Funny how the RD jumped straight to charge more mentality rather than offering females 23% more prize money.
Funny how the RD jumped straight to charge more mentality rather than offering females 23% more prize money.
TheBottomLine wrote:
Funny how the RD jumped straight to charge more mentality rather than offering females 23% more prize money.
Elitist!
Anyway, kind of a funny way to market the whole idea. They could have marketed it as "women will receive a 23% discount" instead of "men will pay 23% more." Wouldn't that have left everyone feeling better about the whole idea?
Couldn't they just income link it? Why should a woman earning $10mil a year get a discount over a man earning $15k a year?
Stupid, but they got the press they were after I guess.
If I were in Des Moines that day I'd bandit the race and hit every aid station, cross the finish line, ignore the medal girls, keep going straight to the post-race food, stuff my face with food (with as much falling out of my mouth as going in) and then turn around and yell .... GGMFs
I suspect this was an April Fools' prank.
Brojos: please remove the link to this article from your front page. There is no text on the race website about men paying more to run. In addition, the race is named the Des Moines Women's Half Marathon. There is no reason to think men are even allowed to enter.
100/77 = 1.2987.... menactually make 29.87% more, based on this statistic, can't just go 100-77=23.
Karl must not be hungus wrote:
Well, the mere fact that something as trivial as this gets you to thinking about identifying as a female says a lot about you.
It's ok that you don't embrace gender diversity and are closed minded.
Are women paid 23% less than men or are men paid 23% more than women?
It doesn't seem like any of these people understand basic math. If women are paid 23% less, then you'd have to charge men almost 30% more to get the same ratio.
I wonder what the gender distribution of their entries will look like? One would think that the only possible reason for doing this is to attract more women (more likely, to discourage some of the men) but in my local area most half-marathons are already more than 50% female. No special incentives are needed to get women to run this distance.
Dhhhss wrote:
“As a male registering for this event, you recognize that your registration cost will be 23 percent higher to reflect current wage inequality between men"
Men should just bandit the race and run for free alongside someone who paid hard earned money for it to reflect the leech that women are on their male counterparts
Very ironic in the sport of distance running where women are paid much more for their performances than virtually all of the men who run considerably faster than them ...
I don't know why people would get so up in arms about this. If you are a guy and really wanted to do it what is is the big deal with $75+$17.25?
But as a guy why would you spend $92.25 to run 13.1 miles and probably get a free glass of wine at the end?
Clearly this race caters to more of a social aspect and camaraderie of getting women to run together, enjoy themselves and have a glass of wine. So really who cares what they charge a guy to run it. It's the race directories choie to charge what they want
1) It looks like no comp'd entry for elite women
2) looks like no prize money
3) looks like no award ceremony
4) at a vineyard
5) obviously no prize incentive for men
Signs all point to a social run for ladies. Why is this even a big deal?
I think the problem most would have with a pricing structure like this is the fact that the wage gap is a made up pile of crap. Take two individuals with the same education, experience, length of time worked and positions and there CAN be a very small
What the hell kind of wine are they making in Des Moines, Iowa?! Can't imagine it's anything other than sweet garbage. This is the true travesty of this "event."
I'm not disagreeing with #YOBRO
All I'm saying is that this is race (product) is targeted toward women nothing about it makes it seem like it's even relevant for a man to want to race it.
I'm sure if a sports bra company wanted to sell sports bras at $50 dollars to women and $61.50 to men why would it matter as (virtually all) men are not in the market for a sports bra for themselves. Or if tampons were on sale for 25% off for women would it matter to you as you're not in the market to purchase any? Nope.
Same with this race. It's clearly targeted toward women. I'm sure men's participation in a Women's Race is marginal at best, so why not cater to your audience.
The News with Brian Williams wrote:
wtfnotsecure wrote:Male Runner Lives Matter
#blockthecourse #resist #protest
Thank you for your good fight. Remember:
The penis mightier than the sword.
+100000
Entering a race SPECIFICALLY advertised as being for women when you're a man is a major d-bag move in my opinion.
No more d-bag than an Italian getting drunk on St. Patrick's Day to celebrate Irish stereotypes.
We have a women's half marathon that plenty of men entered and ran. It only got weird to me a few years later when men started racing it and crossing the finish line first. They still had separate mens and womens divisions. Everyone did get a rose when they crossed the finish line, so no discrimination there.
excellent math wrote:
100/77 = 1.2987.... menactually make 29.87% more, based on this statistic, can't just go 100-77=23.
Seriously, if they didn't suck so bad at math maybe they'd get paid as much as men.
Looks like course has plenty of places to cut -
+ 10 inchesquote]Plus oner of posts wrote:
The News with Brian Williams wrote:
wtfnotsecure wrote:Male Runner Lives Matter
#blockthecourse #resist #protest
Thank you for your good fight. Remember:
The penis mightier than the sword.
+100000[/quote]