Announcements
New Discussions
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Hop To
Page 5 of 5 1 2 3 4 5
Re: Flame me for it [Re: Wouter] #37130
08/30/04 03:31 AM
08/30/04 03:31 AM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Rolf_Nilsen Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Rolf_Nilsen  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Wouter: Regarding "the western myth about women catching up to men and being the same".
The demographics shows a trend to fewer children being born. Even if women earns more money now, this does not make up for a decreasing western population. In the future we will probably be dependent on increased immigration to support our western lifestyle and economics..

Women and men are definately different. Even if we enjoy many of the same things, we dont enjoy all the same things. I agree with the teory that you call a myth, I think women are catching up to men. Altough they are doing it in their own way, just like your friend.
I dont know if this is going to be good for sailing or not.

Now I'm just waiting for Mary's insight..

-- Have You Seen This? --
Re: Flame me for it [Re: Rolf_Nilsen] #37131
08/30/04 05:08 AM
08/30/04 05:08 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Wouter Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Wouter  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe

Ahh but demographics are not that simple.

Families used to have more children in part because more would die in childhood or as young adults. No children are pretty much assured to become 70 years of age.

Also the problem with paying for social security is partly caused by the fact that the elderly don't drop dead around 65 or shortly after that. Now we are looking at having a significant pool of people between the ages of 65 and 90 relatively alot more than before. The surplus in demographics was caused by an increase in life expectancy and a delayed reaction in dropping birthrate because of cultural considerations. This skewed democraphics is now entering the 65-90 age en masse.

Also a little shrinking of the human population is not a bad idea. And the negative growth is only a few % now. Sure it will change things but personally I don't think that anybody has shown this change to be a bad one. We got to accept that societies and economics will change every now and then and that change is as natural as sunshine.

I also don't buy that we have to increase immigration to support our western lifestyles. Afterall I need food, work, housing, warmth and air. I don't really need glossy advertisement leaflets or billboards in the street for example. We can easily cast away a few area's of employment and use the labour enclosed in there to support the area's that need to continue. I'm stand fast in my beleive that western men has began to think 2 dimensional. Not 4 dimensionally. He had begun to think that the current society is what is needed to survive when it really is nothing more than a transitional stage toward and endless series of transitional stages. We have got to think more in terms of time and a 3rd dimension of space. We did think in the 3rd dimension of space when we had a surplus of labour in the 60's and after that. Afterall most people in Europe are now employed in the service sector which this sector being realy important to our survival and existance. Sure ensurreances deals are a central part in our society today but would it stop to exist tomorrow than we would easily survive. Afterall 65 % of the world population lives in societies WITHOUT this western sector of labour.

No, we as a species survive and thrived for millenia and are still here en masse. Ou numbers have both grown and collapsed drastically. China in 20th century anyone (and at other times); Bunbonic plague anyone. We are far more smart and flexible than western society would have us believe and as always we will adapt to the times and to a new society when it comes at our doors without to much effort.

>>I dont know if this is going to be good for sailing or not.

Well she sailed with me because she was what she is. If she were a pretty victorian lady then she would not have. So yes change was good from my perspective. The time now is good for it already. will this change in the future ? Maybe, maybe not. Probably a bit of both depending how far in the future you are going to look. The beginning of the midevil times was a major step back for our societies in the west; the spreading of the renaisance was a major step forward. These will continue to alternate eachother in the future.

Regards,

Wouter


Wouter Hijink
Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild)
The Netherlands
An interesting addition [Re: Wouter] #37132
08/30/04 05:48 AM
08/30/04 05:48 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Wouter Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Wouter  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe


I refered to using individual strong point to get a better overall result. There is a historic example that is interesting.

It is one of the basic differences between the way a European army fought and how the asian minor/arab/turk (AAT) armies fought many centuries ago.

European noble men and officiers valued bold courage and head on combat. The AAT noble men, (except the mamaluks in Egypt be they were white Christian soldier slave who later become noble men) prefered to fight by herding the enemy by encirclement and weakening him in a series of lightning attacks and taken chuncks out of the flanks and isolated groups.

The European noble men rode steads because the character of these suited their way of fighting. A stead would never back-out when trained properly and had no real qualms to ride into a thick mass of fighting men.

The AAT cavalery used mers (? = female horses) as they always turn away from danger or tight spots. Their cavelery would consist of mainly horse back archery where the mers ran around the enemy avoiding tight spots automatically while the rider concentrated on picking off enemy soldier with his small but high powered composite bow.

