Mountain Biking - UCI - Equal Prize Money for Women

Hello all
Georgia Gould is petitioning the UCI to mandate equal prize money for the top-5 men and women in UCI races. If this is something that you support please sign the petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/equalpay/petition.html and pass it on.

Cheers

...and demand that they speak English at riders' meetings!

:D

Hey, I'm all for the equal pay thing. As bass-ackwards as UCI is on so much, though, good luck.

"We, the undersigned, find it regrettable that there is still a considerable disparity between the UCI minimum prize money for men and women. We understand that because competition in the men’s field is deeper, more places receive prize money. We do not understand why the women who are receiving prize money receive less than their male counterparts. Therefore we propose that the UCI show leadership and mandate equal prize money for the top five men and women. Article 3 of the UCI Constitution states: “The UCI will carry out its activities in compliance with the principles of: a) equality between all the members and all the athletes, license-holders and officials, without racial, political, religious, or other discrimination.” We ask the UCI to honor its commitment to equality. "

Flawed Argument.

If there are less competitors in the female sector, it means that the competition organizers will receive less money. Less money equates to less prize money. It's as simple as that.

Thats why they are asking only for equal pay for the first 5 women. That is not nearly as deep as the men. Yours is the argument that is flawed.

Thats why they are asking only for equal pay for the first 5 women. That is not nearly as deep as the men. Yours is the argument that is flawed.

Then they argue that there should be as many women who receive prizes as men.

Really, they attribute all these things to "sexism", when they are, in fact, simply pragmatism. The feminist movement has gone overboard. I remember reading an article a while back that asked the question "Why shouldn't women have urinals? Why should they have to sit?"....

As devils advocate, seems to me if they wanted to "carry out its activities in compliance with the principles of: a) equality between all the members and all the athletes, license-holders and officials, without racial, political, religious, or other discrimination" ...then why discriminate by dividing the sexes into seperate catagories. Let them compete together and those that finish in the money get the money regardless of their gender.

I agree with Mikey. Let them compete together.

I think the prize money should be equal, and the number of places deep should reflect the field size. Got 50 men and 25 women? Award $$ to top 10% - 5 men, 3 women.

Although I will say, I got dirty looks froma ladies who came in 2nd & 3rd in an Expert Class, and we only gave money to 1st place.... hey there were only 3 of them.

My answer is the same for MTB races as it is for road. If they are paying the same for both sexes, guys who are top 10'ing the expert class should look into getting a sex change.

http://cache.deadspin.com/assets/resources/2006/08/purewomanchamp.jpg

As devils advocate, seems to me if they wanted to "carry out its activities in compliance with the principles of: a) equality between all the members and all the athletes, license-holders and officials, without racial, political, religious, or other discrimination" ...then why discriminate by dividing the sexes into seperate catagories. Let them compete together and those that finish in the money get the money regardless of their gender.

If you are advocating for the devil, he's isn't going to get very far. Segregation is not necessarily discrimination, though you can have discriminatory segregation.

As far as your logic goes, competitors shouldn't complain if somebody jacked up on steroids beats them when they are clean. If you and/or others agree with that, then I commend your consistency at ignorance. Men and women are different physiologically (and penisheads on this forum show that while men have the stronger bodies, women probably have the bigger brains). People that think they should compete together--to show women what equality "really" means--have been duped by the egregious form feminism that denies any sort scientifically proven biological differences between men and women.

I mean come on...that men and women should get paid the same for the same job is pretty conventional. There are certain complications because we are talking about physical capital rather than human or intellectual capital but geez.

And if you want to talk about pragmatics, it's horrible publicity for the UCI to not make the pay equal. Even if it is some sort of discrimination in favor of women; discrimination is practical.

My answer is the same for MTB races as it is for road. If they are paying the same for both sexes, guys who are top 10'ing the expert class should look into getting a sex change.

Yeah, that really captures the spirit of competition. I hope you were being facetious.

Yeah, that really captures the spirit of competition. I hope you were being facetious.

Apparently you've never raced road.

What is your take on the situation?

The sport thrives on advertising. Advertisers won't support an event that the fans don't watch.

If the promoters are asked to pay almost twice as much as they already do, for a reason that doesn't make sense, they will back out. This isn't a popular sport.

Apparently you've never raced road.

What is your take on the situation?

