Would it be sexist to have more male than female prize money at road races?

Yes, it is sexist. Faster does not mean better when comparing men to women. As for your whining about the "much larger number of males," well in that case let's give more prize money to Kenyan males than American males because there is a larger percentage of their population training and competing for the top spots too.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Yes, it is sexist. Faster does not mean better when comparing men to women. As for your whining about the "much larger number of males," well in that case let's give more prize money to Kenyan males than American males because there is a larger percentage of their population training and competing for the top spots too.

Prize money isn't a charity handout, it's a business. If more people pay to watch the men than the women then that is who should get more money. Do you think that NBA players should make the same as WNBA players?

I'm looking forward to more males identifying as women to enter "female" athletics. That will shut up the sexism shouters.

http://www.letsrun.com/news/2015/07/the-end-of-womens-sports-as-we-know-it-is-caster-semenya-the-favorite-for-gold-for-the-2016-olympics-the-court-of-arbitration-for-sport-suspends-iaafs-hyperandrogenism-regulations/

no no no wrote:

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Yes, it is sexist. Faster does not mean better when comparing men to women. As for your whining about the "much larger number of males," well in that case let's give more prize money to Kenyan males than American males because there is a larger percentage of their population training and competing for the top spots too.

Prize money isn't a charity handout, it's a business. If more people pay to watch the men than the women then that is who should get more money. Do you think that NBA players should make the same as WNBA players?

No one pays to watch running

Rockgip wrote:

no no no wrote:

Prize money isn't a charity handout, it's a business. If more people pay to watch the men than the women then that is who should get more money. Do you think that NBA players should make the same as WNBA players?

No one pays to watch running

Lol, I was thinking of saying the same thing. This thread is so silly.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Yes, it is sexist. Faster does not mean better when comparing men to women. As for your whining about the "much larger number of males," well in that case let's give more prize money to Kenyan males than American males because there is a larger percentage of their population training and competing for the top spots too.

You switched from an absolute number to a percentage. That's an apples and oranges comparison, and quite meaningless.

fdf wrote:

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Yes, it is sexist. Faster does not mean better when comparing men to women. As for your whining about the "much larger number of males," well in that case let's give more prize money to Kenyan males than American males because there is a larger ̶p̶e̶r̶c̶e̶n̶t̶a̶g̶e̶ number of their population training and competing for the top spots too.

You switched from an absolute number to a percentage. That's an apples and oranges comparison, and quite meaningless.

Fixed.

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Yes, it is sexist. Faster does not mean better when comparing men to women. As for your whining about the "much larger number of males," well in that case let's give more prize money to Kenyan males than American males because there is a larger percentage of their population training and competing for the top spots too.

Kenyans already get a lot more prize money than Americans in major marathons.

There aren't as many E. African professional women runners as men runners because it is still taboo for E. African women to pursue a career in running instead of having children. But for that cultural barrier, there would be just as many E. African women as men at races. Cutting prize money for E. African women would just further the power of men over women in E. African. In Ethiopia, female pro runners are seen as women's liberation figures.

The women's marathon has actually been more exciting than the men's for a while because international runners have been competitive with the E. Africans. Deena, Shalane, and Desi have been right up there with the E. Africans in a way no non-E. African male has. Molly Huddle looks to be a good bet to be competitive in the marathon given her success so far in the half. It would be silly to want to defund the women's prize money when US women are competitive. Maybe the opposite should happen. Maybe the men should give up prize money. All the men's races are just African championships. Non-E. African men have not been competitive since Ryan Hall's 2006 London and wind aided Boston. Otherwise, no non-E. AFrican has been close in the marathon.

Clam Evans wrote:

bloob wrote:

Should there be prize money at a half marathon with 762 participants and an $85 early bird registration fee and $100 race day fee??

No way, someone's got to pay to close down half of that bike path

Ha! there is not one bike path in the entire town. Lots of rural road though. Roads did get backed up a bit. This running shoe store also doesn't sponsor people that 49 seconds away from the trials half marathon B standard. Just rich cheap asses.

This is true at the very top. But just from an American standpoint there is far more depth on the mens side than the womens. Just look at how much tougher the trials standards are on the mens side. For example in the marathon the B standard is roughly 15 min slower than WR. On the womens side its about 28min. That is a huge difference.

no no no wrote:

txRUNNERgirl wrote:

Yes, it is sexist. Faster does not mean better when comparing men to women. As for your whining about the "much larger number of males," well in that case let's give more prize money to Kenyan males than American males because there is a larger percentage of their population training and competing for the top spots too.

Prize money isn't a charity handout, it's a business. If more people pay to watch the men than the women then that is who should get more money. Do you think that NBA players should make the same as WNBA players?

One difference between the NBA and WNBA is that they are now different organizations. The race directors, controlling both the men's and women's races, need to be seen as impartial.

As other posters stated, appearance fees and time bonuses, along with sponsors, can pay different amounts to the genders to make pay more equivalent to talent. The most I've ever made at a race was $500, the most I ever made in a year was $1500, probably around $3500 my entire career unless I can make another breakthrough as a master. By the time you get as slow me we aren't talking about life changing amounts of money, so who really cares how much money goes to the local 21K champion.

The whole idea of gender divisions in athletics is inherently sexist. Right? If it's not, someone please explain to me the non-sexist premises that this separation is based upon.

It should be separate but equal. Totally not sexist...

a Dvck wrote:

It should be separate but equal. Totally not sexist...

Why should it be separate?

There is a local road race billed as the fastest race at that distance. The women's world record was set at this race several (many?) years ago. The men's world record for the distance was held at this race until last year.

Currently, the male winner gets $5k down to 8th place male getting $250 I think. If the men's world record is broken there is a $10,008 bonus. Women's prize money = $0.00

Almost 1/2 men, 1/2 women this year (skewed slightly to the men). Nobody cares the prize money is split the way it is. It's a fun event. The bonus for the men's world record creates a buzz around the event. Seeing the (semi) elite foreign athletes amazes people. Sam Chelanga ran it last year, which is one of the more recognizable names I've seen in the results.

I'd say the only people who are mad are the B/C level Kenyan and Ethiopian women who aren't being brought in to complete for $5k. They usually scare up about 12 elite men to run.

Women shouldn't be allowed in races period. They should be home taking care of the kids, cleaning the house, cooking my dinner, and giving me sex whenever I want.

Gender Blind wrote:

Yes It Would Be wrote:

Yes it would be sexist

Thank you for your intelligent post and use of arguments to back up your opinion.

I agree that putting more prize money in one gender would be perceived as sexist. But is it really? If the guys are just flat out better shouldn't it be ok to put more money out for them. No one cares that professional mens athletes make way more than female counterparts in almost every other sport.

should they only have bronze medals for them too?

they are flat out worse right?

Liberalism = a mental disorder wrote:

According to Third Wave Feminism ALL men are sexist, so why bother trying anymore.

_____________

Actually, no. According to third wave feminism, sexism is an attribute of culture that impacts all people, regardless of gender.