Of course the Huns under Attila perfected this AAT approach and were uttterly succesful with it. It completely parralized the european armies as they could not lure the ATT's into close combat. The Huns rode all the way from the far east to the far west and conquered all. They only stopped because their highest noble man died and the various noble men had to ride back to participate into the selection of the new leader.

This was of course one of the first implementations of manouvre warfare were the intrinsic chacracter of the female horse was one of the basic strongpoints maximized by a new overall tactic. Using these horse in a European way of doing combat would have produced inferiour results to using steads however in this AAT setup she performed superbly and better than a stead.

And there are many examples of how a change of tactic and stategy can change a weak point into strong point. The thing to learn is that you'll need to devise the setup that suits your situation best and not try to beat the other at the situation that suits him best.

Wouter



Wouter Hijink
Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild)
The Netherlands
Re: An interesting addition [Re: Wouter] #37133
08/30/04 08:04 AM
08/30/04 08:04 AM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Rolf_Nilsen Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Rolf_Nilsen  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Wouter: Now we are really getting off-topic with this discussion

However, have you considered that todays demographics are incluenced heavily by the after-war births ? The increased birthrate in the late 40's and 50's causes a wave of elderly people about now, true.
But the demographics I'm interrested in, is the the large number of females who dont have babies. If you compare the numbers, you will se that the number of children born pr. female today is a lot less then 30 years ago. In other words, todays female (as a trend) dont want children, but wants to live free and have a good time instead (as we males have always wanted..)

I want to mention two small digressions with regards to your discussion of medevial warfare.
1: The crusades was quite strongly supported by the pope, as a way to rid Europe of to many troublesom noble sons, causing endless strife and war. And what better way to go to war, than doing it on a charger clad in gleaming armour (vanity).
2: The arabic world had it's own vanitiy with regards to warfare. Even after the assyrians had developed riding archers, they used war-chariots. In fact, they developed an even larger four horse/four man war-chariot. It was of no use on the battlefield, but it looked grand when going to war.. (vanity)

(I know, different time epochs, but I think the comparison holds true)

I agree with you that our western lifestyle has it's large faults. We have yet to reach a population size the earth can not support, if we in the western world are but willing to spend less resources. The question is, are we willing to change our lifestyle ? Nothing indicates that as far as I can see, the only changes I see are for the worse..
The earths population are increasing, but we who live in the western culture have stopped our growth..

Also, when our population has to choose between heavily increased taxes to finance pensions and health care for the large amount of elders, or accept increased immigration. What do you think will be the preferred ? Take into account also that our elders often are those most strongly opposed to immigration from "the third world", what would they vote ? To lower their pensions and part with other rights, when they probably will be in majority ?


BTW: This was posted on the Farrier-boat e-mail list today (in an attempt to get back to the thread):
Quote
While the males out there may be bemoaning a lack of females interested in sailing, I have found it is not the sailing the females are usually adverse to, but the males and their attitudes. This is just an observance. I know enough sailors (male and female) who do not have their priorities in order - and it is a bad formula for any team - off or on the water.



I hope Mary will come with her toughts soon, or you (Wouter) and I will probably start discussing the relative importance of present demographics as related to ancient sailing on the Nile..

I don't buy that [Re: Rolf_Nilsen] #37134
08/30/04 09:53 AM
08/30/04 09:53 AM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe
Wouter Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Wouter  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 9,582
North-West Europe

>>But the demographics I'm interrested in, is the the large number of females who dont have babies. If you compare the numbers, you will se that the number of children born pr. female today is a lot less then 30 years ago. In other words, todays female (as a trend) dont want children, but wants to live free and have a good time instead (as we males have always wanted..)


I don't buy that, sorry. I've seen quite a few career women by now who got hitch up at 30 sometimes and do the children thing right before it is too late. Like I said ; women are hard pressed to ignore their genetic imprint just as the men are because I see many men do the same as well. Also the fact that the birthrate per women is lower than say 30 years ago doesn't have to be explained by "Women don't want children" it is just as easily explained by "women want less children".

