Is it right that the 'Race for Life' is women only?

Watch
This discussion is closed.
Dann
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 13 years ago
#1
The other day I walked through my kitchen and saw a bunch of forms my sister had picked up as part of the paperwork for the 'Race for Life', Cancer Reasearch UK's women-only 5 kilometer fundraiser.

It got me thinking, and I could not help but find it slightly odd to have such an event...I know that there is an equivalent race for men-only, ' Run for Moore', but as far as I can tell, that doesn't have the same publicity, and to be frank, why should it? The very title of the women's 'Race for Life' seems to hold far more gravitas, and what's more, the funds received in the equivalent male event go exclusively towards bowel cancer, wheras the women's event goes towards cancer research as a whole. In my mind these two factors are probably indicative of the 'Race for Life' being a far more high profile event that the 'Run for Moore.'

If this is the case, my question is, is it right to promote an event like 'Race for Life' as exclusively women only when it has enough media attention and public recognition to justify shedding the novelty value of a single-sex event?

Surely if men were allowed to race in 'Race for Life' then that could only produce more funds for charity. As it is I would imagine many males might not race in their own 'Run for Moore' as it is not as well known; and even were they to know of the event, by making proceeds go to bowel cancer only, the event might seem less applicable to many people.

I recognise women's rights to support causes, but I am dubious as to whether the division of events for different sexes is the best way to attract the most sponsorship.

Thoughts please
0
Agent Smith
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#2
Report 13 years ago
#2
No. Two wrongs don't make a right, although admittedly it's such a petty issue that it doesn't really matter.
0
Tufts
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#3
Report 13 years ago
#3
I cant see the problem tbh. What's wrong with a little female solidarity? Women feel more comfortable in eachothers company, particularly when exercising. That's why the demand for women-only gyms is on the increase. There's no reason why the men cant raise more publicity more their event.
1
The_Bear
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#4
Report 13 years ago
#4
I'm also for "normal people only high streets", so many ****ing oddballs on the streets today. I'm sure the demand is high for that too...does that make it ok?
0
Dann
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#5
Report Thread starter 13 years ago
#5
(Original post by The_Bear)
I'm also for "normal people only high streets", so many ****ing oddballs on the streets today. I'm sure the demand is high for that too...does that make it ok?
I'm not terribly sure what you mean by this, but I believe you are saying that just because (potentially, I by no means know) there is high demand from males to race in the event it doesn't mean it should be allowed. Which is fair enough, but your example is quite far removed isn't it? Kicking people off the street makes things LESS inclusive and accessible, wheras allowing men to participate would be the other way round...

Thanks to the other posters though. Yeah, Tufts, I can definately see that, I was in two minds about it though. I suppose I never really considered whether women would be comfortable exercising with men or not. Cheers.
0
tehjonny
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#6
Report 13 years ago
#6
(Original post by Tufts)
I cant see the problem tbh. What's wrong with a little female solidarity? Women feel more comfortable in eachothers company, particularly when exercising. That's why the demand for women-only gyms is on the increase. There's no reason why the men cant raise more publicity more their event.
I thought that kind of thing was discrimination...
0
Locked
Badges: 0
#7
Report 13 years ago
#7
The name of the event has two meanings, taken a particular way it appears very sexist.
0
Tufts
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#8
Report 13 years ago
#8
(Original post by tehjonny)
I thought that kind of thing was discrimination...
Providing women with a safe secure space in which they can exercise and feel comfortable about their bodies is descrimination? There are plenty of male only places in society too. Why should we moan when women (whom are often viewed as sexual objects) want to exercise in peace and safety?
0
Square
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#9
Report 13 years ago
#9
If it was a male-only race there would be public uproar, accusations of sexism.

The whole 'Feminism' argument is so one-sided its really rediciulous. I mean I can understand about the right to vote, but the things that get picked up on nowadays is just nitpicking, trying to get their names in the papers/news really. Another example of how incredibly over-PC the UK has become.

(Original post by Tufts)
Providing women with a safe secure space in which they can exercise and feel comfortable about their bodies is descrimination? There are plenty of male only places in society too. Why should we moan when women (whom are often viewed as sexual objects) want to exercise in peace and safety?
Please, all male-only societies get outcast and heckled at by feminists because they don't allow women in. Would a male complain about a women-only gym? No. Would a female complain about a male-only gym? Yes.

Its all very hypocritical, they just want to argue for the sake of having a go at men.

Give women seperate gyms!
Let men and women compete in the same sporting tournaments!
1
tehjonny
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#10
Report 13 years ago
#10
(Original post by Tufts)
Providing women with a safe secure space in which they can exercise and feel comfortable about their bodies is descrimination? There are plenty of male only places in society too. Why should we moan when women (whom are often viewed as sexual objects) want to exercise in peace and safety?
Yes, the presence of men automatically disturbs the peace and makes women unsafe. That is an awful attitude to half of humanity, and above all entirely false. Men are not violent and disruptive just because they are men.

It could also be said that men shouldn't have to be discriminated against because of womens attitudes towards their physicality, reinforced mainly by idiotic female aimed media.
1
Tufts
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#11
Report 13 years ago
#11
(Original post by tehjonny)
Men are not violent and disruptive just because they are men.
Yuck. Where did I say that?
0
tehjonny
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#12
Report 13 years ago
#12
You said:

Providing women with a safe secure space in which they can exercise and feel comfortable about their bodies is descrimination?


Suggesting that women are unable to exercise safely in the presence of men. E.g. men are inherently violent.

