue.
I'd agree that women should be paid equally to men. Men compete against men for money and women compete against women for money... The notion of paying women less on account of subjective depth differences, is very unsound on a whole slew of counts.
[quote]Marla's Publicist...... wrote:
Shud Up-
This may be off the point, but I actually think Marla does make an issue of her blindness, and the way she actually appears to go out of her way to make it a non-issue is all just part of the publicity. If she made it a non-issue, then why does every story you read mention her disability. And why does she go to the school for the blind before the Boston Marathon with the press in tow. I think she is a great athlete, but I also think she makes her vision an issue by trying to make it a non-issue.
Good Point...Since I have as of yet failed to take a stance on way or the other, I'll say that I don't really think the relative quality of the men's and women's fields should be a determining factor in allocating prize money in road races. If all the money was thrown in a hat and then distributed as you have said, then that might deter some women (or whichever sex has less depth that race) from showing up to a race because they would know that they won't get anything for finishing in the top 5 because there are 10 Kenyans that will have better relative performance rankings, thereby further depleting the quality of depth of the field...
if the women what equal pay. Simple run as fast as the men. I hate this affimative action feminist bs.
Broken Runner wrote:
The idea of equal pay in sports is a ridiculous concept. Extrapolate the equal pay idea to basketball and then you could make the argument that some female players in the WNBA should get as much as Kobe Bryant. You should only get paid as much as someone thinks you are worth. Why does Webb get paid so much when other runners are better than him? Somebody out there thinks he is worth it?
Running is not a union organized steel mill factory job. Nobody can just go to a race and expect to get paid no matter what. If for some reason a female is a big draw like Radcliffe, then they will make their big money. Being comparatively better than the opposite sex means nothing when it comes to money.
They are talking about prize money, you know, the cash you get AFTER the freakin' race. Not a paycheck like the NBA, not a sponsorship like Webb and Radcliff. Try checking out the Sylvan Learning Center in you area and learn to read.
hornet power wrote:
if the women what equal pay. Simple run as fast as the men. I hate this affimative action feminist bs.
Run as fast as the men...hp, that's hardly a simple way to square things up. Your point/argument is shallow, bordering on embarrassing.
What needs saying is the women are already receiving equal pay in road racing and reaction here is beside the point.
Women have been treated (and continue to be treated) as second-class citizens for thousands of years in practically every culture. Only in the past 50-60 years with the greatest changes coming in the last 30, have women started catching up to the men in pay, opportunity, etc.
That running, particularly US road racing leads the way in equal pay compared to other global sports is cool!
Millions of women throughout the world live lives depraved of basic human rights, only because they are women. Women are bought and sold, raped and beaten, forced to marry... Being a proponent of women's rights is being a proponent for human dignity.Fortunately in the US things are much progressed. But, can you believe that it took American women's suffrage movement 70 some years after 1848 to make the then controversial notion of women's right to vote a reality? Anyone who thinks women aren't still discriminated against in the US today, is just wrong.
scotth wrote:
[quote]hornet power wrote:
That running, particularly US road racing leads the way in equal pay compared to other global sports is cool!
Scotth, I couldn't agree more!
There is no question that the men's field is far deeper with talent than the women's field at all races. This is for 2 basic reasons. One, there are almost always more men in a race than women, and in some cases there is a very large gap. Look at the first example presented, the PGH Marathon. 70% male, 30% female. There are more than twice as many men in the field as women. I checked the field, 1532 men, 676 women. Let's assume they give money equally to top 10 (I'm not sure of the money structure for this marathon). For a male to make the top 10, he must beat 1522 other runners; for a female to make the top 10, she must beat 666 runners. Assuming they get paid equally for 10th place, the male must beat 2.3 times as many men to get the same amount of money.
Looking at it from a percentage point of view, to make the top 10 a male must beat 99.35% of the men's field; a female must beat 98.5% of the women's field. This does not seem like much of a difference; however, it you apply these percentages the difference becomes readily apparent. For a women to beat 99.35% of the women's field, she would have to finish in 4.4th place, or roughly between 4th and 5th. So why shouldn't the 5th place female receive the same money as the 10th place male? After all, they both performed equally well AGAINST THEIR OWN SEX. (I highlighted that so I don't hear the pathetic response of "worry about your own race" - I AM talking about the races separately.) This is entirely an objective point of view using basic race statistics.