Of course I'm now about to state a very personal opinion so bear with me. I simply do not believe for a second that todays women want to have NO children, live free and just have a good time instead. Just as much as I don't think men want this in general as well. Sure, we all go to or went to rave parties, did do a bit of the free love thing and what not. But at the end of the reproduction age most of us still get into the game quickly before it is too late. At least the majority still does. Also our western culture highlights career and the gethering of wealth or power as the pinnacle of a rewarding life. But then again our culture idolize skinny little supermodels as well and last time I checked 85 % of the women do not look like that on the streets either. There is a profound difference between what is very prominant in the culture and what is really done or experienced.

One more point : "but wants to live free and have a good time instead (as we males have always wanted..)" for some reason the men really never took to this life en masse; did they ?

Afterall, our men hood is a much defined by the women and children as women hood is in relation to men and children; even though it is different in the details. Out standing as aging men is to a large extend derived from our family standing. A single old men still is regarded a dirty old geezer; not much romance there. And an old single lady is still regarded as an old spinner. Even by the young folk.


>>The question is, are we willing to change our lifestyle ? Nothing indicates that as far as I can see, the only changes I see are for the worse..

Is is going to happen anyway, during my studies I was very interested in the energy problem and it was already understood at that time that the Energy crisis (no more easy accessable oil) will give our societies a harsh shcok eventually. We have failed to modify our societies and now it is too late to soften the blow. With China taken up bigger and bigger shares of the oil production the western societies will over the next 25 years experience increasing and increasing energy prices. Ergo our current society is not going to survive as it is for another generation anyway. But as always we'll survive as a people and adapt to the changing reality.

Maybe it is even past our peak time for us and we will decrease in importance and hand the scepter to another emerging people and emerging empire/culture. Asia and China are the most likely candidate with Brazil and parts of latin america as good seconds. And our societies will maybe go the way of our demographics. Turn grey, old and tired and wither away unable to keep up with the new kid on the block.

Wouter



Wouter Hijink
Formula 16 NED 243 (one-off; homebuild)
The Netherlands
Re: Flame me for it [Re: Wouter] #37135
08/30/04 10:07 AM
08/30/04 10:07 AM
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,307
Asuncion, Paraguay
Luiz Offline
veteran
Luiz  Offline
veteran

Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 1,307
Asuncion, Paraguay
Quote
In short; I don't think that the "large changes in western culture" will make women more physical or significantly change their unique way of looking at life and sports for that matter.


Wouter,

Population decreases happen periodically. Traditionally they are caused by disasters, diseases and wars. Of those, war is the only people-killer that increased its "efficiency".

Birth rates depend a lot on different hormone balances between women and men and also on the so called "cultural" factor - in fact, the two are very closely linked. Most sex-related aspects of cultures are caused and regulated by hormones.

As a species, our reaction to the growing perception of the likeliness of a malthusian chrisis is a change in cultural habits and hormone levels. We are actually passing through an important modification/adaptation of human behavior (= hormone balance = cultural change) to compensate for the new survival conditions (= environment) we are living. I would expect men and women to modify their hormone balance and "cultural" behavior more or less automatically while the available space and natural resources shrink.

The changes on ourselves are one of the causes of the "large changes in Western culture", more then a consequence of them. If the changes become more pronounced, women and men will continue to become more equal, especially in hormone balance, for it is the most efficient birth control system nature provided to our species.

Considering that the current population and the use of Earth´s resources are unprecedent, it is also reasonable to expect the hormonal and cultural changes to be the greatests ever - and this is a good thing if we consider that the main alternative is global war.

The hormone balance-cultural development link more or less explains the sexual behavior of "decadent" cultures in history. Rome, for instance. It also explains the polarized acceptance or rejection of homossexualism during contractions or expansions of the population.

Conlusion: women are already changing the way their look at life and sport and we should expect this change to continue in the same direction for a while. Actually, I HOPE it goes this way, because I see it as a key part of the peaceful solution for the upcoming Malthusian chrisis - possibly the greatest challenge humanity ever faced.

Take care,


Luiz
Re: I don't buy that [Re: Wouter] #37136
08/30/04 12:47 PM
08/30/04 12:47 PM
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Rolf_Nilsen Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Rolf_Nilsen  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,451
West coast of Norway
Oh no, here we go..

Wouter: I think you are to optimistic re. birth rates and at what time in life we get children. The numbers indicate this at least.


Regarding the coming changes in western and global society, I agree with you.

It will be interresting to watch what will happen as oil becomes scarce. More wars for oil, or a peaceful transition to other materials and technologies.

Anyway, not much beachcats material in the last few postings..

