Originally Posted by
sarals
Cleave got me thinking.
Oh man, what did I do now?
I tried to read through this with some care because it IS an important topic. I hope that I don't quote anyone out of context as I respond.
Originally Posted by
sarals
I've got one for the NCNCA and USAC. Simply, how are they (sic) going to attract more women, of all ages, but especially older gals, to competition when the fields are routinely lumped together? To be a new, wide-eyed, and not sure of either what is going on nor of your skills/strength, racer, and then to be tossed into a field with Cat 2's, 3's Masters, etc, and then get thoroughly lambasted is NOT fun nor does it serve to make competition attractive. Sure, there are a few (me among them) who have enough of a desire to "come back for more", but most do not.
Regardless of which organizing body or promoters do it, I think there really needs to be an answer to sarals' question.
Originally Posted by
Hermes
Here are the NCNCA Demographics http://www.ncnca.org/content/ncnca-demographics for 2010. I doubt that they have changed much. If I were a race promoter, I would certainly look at those numbers when designing races.
BTW, you are allowed to race with the 65+ men, if there was a 65+ field.
There was some "big" drama earlier this year when one promoter ELIMINATED the Women Pro/1/2/3 race from his monthly race series. There was a lot of Facebook hand wringing but the bottom line for him was that on average, there were less than 20 women showing up for that race. He has been vocal (and this guy is very vocal) for many years about the size of that women's field and how if more women didn't show up he was going to do a different (men's) race that would easily attract many more men. In all of the name calling and missives on his Facebook pages, someone quoted some numbers that I haven't been able to confirm as Hermes has. Someone pointed out that there were almost 500(!) Pro/1/2/3 women in the Southern California / Southern Nevada district. Yet on most any given Sunday, I'd be hard-pressed to see 40 Pro/1/2/3 women in a race. There are just a few exceptions each year, such as NRC races, where there are big (50 or more) women's fields.
Also, another promoter who puts on a race each month also ELIMINATED the women's Pro/1/2/3 race from his series with almost zero "fanfare."
Even if the real number is half of what I remember (the threads have been deleted from Facebook), there is something really wrong because by the time someone is a Cat 2 or higher, I believe that they've made some kind of commitment to the sport. Despite that, these more accomplished women are not showing up. Another example, the Roger Millikan Memorial Criterium offered a reasonable purse for the Pro/1/2/3 women and there were 38 women on the start line. Decent turnout but where were the rest of them? One would think that with far fewer races for these women that the races that were left would be very well attended.
BTW, what was incredibly ironic and completely non-productive (IMHO) was an effort by some Pro/1/2 women to get the Cat 3/4 women to boycott the vocal promoter's races. Someone still needs to explain that logic to me but thankfully the boycott efforts have failed and there were 26 Cat 3/4 women at his race last Sunday.
Also, FYI regarding Masters women, from the USAC Rule Book:
(h) Master women may compete in men’s masters races as follows:
(i) category 1 and 2 master women may enter men’s events for riders up to 10 years above their racing ages;
(ii) category 3 and 4 master women may enter men’s events for riders up to 20 years above their racing ages.
This may or may not be of use to the women who read this.
Originally Posted by
sarals
Title Nine does play in that it attracted women to sports. The true benefits of Title Nine are just starting to show themselves. Like most societal changes, it has shown itself to be generational. I was trying to draw a comparison to pre Title Nine and women's cycling now. They're very similar, at least on the surface. The door may be open for women to really start to become engrossed in the sport, and the junior ranks seem to show that.
I'd like to find a way to attract older women to the sport. Track and field and triathlon do, and one of my points was, what is it about those sports that makes them attractive? Can't competitive cycling learn something from the popularity there and apply it to our sport? And if the sanctioning body isn't the answer for promotion, then who is? Velo Club Monterey or Monterey Bay Racing Team?