The second reason why men's field's are deeper is more subjective and has to do with society. With regards to athletics, a male is EXPECTED to be highly successful. Few men participate in sports just to "participate"; the male ego prevents this. Men must prove their "manhood" by being a champion in their repsective sports. This is true of running also. It is not enough to compete; men MUST win. It is a blow to the male ego to lose. This drives the average man to be more competitive than the average woman. Before you jump on this statement, notice I said AVERAGE. There are surely many women who are more competitive than men. Lynn Jennings comes to mind, and more contemporary, Paula Radcliffe or even Shalane Flanagan. They seem to have an unparalleled drive for success, rivaling any man's drive for success. As a result, they dominate.
This difference between male and female competitiveness is especially eveident at the high school level. If a coach can get his girl's team in shape, regardless of their talent, they will be successful. Maybe not state champions if they lack talent, but they will be very competitive. On the other hand, it is not enough for a HS boy's team to get in shape. An "in shape" boys team will get their ass handed to them by most teams. Being "in shape" is not enough due to the nature of the competitive spirit and male ego that drives males on in sports.
I know I've rambled here. I'm done now. Damn, 16x is going to give me hell for this post :)
Statistics don't lie wrote:
I'm done now. Damn, 16x is going to give me hell for this post :)
I'm not going to give you hell about your post, but I wish you would stick with the same name throughout a thread - and don't tell me you aren't under several different names...your writing style and bitterness comes through as a signature style.
It is a fact that boys don't do as well in school as girls do, this carries through to higher education and even into graduate school. What do you think we should do about this?
Should we ask them to pay more, or possibly tax the parents of boys more in public school so that we can educate them up to the level that the girl's enjoy? Why are we spending the same amount per child when boys apparantly aren't either motivated or as equipped to excel in these learning situations? Boys have equality in education, but cease to show the same results as girls. Inferior? less motivated? cultural? What should we do about it?
Why do all have the priveledge of voting, clearly there are folks who are more informed, more educated to make decisions about our government. But everyone over the age of 18 is given the same opportunity to cast a ballot. Why?
But we educate boys and girls the same, people have voting rights regarless of their cognitive skills, why? Because there are reasons to quit drawing lines and boundaries to keep people on the outside based on some perception of "inferiority". You want to be the person to draw the lines and the boundaries? Good. You can start a road race and you can hand out the prize money any way you want to at your race, nobody's going to stop you. There's a guy in Texas who's handing it out to spectators!
First of all, 16x, you got me. I DID post under 2 different names in this thread. Do you want to know what the other one was? Equal Pay???, that?s right, the person who introduced this thread. I wanted to wait a few days to see people?s opinions before expressing mine. Notice what my last statement in that post said: let?s try to refrain from personal attacks and stick to the topic. And yet, who was the FIRST person to make a rude comment? You were. So, since I have avoided personal attack thus far and you?ve resorted to nothing but such comments, I?m going to throw a few your direction in this post.
Secondly, I loved your post about the inferiority of males in academics. Maybe you should do some research first. It is very hard to compare school to school, etc., but one test that is constant across the nation for all students regardless of sex is the SAT. The results surprised me. I knew that males would dominate females on the math SAT, but I was shocked to see that males have outperformed females on the verbal portion as well. The statistics I looked at (the link is below) were from the years 1960, 1967 ? 1993, and 1995. Why it skipped years, I don?t know. That?s beside the point. The results show that during these 29 years, males scored higher on the math portion EVERY year and on the verbal portion every year since 1972. Male verbal average is 439.8, female is 434.2; in math, male average is 500.6, female is 455.0. For this nearly 30-year period, males averaged 940.4, while females averaged 889.2, giving males a higher score by an average of 51.2. Don?t you hate statistics?
Hmm, more statistics presented. Still no rude comments, although that last one was kind of sarcastic. I?m doing good so far ?