Re: I don't buy that [Re: Rolf_Nilsen] #37137
08/31/04 05:33 AM
08/31/04 05:33 AM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558
Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH...
Mary Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Mary  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558
Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH...
This sub-thread about women has been one of the most interesting I have ever seen on this forum -- but that's probably because I am a woman.

I started this digression by asking why few (if any) women compete in Olympic level sailing on the classes of boats that are open to both men and women: Laser, 49er and Tornado.

Bill, Wouter, Rolf and Luiz all gave excellent answers. Bill Roberts is the only one who is way off base. He thinks the differences between men and women can be corrected by proper boat design.

But my theory is that if you use a boat that women and men can handle equally as far as strength and agility and endurance requirements, if righting leverage is not an issue and if weight is not an issue (and may even slightly favor women), men are USUALLY still going to win.

Let's take the Hobie Wave, for instance. No reason whatsoever why women should not be able to compete equally against men on that boat. And they probably can in fun, Wednesday-night beercan races, and maybe even in the Nationals and North Americans.

But if you put the Wave into SERIOUS competition and make it an Olympic class, men are going to dominate.

I think Wouter and Rolf and Luiz know the answer to why. It is so simple and basic.

It is hormone differences. When you are talking about competitive sports, it is about testosterone. Men have a lot more of it than women do.

Testosterone does not just make men stronger and faster. It also makes them more aggressive and competitive and combative. When women compete in sports it is a game. When men compete, it is WAR.

And, of course, at the Olympic levels, we are not allowed to add testosterone to our systems, because it is illegal under the anti-doping policy. (Look what Kevin Hall had to go through as far as getting approved to sail in Finn Class in the Olympics. He has to take testosterone injections because his body no longer makes it [testicles removed due to cancer]. He didn't know until a couple weeks before the Games whether they were going to approve him to sail.)

And that raises other interesting questions. If Kevin Hall had been sailing in the Laser Class instead of the Finn Class, would they have allowed him to race? The Finn Class is just for men. So obviously you need male-type testosterone levels if you are racing only against men. But, the Laser class is open to both men and women. Women have low testosterone levels. So if you are racing in an "Open" class, would it be fair to allow a man to add testosterone and not allow the women in the same class to do the same?

So the playing field is never going to be exactly equal even though we pay lip service to the idea that sailing is a sport in which men and women can compete against each other equally.

As I said initially, the only two Olympic sports in which men and women compete against each other are Sailing and Equestrian. Why is that? I think somebody a long time ago must have decided, "Well, in Equestrian the horse is doing all the work and in sailing the boat is doing all the work. The people are just riding on the horse and riding on the boat, in both cases they are just pulling strings."

Well, I have not been able to see any similarity between the two events. There is no "racing" in Equestrian events. And horses are not one-design. The horses do all the work. The riders need more skill than strength. The events are all individual. I haven't been able to find the results of the Equestrian events, but I would bet that not many women win in those "Open" events either. (But at least quite a few women are able to qualify to get to the Olympics in Equestrian, unlike "Open" sailing events.)

Heck, they don't even have men and women competing against each other in Shooting and Archery.

So let's get off this idea that women should be competing against men in sailing. The Laser? The 49er? Give me a break! The Tornado used to be very amenable to male-female crews in its old rig, because it was single trapeze, no spinnaker. It was set up perfectly for a woman skipper/male crew. A tiny woman could helm the Tornado, no problem, as long as she had a big, strong guy as crew. But, again, there is that problem with aggressiveness and competitiveness and combative fire that the helmsperson needs.

I think pretty much all women will agree with me regarding testosterone vis-a-vis sports. My daughter, who is a very competitive person, agrees with me. My sister, who has been racing sailboats as a skipper all her life, agrees with me. Any woman who has crewed for a man will agree with me.

So it is a farce to have these Olympic sailing classes that are declared as "Open."

Re: I don't buy that [Re: Mary] #37138
08/31/04 07:08 AM
08/31/04 07:08 AM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,528
Looking for a Job, I got credi...
scooby_simon Offline
Hull Flying, Snow Sliding....
scooby_simon  Offline
Hull Flying, Snow Sliding....
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,528
Looking for a Job, I got credi...
Mary

Quote
Well, I have not been able to see any similarity between the two events. There is no "racing" in Equestrian events. And horses are not one-design. The horses do all the work. The riders need more skill than strength. The events are all individual. I haven't been able to find the results of the Equestrian events, but I would bet that not many women win in those "Open" events either. (But at least quite a few women are able to qualify to get to the Olympics in Equestrian, unlike "Open" sailing events.)