The sport thrives on advertising. Advertisers won't support an event that the fans don't watch.

If the promoters are asked to pay almost twice as much as they already do, for a reason that doesn't make sense, they will back out. This isn't a popular sport.

Okay...I guess your point now is different than the point about the sex change.

The sport is not popular because the promoters are not innovative. Innovative marketing can make anything popular. The "Slinky" is an icon for christ's sake. Look at the current popularity of poker, for example. Not exactly a spectator sport but there is a huge interest in it lately.

They don't have to pay twice as much anyway, do they? They can lower the pay for men. Anyway, I don't think Specialized or Trek or Crank Brothers is going to quite sponsoring racing. And isn't the theory: more money paid (for women's races), more people attracted, more competition, more people (women) buying things in aspiration and emulation of the stars.

These are all easy questions. Gone over a million times. No issue here. Sign the petition or at least do not oppose it or risk showing your disjunct from history, politics, business, and law.

These are all easy questions. Gone over a million times. No issue here. Sign the petition or at least do not oppose it or risk showing your disjunct from history, politics, business, and law.

I didn't think my opinion granted a personal attack, but whatever. It shows your character. I also have no clue where history, politics, and law fit into this discussion.

Ever seen a women's race on TV (real networks, not the OSHO)? When was the last time you saw ESPN say anything about a women's race? Watching a women's road race is like watching paint dry. If advertisers don't get exposure, they aren't expected to keep paying out of the goodness of their hearts.

If you think there is some sort of miracle fix for cycling being so unpopular, by all means, give it a shot. You wouldn't the first.

If you are advocating for the devil, he's isn't going to get very far. Segregation is not necessarily discrimination, though you can have discriminatory segregation.

As far as your logic goes, competitors shouldn't complain if somebody jacked up on steroids beats them when they are clean. If you and/or others agree with that, then I commend your consistency at ignorance. Men and women are different physiologically (and penisheads on this forum show that while men have the stronger bodies, women probably have the bigger brains). People that think they should compete together--to show women what equality "really" means--have been duped by the egregious form feminism that denies any sort scientifically proven biological differences between men and women.

I mean come on...that men and women should get paid the same for the same job is pretty conventional. There are certain complications because we are talking about physical capital rather than human or intellectual capital but geez.

And if you want to talk about pragmatics, it's horrible publicity for the UCI to not make the pay equal. Even if it is some sort of discrimination in favor of women; discrimination is practical.

Rule says "equal between all...athletes...without...discrimination." I didn't write the rules...and you seem to be advocating the breaking of the rules. If the rules need to be rewritten then so be it. I never said there shouldn't be equal pay for equal work...but is their work really "equal"? I can go race and bust my a** just like the winner does and I won't make one red cent because my performace is not "equal" to his/hers.

I am much stronger than my wife, but, she certainly has the "bigger brain"...she also makes about 30% more money than I do for 40 hrs work. But this "penis head" not complaining. :D And I sure as hell don't expect her to make less so I might make little more, as you suggest. IT'S NOT FAIR!! WAHHHHahaha!!:cry: It's not equal either...it's the MARKET PLACE.

I mean come on...that men and women should get paid the same for the same job is pretty conventional.

It is NOT the same job.

I didn't think my opinion granted a personal attack, but whatever. It shows your character. I also have no clue where history, politics, and law fit into this discussion.

Ever seen a women's race on TV (real networks, not the OSHO)? When was the last time you saw ESPN say anything about a women's race? Watching a women's road race is like watching paint dry. If advertisers don't get exposure, they aren't expected to keep paying out of the goodness of their hearts.

If you think there is some sort of miracle fix for cycling being so unpopular, by all means, give it a shot. You wouldn't the first.Watching ANY road race is like watching paint dry; watching ANY XC race is like watching dried paint weather.

This year's Jeep KOM Series showed both men's and women's races (granted with the women, they only showed semis and finals). When there is interesting racing to watch, both sexes are TV-worthy.

Hello all
Georgia Gould is petitioning the UCI to mandate equal prize money for the top-5 men and women in UCI races. If this is something that you support please sign the petition at http://www.petitiononline.com/equalpay/petition.html and pass it on.

Cheers

this is absurd.

When junior expert men are creaming the pro women, especially in DH, you can't advocate equal prize money and keep a straight face.