I agree that Title IX is relevant to this conversation and I agree with your question of who and how. Someone needs to do something different. Title IX was a way to get more "girls" involved in sports but the "if you build it, he [they] will come" approach isn't working for women's bike racing. Just putting an event on the calendar isn't enough incentive. I wish I had an answer or even a reasonable suggestion to try. This is something that I need to think about.
Originally Posted by
valygrl
I'm 47, have been racing for one year, which I never thought I would do, and have been riding forever. I consider myself a feminist -- I'm old enough to say that and think back with respect for my mom, rather than with scorn that many men and women heap on that term.
Anyway, I don't know that I would have started racing without the social motivation that my friends were doing it.
Apart from that, one definite factor in me trying crit racing was that we have a local weeknight series here, that is targeted at women and junior development. The promoter made it FREE for juniors and Cat 4 women and $5 for other category women, it's $18 for men. So, this is speaking against my premise, and showing that yes, if there are more races targeted at women, maybe more will try it... however.... most of those races I did have fewer than 5 women. Five. Free racing. In Boulder CO.
Anyway, I don't where exactly I'm going with this..... other than I don't think you can lay the lack of women racers right at the feet of the promoters or the governing body.
It's unfortunate that the term 'feminist' has such a stigma associated with it. I have been and still am a big proponent of women's rights and I believe that initially, affirmative action is necessary to break existing societal norms.
The previously mentioned vocal promoter used to let women compete in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, etc races for free. It didn't help. (I get the privilege of paying for all of my extra races.
)
Originally Posted by
Racer Ex
Yep. Like a lot of "federations" you're looking at an organization run by men. Mostly old, mostly white. Not that I have anything against white people. I married a white girl.
Title Nine, Virginia Slims...these are all good examples of inequities being corrected and playing fields being leveled. The trickle down is enormous over time. Will that happen in cycling where we hit a 50/50 ratio? Doubtful for the simple reason, riffing off of Valygrl's point, that there's a danger factor in our sport that isn't present in tennis or triathalons. But I do think that the ratio now that's reflected in the USAC demographic is not reflective of the actual market.
It doesn't take a very long look to see across the pond...how many women are in the GB track program drawing from a much smaller population base while Sara Hammer is our sole rep at Worlds?
That's simply inexcusable.
Victoria Pendleton is a rock star over there. She's essentially Danika Patrick with more talent. How many girls are going to look (or have looked) at her in some magazine or on Youtube and think "yeah right, that's what I want to be when I grow up". We have this amazing list of female talent (cripes, I sound like Romney and his binder of women) that no one knows about.
It seemed like in the 1980s when Connie Paraskevin and Rebecca Twigg were "cover girls" in mainstream sports media, there were large fields for women's races. Besides those two, Sheila Young, Beth Heiden, Connie Carpenter, Inga Thompson, and others were winning Olympic and World Championship medals. While I agree with with the danger factor, I think the role model factor is a greater draw than danger being a deterrent. Currently, for some reason, women like Kristin Armstrong and Sarah Hammer are not creating the same kind of draw as past US champions. Celebrity is a strange attribute.
(BTW, I'm a big Danica fan. I've followed her progress ever since seeing her race in Formula Atlantic in Long Beach over a decade ago. She may not be as talented as some other top male drivers but she is (arguably) the most talented woman driver out there and she is talented enough to deserve to be on good teams. Her male teammates with the same cars didn't win the pole position for the Daytona 500.)
My club's demographics definitely fall in the age groups north of 50. There are a number of women who have an interest in racing and despite my encouragement when I was the club's Race Director, I had little success in getting them to race regularly. A criterium, a mid-week training race, a road race, and a TT here and there but nothing consistent except for our 70+ Master who races as much as she can in her age group. As I've mentioned earlier she was thrilled that there was a full podium (5 racers) at the 2012 Masters National TT Championship. Our current Race Director is a 50+ woman.
I guess I need to think some more and try some more to figure out how encourage women of all ages to race regularly.