Done a little but of digging around the Equestrian results and they make some interesting reading :

Details are Link to BBC website

Individual Events

Individual Eventing (female in bold)
18/08/2004 LAW Leslie SHEAR L' EAU GBR
18/08/2004 SEVERSON Kimberly WINSOME ADANTE USA
18/08/2004 FUNNELL Philippa PRIMMORE'S PRIDE GBR


Individual Dressage (female in bold)
25/08/2004 van GRUNSVEN Anky SALINERO NED
25/08/2004 SALZGEBER Ulla RUSTY GER
25/08/2004 FERRER-SALAT Beatriz BEAUVALAIS ESP


Individual Jumping (all male)
27/08/2004 O'CONNOR Cian WATERFORD CRYSTAL IRL
27/08/2004 PESSOA Rodrigo BALOUBET DU ROUET BRA
27/08/2004 KAPPLER Chris ROYAL KALIBER USA

The fact that all the Dressage medals went to female and the Jumping to male suggests there is still a physical aspect to the equestrian events.


Team events

The team dressage and eventing are more mixed (maybe the eventing needs the lady’s skills at dressage ?

The team Show jumping is all male except one (Beezie MADDEN)




Last edited by scooby_simon; 08/31/04 07:22 AM.

F16 - GBR 553 - SOLD

I also talk sport here
Re: I don't buy that [Re: scooby_simon] #37139
08/31/04 01:00 PM
08/31/04 01:00 PM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558
Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH...
Mary Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Mary  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558
Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH...
That makes sense, that the women would do well in dressage. And maybe fewer men compete in dressage in the first place. And it also makes sense that men would do better in the jumping events. But in equestrian events, it is more about the horses than the riders, so I can't really see any parallels between equestrian and sailing.

Re: I don't buy that [Re: Mary] #37140
08/31/04 02:35 PM
08/31/04 02:35 PM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 552
B
brobru Offline
addict
brobru  Offline
addict
B

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 552
Mary,
I believe there is a big message here.

Om prime time NBC , women sports, controlled at least 50% of the airwaves........it seemed like more, but the error on the conservative side,....lets say 50%

So, the world loves women as athletes!,...and the sponsers pay big bucks to show them!

So, why aren't women in sailing more? I agree, why are they not in sailing? You gotta answer this for me ( and others)?

I mean, the Olympic class boats are not 50 footers with 5000 s.f of sail area to horse around......

And the women in track and field, gynmastics swimming are far from weak wimps,.....in fact, they are darn impressive!

So, what gives?

Maybe we should all sell our gazillion dollar investment in our boats and go to Beach Volleyball as a sport,......why we would have to buy small gym suits and some real cool sunglasses.........and be on prime time TV about 10,000% more than olympic sailing,.....and put the rest of the money in the bank

regards,

Bruce

Re: I don't buy that [Re: Mary] #37141
09/01/04 10:39 PM
09/01/04 10:39 PM
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 22
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Guer_J Offline
stranger
Guer_J  Offline
stranger

Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 22
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Actually in Equestrian (especially jumping) women may have the edge. I think mainly because of two factors. First, Weight: women are usually lighter than men; however, woman & men have about the same physical constitution in the lower part of the body (legs). In Equestrian the legs are very important and possibly are the part of the body that needs to be in better shape. Hence, woman will have less weight w/ about the same leg strength. The other factor is ‘empathy’. This is merely speculation on m part; but in Equestrian it ‘s very important that a strong connection/bond between the horse and the rider exist. We all know woman excel in that department
BTW: I was in the sport for 3 year as a teenager, also I have a close cousin that went to the Pan am games in this sport.

Testosterone actually doesn’t have to do much with how ‘competitive’ a person is. The competitive drive is very present on the female as well. Just look at the meticulous preparation a female subject takes before heading to a singles bar or club, that is fierce competition amongst females my friend!

Jaime

Re: I don't buy that [Re: Guer_J] #37142
09/02/04 12:59 AM
09/02/04 12:59 AM
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,528
Looking for a Job, I got credi...
scooby_simon Offline
Hull Flying, Snow Sliding....
scooby_simon  Offline
Hull Flying, Snow Sliding....
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 3,528
Looking for a Job, I got credi...
Quote
Actually in Equestrian (especially jumping) women may have the edge


The results do not show this at all. Women took all the medals in dressage and the men took all medals in the jumping - individual.