If 50% of bike shop customers were female, then I suppose there would be more justification.

Just thinkin'-

Don't recall if I ever heard of women and men racing DH against each other, at least as an exhibition type thing. Wonder how Missy Giove would have done back in the day.

Wonder how Missy Giove would have done back in the day.

She would have most likely lost against pro men. She would kick my ***** going down a hill though.

She would have most likely lost against pro men and dminor.

Just thinkin'-

Don't recall if I ever heard of women and men racing DH against each other, at least as an exhibition type thing. Wonder how Missy Giove would have done back in the day.She would have gotten waxed. The only woman I've seen, at least from a bike-handling standpoint, that stacks up to the men is Anne-Caro. She was actually a training-partner with Cedric. (Right now she is off trying to qualify for the Olympics in BMX) The women are fast, yes, but their times are often comparable to some of the older Experts.


She would have most likely lost against pro men and dminor.Haha. I'm a slow hack who tries to convey the illusion of speed with sponsor decals ;)

dminor.. maybe you should wear a wig, and dominate the womens pro circuit.

dminor.. maybe you should wear a wig, and dominate the womens pro circuit.Tried it one season - - sport bras chafe under my armor.

"equal" needs to be defined before you use that argument. Is it equal percentage, or equal value.

Equal percentage could pertain to each feild's contribution to the event, ... e.g. the amount the competitors "put into the cup" to compete.

The return "percentage" could be in dollar form, or place count. I think $ form makes more sense.... but it'll also piss off the head ladies quicker.


Equal pay amount across the board basically says that a minority which brings fewer dollars to the table takes home a larger percentage of earnings/winnings.

To me it's not a rights thing... but a money and overall contribution thing. I'm all for women's rights... but this is just what makes sense to me.

Then again, I have nothing to do with the races, so my opinion is null and void.

Sorry to bash the OPs thread... I know this wasn't meant to be a debate... you just wanted to gather support.

The women are fast, yes, but their times are often comparable to some of the older Experts.

And one of the older experts might be...................?

And one of the older experts might be...................?No, no, not me. I was referring more to the 30+ Experts.; those guys are fast.

To give you an idea, at the 2004 NORBA Nats at Schweitzer, ID, Greg Minnaar won the Men's Pro (on his Honda G-Cross) with a time of 4:29. I got my best time on that course that year with a 6:39. Kathy Pruitt won Women's Pro with a 5:25. Times for the Pro women ranged from Kathy's 5:25 to 7:44. (My hero, Marla Streb, beat me by over a minute with a 5:36) If I'd been racing the Pro women [ :D ], I'd have gotten 16th place (out of a 25 field). Winner of the Expert Men 30-39 clocked a 5:44.

(Source: http://www.usacycling.org/results/index.php?year=2004&id=622&info_id=2843)

Doug-

Over a course that is 5-6 minutes in duration, one minute must be quite significant. Woof. (Edit- you were 2 full minutes off the men's pro winner. I'm certain you are plenty fast, but 2 minutes, hard to imagine how knarly THAT would be).

I've been out of the racing loop for quite some time, but my son and I did attend and race (XC) at the Norba Nationals twice at Mt. Spokane and one year at Snoqualmie, back in, what was it, '96-'98 or something like that. Anyway, the impression that I took away, particularly about the men's DH: scariest fricckin' thing I've ever seen done on a bicycle.

As far as the equality in prize money goes, I would be thrilled to see that happen, I think it should be steered toward. Even if only for the fact that these women work every bit as hard as the men, perhaps in some cases harder. As part of the equation, it would be good to see more of the youngest gals joining the ranks.

Phelan had an interesting point of view on the money thing. She said that women racers should be paid more than men because they are fewer in number and must shoulder a greater individual percentage of the sponsorship burden. She was speaking specifically of sponsorship dollars, but it's an interesting idea nonetheless.

Personally, I'm in favour of equivalent percentages of prize money. 100 guys enter a race, winner gets x%, 2nd gets y%, etc., for the top fifth of the field. 20 women enter a race, they get the same deal for the top fifth of the field. The pot is based on the number of people in the category, not the total number of men or women. Yes, this means Experts get boned, but if you can afford to train enough to be an Expert, you don't need those poor schlubs in Sport paying for your habit. If there's only 5 people in a category, maybe only the top rider gets any cash.