In the June edition of our club's newsletter are two separate advertisements for men and women's bike racing clinics. For men, the charge is $5 and for women, it's $10. I would like to think this is an error.
Inequality for would-be men and women racers
Tue, 06/01/2004 - 3:38pm
Wed, 06/02/2004 - 5:16am
#1
Comparison Shopping
"Geez, I went to Gristedes yesterday to buy some fruit, and noticed that the apples cost less than the oranges.
I, too, would like to think this is an error.
Hint: Were the two clinics identical, conducted by the same sponsors, offering the same ""curriculum"", for the same duration of time at the same place?"
Wed, 06/02/2004 - 8:01pm
#2
Yes, just a different date
From what I could tell from the descriptions of the advertisements, both clinics offered the same, by the same people, just different dates.
Fri, 06/04/2004 - 9:23am
#3
not really
While CRCA is the sponsoring club for both events, the racers that volunteer their time to organize and put on these clinics are different people. While the intent may be the same, the execution (prizes, goodybags, coaching, format, time, etc) may be quite different.
Why don't you pose your question to the powers that be at CRCA? Or do you just want to stir the pot that's currently aboil regarding New Jersey bars? ;-)
Robin
Sat, 06/05/2004 - 10:03am
#4
I'm happy to put the question to the CRCA powers that be
I am happy to put the question to the powers that be at CRCA, except that I'm not a member of that organisation. I'm not trying to stir the pot, and I'm not sure what the connection is with New Jersey bars.
However, given that the adverts have been put in our club's newsletter, it is obvious that the CRCA is trying to attract would-be racers from the NYCC. Therefore, it seems perfectly fair and reasonable to discuss the issue on our message board. Regardless of what the two clinics entail, the advertisements indicate they are essentially the same, except one is for women and the other is for men. The only other difference is the dates. So I believe my obwservation of what appears to be inequality for men and women is both valid and pertinent.
Sat, 06/05/2004 - 7:48pm
#5
my point
...was that a question directed to the source of the advertisements would probably explain the discrepancy.
Maybe it was a mistake, maybe not.
I'm sure plenty of folks here would be interested in what you find out.
Sat, 06/05/2004 - 8:22pm
#6
connection is with New Jersey bars
"Some civil rights arm of the NJ law with too much time on their hands to watch over more important matters wants to eliminate ""ladies night"" citing that it discriminates men who have to pay for drinks. News article here
Rumor has it such a law will be passed as part of pork barrel equality legislation requiring urinals in the womens restrooms at NJ bars.
-peter
(nice tie-in Robin)"
Sun, 06/06/2004 - 6:14pm
#7
Just get over it. Once you begin to race, the fee is all the same but the race turn-out for women would be less. What I don't like about the CRCA is that a new member you have to marshall at least one race. I generally don't like their jersey. So retro looking.
Sat, 06/05/2004 - 11:30am
#8
"Anthony, my personal opinion is that you make a very good point.
The above New Jersey comment was probably in reference to a recent ruling that that bars in that state may no longer offer cheaper drinks for women.
>.com"" TARGET=""_NEW"">http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/03/nyregion/03ladies.html
The article points out, interestingly, that other states have not always ruled in the same manner.
... Judges in Pennsylvania and Iowa have said that similar events are illegal. But courts in Illinois and Washington State have said that ladies' nights are permissible because they do not discriminate against men, but rather encourage women to attend.
Regards, Ben
"