Last edited by scooby_simon; 09/02/04 02:15 AM.

F16 - GBR 553 - SOLD

I also talk sport here
Re: I don't buy that [Re: scooby_simon] #37143
09/02/04 03:59 AM
09/02/04 03:59 AM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 612
Cape Town, South Africa
Steve_Kwiksilver Offline
addict
Steve_Kwiksilver  Offline
addict

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 612
Cape Town, South Africa
Mary, to say that in equestrian events it`s the horse that does all the work while the rider just steers it is a way-off statement. The rider has to be able to assess every turn & approach to a jump, and issue the horse instructions through physical communication with the horse (legs, reins etc). They also have to be able to steady & slow down a sometimes over-eager horse, which can take some physical effort.
Dressage requires more precision, patience and finesse, a "softer" feel, which could be why women have the edge there.
When you get to jumping over 6ft triple-jumps and especially eventing, the fear factor comes into it as well. I think here men have the advantage, they seem to be able to deal with fear more easily, maybe it`s because we can block out the fear, or ignore the possible consequenses. I don`t know why this is, but I`d guess it`s why you find more men in sports like skydiving, paragliding, rock-climbing etc than women. It`s not that women can`t be as good as men in any of these, I think it`s that they are not prepared to take the same risks as men are.
I know some very good female paraglider pilots, they probably have a better feel for the air than most men in the sport, but most are not prepared to fly competition rated gliders, as they are more dangerous to fly than intermediate or sports gliders. In the context of sailing, that`s why more women will sail boats that they feel they can comfortably control, whereas men want to sail bigger, faster, more "on the edge" boats. In this respect I can`t see a women sailor pushing a 49er or Tornado as hard as a man would, and will take fewer risks at aggressive starts & mark roundings. Women have a higher sense of self-preservation than men, and unlike men, women can acknowledge that they are, in fact, mortal.
We`re fortunate in the sense that a mistake in sailing usually ends up in a swim, which most of us are not afraid to do once in a while.
What I`ve noticed in paragliding is that when a guy has an accident & breaks an ankle or wrist (ie a non-life threatening or paralysing accident), he can`t wait for the cast to come off so he can go flying again, (some fly with the cast !) while many women pilots, after even a bad landing where the injuries amount to some bruising or maybe a sprained ankle, tend to re-evaluate their desire to fly.
I don`t think it`s because they`re scared, I think it`s because they might just have a greater appreciation of what might have happened if the situation were a little worse.
From a personal viewpoint, my fiance broke her arm 3 times while horse-riding, and has decided that sailing with me is a bit safer ! This suits me fine since I have crew, however I know that if she is injured badly or is put into a possible life-threatening situation (like if we have to be rescued while sailing in the ocean), she might think twice about her involvement in the sport. She has tried paragliding and decided it`s not for her, while I still fly after having seen accidents that resulted in paralysis, and have lost more than one friend to the sport.
It probably is all about testosterone.

Cheers
Steve

Re: I don't buy that [Re: Steve_Kwiksilver] #37144
09/02/04 02:18 PM
09/02/04 02:18 PM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558
Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH...
Mary Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Mary  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558
Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH...
Steve,
Sorry, I phrased that wrong. I did not mean to suggest that the riders do not do any of the work. Obviously, it takes strength and skill -- it's just that I think that even at the Olympic level men and women are probably able to both acquire the necessary levels of strength and skill. So I figure those factors are out of the equation, and then it just comes down to the speed, strength, and ability of the horse.

But in the Open Class Olympic sailboats, I think strength is very definitely a factor that gives men an advantage.

The psychological differences would apply in most sports where men compete directly against women.

Someone has suggested to me that the female of many species also take less risks because it is important for them to survive in order to have children and perpetuate their species. If most of the men get killed in battle, all the women need is one lucky male survivor.

In some horseback riding events, maybe the sex of the horse is a factor for the same reason -- the males are more likely to take risks. If Wouter is correct about the different way in which male and female horses used to react in battle situations, maybe that bit of history tends to corroborate the theory.

If that is the case, we now have to worry about the relative testosterone levels of the horses, too. Should female riders be required to ride male horses and vice versa, just to even out the testosterone?

I never should have started this topic -- now I have gotten myself totally convinced that I can never possibly beat a man in a sailboat race.