You don't need to say something to say something. Women can already exercise in safety at a normal gym. To suggest they cannot do so because men are their, well...doesn't take a genius.
0
HistoryStudent
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#13
Report 13 years ago
#13
I doubt she meant that some women would feel uncomfortable exercising because of men being inherently violent - I think she meant that they would feel uncomfortable about showing their bodies (especially if they are unfit and have flab) when exercising when men are around to see it. They probably just feel more comfortable about showing themselves when exercising when only other women are around.
0
tehjonny
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#14
Report 13 years ago
#14
(Original post by HistoryStudent)
I doubt she meant that some women would feel uncomfortable exercising because of men being inherently violent - I think she meant that they would feel uncomfortable about showing their bodies (especially if they are unfit and have flab) when exercising when men are around to see it. They probably just feel more comfortable about showing themselves when exercising when only other women are around.
So why the use of the word 'safe'?

You think that isn't equally true of blokes?
0
HistoryStudent
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#15
Report 13 years ago
#15
Women tend to be more insecure about their bodies than men, as can be seen by the ever-present debate about the link between the media, body image and eating disorders. Plus wasn't there a massive survey not long ago about women and body image which backed this up to a high degree? (I heard it on the radio at work a few weeks ago and didn't think to remember.) Isn't this getting off topic though? It's not on the topic of guys not wanting to exercise with women, but the other way round.
0
tehjonny
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#16
Report 13 years ago
#16
(Original post by HistoryStudent)
Women tend to be more insecure about their bodies than men, as can be seen by the ever-present debate about the link between the media, body image and eating disorders. Plus wasn't there a massive survey not long ago about women and body image which backed this up to a high degree? (I heard it on the radio at work a few weeks ago and didn't think to remember.) Isn't this getting off topic though? It's not on the topic of guys not wanting to exercise with women, but the other way round.
Let me be clear, I've no problem with divisions upon gender lines if they make sense, or are fairly arbitrary.

I do however take issue with someone suggesting women are not safe if they exercise in the same room as men. These views are all to common with women today (e.g. men are animals unable to control themselves), and they are simply wrong.
0
Phil.Murray
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#17
Report 13 years ago
#17
This whole feminism thing really does annoy me. Why are female-only races, gyms, etc acceptable? Discrimination works both ways, and is never acceptable. Feminism was necessary last century; not now. And why can't men run in the Race and raise money for such a good cause just because they have a penis? Stupid!
0
RK
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#18
Report 13 years ago
#18
(Original post by Dann)
The other day I walked through my kitchen and saw a bunch of forms my sister had picked up as part of the paperwork for the 'Race for Life', Cancer Reasearch UK's women-only 5 kilometer fundraiser.

It got me thinking, and I could not help but find it slightly odd to have such an event...I know that there is an equivalent race for men-only, ' Run for Moore', but as far as I can tell, that doesn't have the same publicity, and to be frank, why should it? The very title of the women's 'Race for Life' seems to hold far more gravitas, and what's more, the funds received in the equivalent male event go exclusively towards bowel cancer, wheras the women's event goes towards cancer research as a whole. In my mind these two factors are probably indicative of the 'Race for Life' being a far more high profile event that the 'Run for Moore.'

If this is the case, my question is, is it right to promote an event like 'Race for Life' as exclusively women only when it has enough media attention and public recognition to justify shedding the novelty value of a single-sex event?

Surely if men were allowed to race in 'Race for Life' then that could only produce more funds for charity. As it is I would imagine many males might not race in their own 'Run for Moore' as it is not as well known; and even were they to know of the event, by making proceeds go to bowel cancer only, the event might seem less applicable to many people.

I recognise women's rights to support causes, but I am dubious as to whether the division of events for different sexes is the best way to attract the most sponsorship.

Thoughts please
I think I agree with you entirely. I do not ee why the hell any charity event needs to exclude anyone, be it Race for Life or Race for Moore.

Sadly the mens race for Moore is so much less known about. So fewer men can take part in it than perhaps would want to.

I was not aware that Race for Life is a general cancer fund raiser...I thought it was more for female cancers, but still that doesn't matter. But I would have tried to take part last year, in memory of my Grandma who died of breast cancer. To have something well known all organised for you is a great way to try and raise money. The fact it is all set up for you allows to still take part even if you have little time to organise something from sratch.

Sadly, there was nothing else held near my last year which was organised. So I was not able to do much. But I will try to do something this summer...you've got me thinking of this sort of thing again...at least one good thing has come out of the exclusion of individuals from certain charitable events.
0
RK
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#19
Report 13 years ago
#19
(Original post by phil_m88)
This whole feminism thing really does annoy me. Why are female-only races, gyms, etc acceptable? Discrimination works both ways, and is never acceptable. Feminism was necessary last century; not now. And why can't men run in the Race and raise money for such a good cause just because they have a penis? Stupid!
It's like all discrimination...if you are part of the group which has historically been the one not discriminated against, then today people accept discrimination against you.

The worst group to be in for this is young, white, English, hetrosexual males.
0
Phil.Murray
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#20
Report 13 years ago
#20
(Original post by Roger Kirk)
The worst group to be in for this is young, white, English, hetrosexual males.
Great.....:rolleyes:
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

What do you want most from university virtual open days and online events?

I want to be able to watch in my own time rather than turn up live (192)
29.54%
I want to hear more about the specifics of the course (108)
16.62%
I want to be able to dip in and dip out of lots of different sessions (58)
8.92%
I want to meet current students (54)
8.31%
I want to meet academics and the people that will be teaching me (51)
7.85%
I want to have a taster lecture or workshop to see what the teaching is like (128)
19.69%
My parents/guardians are more interested than me to be honest (38)
5.85%
Other things – I'll tell you in the thread (21)
3.23%

Watched Threads

View All