Third, you have posted 8 times to this thread and have yet to provide any evidence or argument as to WHY women should be paid the same in road races. The closest statement that resembled an argument was, ?A intelligent Race Director isn't going to piss off 35% of the total runners, or alienate the fastest growing segment of new runners - women. Running companies cater to women because who spends money on lots of outfits and lot of shoes? Women do. We can outspend you guys any day of the week.? So your reasons why women deserve equal pay in road racing are: 1) race directors shouldn?t piss off 35% of the runners, and 2) shopping. SHOPPING? SHOPPING???!!!!!! Are you kidding?! You have to be joking! Hey, I can?t argue with you, women can outspend men any day. This is why they deserve equal pay in your opinion? Let?s see, we pay the women, they spend it, the economy improves, unemployment declines, jobs are plentiful, and the entire country prospers! I get it now!
Oh, by the way, before I forget, here?s that link to the SAT scores. It even has a nice graph if you like looking at pictures rather than reading words. After all, female verbal scores ARE lower than males.
http://christianparty.net/sat1966_1992.htm
Also, one last thing. Your statement, ?A intelligent race director ?? is not correct. In the English language, we have an option of using ?a? or ?an? in cases like this. In the case where the next word begins with a vowel (a, e, i, o, or u if you need help), you should choose the ?an.? BUT WAIT! There are exceptions to this rule, such as when the next word begins with a silent h, such as hour. Although it begins with a consonant, you still use ?an.? We don?t say, ?a hour? but instead ?an hour.? And yes, the h here is silent; the word is not pronounced like ?whore.? You always wondered what whores have to do with clocks, minutes, and seconds, didn?t you? I hope I cleared that up. Just doing my part to raise female verbal skills.
Also, ?Why do all have the priveledge of voting, clearly there are folks who are more informed, more educated to make decisions about our government. But everyone over the age of 18 is given the same opportunity to cast a ballot. Why?? It is called the 26th amendment. If a person is old enough to die in combat for his country then he is old enough to vote for his country?s leaders. And ?privileged? is spelled wrong in your post.
Damn, I almost made it through that without any insults. Almost.
First of all, I feel it fair to say that you are a liar, you denied writing under another name, now you say it was two names, and something tells me it was many more. You can't hide your bitter style....
And here some links you might want to try that don't reflect some religious right propoganda catman.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/31/60minutes/main527678.shtml
http://www.edweek.org/ew/newstory.cfm?slug=39gender.h21
http://www.familyeducation.com/article/0,1120,1-10228,00.html
You should state that your statistics about male/boy education achievements come from you Right Wing Christian
MALE RIGHTS propoganda magazine, by which we can accurately judge the tone of all of your posts - Males are superior in everything, period. If that is the shit your accustomed to reading, I know where your coming from, and I'm not at all impressed. Quoting anything other than the NEA, the National Organization for Education, is much like quoting me stats about running you found in a skiing magazine.
So how are things over there at Oral Roberts University? Any lynchings held recently? Any Abortion Clinic bombings int he making?
Here's a quote from the U.S. Department of Education
"The Condition of Education," issued by the U.S. Department of Education in 1997, says much of the same. For the last 13 years, females have significantly outscored males in reading and writing. Boys have fallen behind.
For those of you following this post, I want you to see what Equal Pay?? Equality ?? and whoever else he is, is reading. Now you can understand the original post and just what sort of twisted minds are out there...scary....
16x,
you are a friggin? idiot. You think I too am just the same women-hater person who is posting under different names right? I have only posted under one name here, and I sure most of others also did the same. All of these people disagreeing with you ARE DIFFERENT PEOPLE (as far as I can tell). Are you capable of believing that? Are you capable of believing that on a board dominated by men there might be lots of men who agree with each on an issue that pits men vs. women?? That would be shocking, huh? Are you capable of believing that out of all of those DIFFERENT men that some( I am speaking for myself) of them might NOT be your stereo-typical women-bashing men-are-superior at all things right wingers (as you called them)? Is it POSSIBLE that you are wrong and we are right on this issue? Are you capable of believing any of that? You won?t even consider any of those possibilities it for a nano-second.