Re: I don't buy that [Re: Mary] #37145
09/02/04 02:34 PM
09/02/04 02:34 PM
Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 22
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Guer_J Offline
stranger
Guer_J  Offline
stranger

Joined: Aug 2001
Posts: 22
San Juan, Puerto Rico
Well, you can race against me, You'll certainly win… if that makes you feel better.

Mary, Try telling my wife that!! [Re: Guer_J] #37146
09/02/04 02:59 PM
09/02/04 02:59 PM
Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 454
Syracuse, NY Hobie Fleet 204
T
Tom Korz Offline
addict
Tom Korz  Offline
addict
T

Joined: Jun 2001
Posts: 454
Syracuse, NY Hobie Fleet 204
-=O=-
_) _) _)

She beats up on many excellent male sailors!!!

4th H16 opens 1999 Ft Walton Beach 120 teams
5th H16 opens 2000 Kingston 45 teams

and continues to do it to this day!!

No it's not the Olympics but very few men could do that well!!

Re: Mary, Try telling my wife that!! [Re: Tom Korz] #37147
09/02/04 05:01 PM
09/02/04 05:01 PM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558
Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH...
Mary Offline
Carpal Tunnel
Mary  Offline
Carpal Tunnel

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 5,558
Key Largo, FL & Put-in-Bay, OH...
Susan is an awesome sailor. There are lots of great women sailors. My sister has been beating men all her sailing life, too.

But this thread was about the Olympics and why there are usually no women at all racing in the Open classes. I just theorized that those particular classes are, in general, too demanding for women to be competitive with men at the Olympic level.

And I suggested the reason for that is the difference in testosterone levels. My sister agrees with me, and my daughter agrees with me. So I have at least two women on my side.

If the Hobie 16 were an Open Olympic class, we would probably start seeing more women, both as skipper and as crew.

I think the designation of "Open" is silly for the Laser, 49er and Tornado (especially since the Tornado added the spinnaker), but it has been suggested to me that ISAF has to designate some classes as open, whether women are really ABLE to compete in them or not. It has something to do with an IOC rule -- maybe X number of classes have to be available to women.

Does anybody know about this? Does it have something to do with Title 9? I thought that was just for high school and college sports.

But if they do have to designate some "Open" classes, why don't they make at least one of them a true and realistic open class?

Re: Mary, Try telling my wife that!! [Re: Mary] #37148
09/02/04 07:49 PM
09/02/04 07:49 PM
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 894
Branford, CT
rhodysail Offline
old hand
rhodysail  Offline
old hand

Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 894
Branford, CT
Susan can kick some butt and we can add Pease Glaser and Annie Nelson to that list.

Re: I don't buy that [Re: Mary] #37149
09/03/04 04:14 AM
09/03/04 04:14 AM
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 612
Cape Town, South Africa
Steve_Kwiksilver Offline
addict
Steve_Kwiksilver  Offline
addict

Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 612
Cape Town, South Africa
Hi Mary,
In equestrian sports it`s a bit confusing, since male horses are divided into those who are still all male, and those who have had some equipment removed, which makes them a bit more docile ! Female horses you can at least bet on for consistency, except they all have their own personality. I promised myself a long time ago I would never do a sport where my equipment can think for itself !
Lucky for us, boats are pretty neutral, even though we call a ship female. Perhaps if women sailors could get male boats, they`d do better ?

This issue is an impossible one to resolve - I used to think women had less competitive drive than men, which could explain why fewer compete in sailing, but my crew (female) hates losing more than I do, so it`s not that. I remember a huge fight on the boat at one Nationals, after we`d just come 2nd in a race, because I thought "wow, we just came 2nd", while she thought "If you didn`t make that one mistake, we could have been first."
It might just be that because they are MORE competitive than men in some ways, and can`t stand losing, that they don`t want to compete, for fear of losing.
Then again, there`s a theory which states that, male or female, we`re all different. I`ll go with that one.

Cheers
Steve

Page 5 of 5 1 2 3 4 5

Moderated by  Damon Linkous 

Search

Who's Online Now
0 registered members (), 426 guests, and 84 spiders.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Darryl, zorro, CraigJ, PaulEddo2, AUS180
8150 Registered Users
Top Posters(30 Days)
Forum Statistics
Forums26
Topics22,404
Posts267,055
Members8,150
Most Online2,167
Dec 19th, 2022
--Advertisement--
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.1