As I said before, I am as liberal as they come. I support Affirmative Action, support A WOMEN?S RIGHT TO CHOOSE, & I think any wife-beater (Jason Kidd) should be jailed for a looooooooong time. I just don?t think women deserve = pay in running where they perform poorer from an absolute or relative standpoint And I and others have given many rational reasons why not. In Pro Figure Skating, if a woman is a bigger draw than a man, should they pay the man the same as the women?? No. And I bet you don?t think so either. Why should YOU get paid more than the last-place women?? Because you beat her?? Maybe she is a genetically inferior athlete, as you are compared to the top men. But no, that?s different, right? Let?s split all the $ equally, and everyone gets paid exactly the same, from first to last, how about that? Would that make you happy? Being an extreme women libber, are you EVER HAPPY?.or are you always just feeling angry towards men & the way that they have treated women all these years. Is that it?
Women usually use the following argument to explain why girls don?t perform as well as boys in school: boys are treated better in High School, girls are afraid to raise their hands, girls don?t want to be smart because boys won?t like them, girls are biased against in grading because they are not jocks, male teachers prefer male students, blah, blah, blah, blah (completely ignoring that there are as many sociological reasons why BOYS don?t want to do well in school, i.e. the popular boys are not brainiacs, boys get way more positive feedback from their friends for being class clowns and being jocks, etc etc). And I am sure you agree with those alleged biases (I am sure you suffered a lot from those phallic, testosterone dominated schools). But you propose that despite ALL those biases and hurdles, women actually DO BETTER than males in school. Wow. Now I really do want to be a girl, because despite the longest odds and obstacles, they are kicking males? asses in school. Or?.were some of those biases just made up/exaggerated before by women libbers like yourself?? Maybe girls have not been at a disadvantage in school for a loooooong time. But no, you won?t accept that(here is quote from the article you linked: ? ?All the rhetoric in the gender equity movement is about how schools shortchange girls. There was almost nothing about how we could reach out to boys,? says Christina Hoff Sommers, a former college professor, now at the American Enterprise Institute. SHE BLAMES THE LACK OF ATTENTION TO BOYS' PROBLEMS ON FEMINISTS. ? See, you feminists got your revenge!!! Maybe some day you can arrange it so women get paid MORE than men in road races?that would be to your taste, right?). The only thing you accept is: women are biased against everywhere, men have it much easier, women suffer from men?s hatred everywhere, but despite all that WOMEN PREVAIL IN THE BATTLE OF THE SEXES!!!! Is that the way you see the world?
So many questions for 16x from so many (DIFFERENT people)?.and so few rational answers. It must be ?that time? of the month for her. Give her a few days. Oh wait?she is ALWAYS like this. She is not just PMS?ing, but a permanent BITCH!! HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
scotth wrote:
Run as fast as the men...hp, that's hardly a simple way to square things up. Your point/argument is shallow, bordering on embarrassing.
What needs saying is the women are already receiving equal pay in road racing and reaction here is beside the point.
Women have been treated (and continue to be treated) as second-class citizens for thousands of years in practically every culture. Only in the past 50-60 years with the greatest changes coming in the last 30, have women started catching up to the men in pay, opportunity, etc.
That running, particularly US road racing leads the way in equal pay compared to other global sports is cool!
Great post.
"That running, particularly US road racing leads the way in equal pay compared to other global sports is cool!"
Terrible post!
So, equal pay, unless I missed it, are you for or against equal pay for men and women in road races?
Somewhere above you take a shot at explaining why there aren't more competitive women compared to men. I didn't see you note that women have only had the kinds of competitive advantages and opportunities (that men have had for 3000 years) for a mere 25 years or so. I see a decided discrepancy there. That, my friend, is THE explanation why there aren't equal numbers of competitive men and women.
How the sexes respond to athletic opportunities, competitive situations and such is an entirely different subject but one that can also largely be explained by the vast difference in time that men and women have had in sports.
16x times can't stand the heat wrote:
16x,
you are a friggin? idiot. You think I too am just the same women-hater person who is posting under different names right?
So many questions for 16x from so many (DIFFERENT people)?.and so few rational answers. It must be ?that time? of the month for her. Give her a few days. Oh wait?she is ALWAYS like this. She is not just PMS?ing, but a permanent BITCH!! HELP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
yes, actually you are the same woman-hater poster in all the threads - yes, you just use different names.
you really need to get a handle on your rage about women.
Next question?