Forums: Community: The Ladies' Room:
Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport
RSS FeedRSS Feeds for The Ladies' Room

Premier Sponsor:

 


sendit1023


Apr 13, 2009, 6:45 PM
Post #1 of 76 (3956 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 13, 2009
Posts: 2

Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Is climbing an equalizer between men and women, or is it like other sports developed by men that compliment their body types? Is it possible for women to rival men in this sport, for us to compete equally?


dingus


Apr 14, 2009, 2:22 PM
Post #2 of 76 (3891 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [sendit1023] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I'd say certainly possible to rival yes. Compete equally?

No way. I take that to mean across the board, heads up 'can you do it or not' equality? Not yet anyway.

Cheers
DMT


kiwiprincess


Apr 14, 2009, 3:53 PM
Post #3 of 76 (3874 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2007
Posts: 307

Re: [sendit1023] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Slabs are the great equaliser.
We differ in our strengths, between the sexes and from person to person.
I see people of both sexes doing things I can only dream of all the time.


grampacharlie


Apr 14, 2009, 5:13 PM
Post #4 of 76 (3861 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 25, 2006
Posts: 388

Re: [sendit1023] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

To "compete" in climbing, you have to have a sickeningly strong drive for competition, and training. Just like any other sport.

Read Lynn Hill's "Climbing Free."

Lynn seemed to be able to level the playing field in her prime. I guess it comes down to what drives you.

If I can add a personal opinion, climbing is a very self-involved sport, very individualistic. So it may be a question of psychology, as well as physiology.


aerili


Apr 14, 2009, 6:57 PM
Post #5 of 76 (3850 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 12, 2006
Posts: 1166

Re: [sendit1023] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

GOD I wish I could remember this quote by Frank Deford from two summer Olympics ago.... He said something about how everyone keeps trying to measure men and women athletically against each other, but many/most female athletes aren't pushing themselves to be measured against men, only against each other. Why do women always have to be pushed to become men?

He felt if women had ever had any say in the Olympic credo, then maybe it not have come out as "higher faster stronger." Maybe it would be more than that. Maybe it would just be other things, things women value in athletic pursuits that aren't defined by those three words.

I feel both sexes exhibit their own unique athletic strengths. Total crossover will probably never happen for either.

The only way to ever truly equalize the sexes athletically is to give women equivalent male hormones and give men equivalent female hormones. Preferably starting in the womb. Cool


iamthewallress


Apr 16, 2009, 3:56 PM
Post #6 of 76 (3749 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 1, 2003
Posts: 2463

Re: [aerili] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

Egalitarian doesn't mean identical.

And what is true on average doesn't mean much for the outliers.

I'm neither a guy nor am I Lynn Hill in terms of what nature gave me.

But among those w/ whom I climb, I can, on average, keep pace with the guys. And the girls.


(This post was edited by iamthewallress on Apr 16, 2009, 4:01 PM)


clausti


Apr 19, 2009, 10:53 AM
Post #7 of 76 (3683 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [iamthewallress] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

iamthewallress wrote:
Egalitarian doesn't mean identical.

always good to remember!

i find that, among those with whom i climb outside, i usually climb less hard then the guys and about par with the ladies.

but there are a heck of a lot of guys that i outclimb at my gym.


aerili


Apr 20, 2009, 10:47 PM
Post #8 of 76 (3624 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 12, 2006
Posts: 1166

Re: [iamthewallress] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

iamthewallress wrote:
Egalitarian doesn't mean identical.

This is true. So tell me how you would interpret her question then?

Climbing is fairly egalitarian to women in that it's equally available for them to pursue (unless maybe you're a mom...but hey I won't go there!).

Otherwise when we compare equality in sports between men and women, we usually compare numbers of participants in an activity, money spent on each gender having access to the sport, quality and quantity of training/mentorship/resources devoted to each gender pursuing the sport, and performance in the activity. (There's other stuff, like injury research between genders, etc., but these seem like the biggest points to me.)

Maybe the OP can rephrase her question so it is more clear what she means by an "egalitarian sport."


robbovius


Apr 21, 2009, 6:06 AM
Post #9 of 76 (3599 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 8405

Re: [aerili] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

since I took up climbing as a serious enthusiasm (oxymoron, there?) 6 years ago after a couple decades of infrequent dabbling, it has been my experience adn consistent observation that climbing, purely as a phyisical activity, favors neither male nor female body types. of the men and women I climb with regularly (and have over the last 6 years) it seems to me that they climb/outclimb each other in fundamentally equal measure, dependant on the day, route/problem, and personal level of risk aversion.

...and most of them outclimb me.

of all sports I've been involved in, climbing seems the least sex-prefrerential in terms of pure physical ability.
this is one of the great enjoyments of climbing, that about anyone can come to it, and find enjoyment , achievement and satisfaction, regardless of sex, or age for that matter.

If anything sullies this "purity" its the attitudes that people bring to it. some people tend to evaluate every athletic endeavour in terms of the competitive aspects, and this can add an unpleasant tension, that doens't really need to be introduced.

IMO, YMMV.


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 6:18 AM
Post #10 of 76 (3597 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [robbovius] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

To say competition has no role in climbing is utterly ridiculous. Competition in various forms has been the driving force behind most climbing advancements.

DMT


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 6:22 AM
Post #11 of 76 (3595 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

also, i have to say: i see a lot more groups of mixed sex who all climb about equally well in the 5.9 to 5.11 ranges than in the 5.12 to 5.13 ranges.


robbovius


Apr 21, 2009, 8:02 AM
Post #12 of 76 (3574 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 8405

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (2 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
To say competition has no role in climbing is utterly ridiculous. Competition in various forms has been the driving force behind most climbing advancements.

DMT

I didn't say it has no role (to be sure, each of us is propelled to further our abilities by that same aspect, whether internalized or externalized), but was speaking simply about climbing with regards to the OPs question about its egalitarian qualities, as regards the sexes.

to reiterate, it has been my experience and observation that purely in terms of achievable physical abilities, as measured by the most-climbed route grades climbing is not preferential towards either sex.

clausti's observation has been my own, though I would expand the range to include 5.7-5.10. into the morel elite grades, 5.12 and up it does seem to be mostly males pursuing those levels, but i think that has more to do with males driven to higher levels of competitive urge (and in this case, arguably of an internalized source) simply by their nature.


(This post was edited by robbovius on Apr 21, 2009, 8:08 AM)


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 8:11 AM
Post #13 of 76 (3567 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [robbovius] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

OK.

Consider basketball as a counterpoint...

using some of the points made in this thread, basketball doesn't seem to be egalitarian by comparison.

For both climbing and basketball - at the very pinnacle (haha) of performance, males dominate. Sorry, they just do, there is no arguing the point. Sure you can cite a woman or two who has held their own for a time but they are the exceptions.

In climbing, as pointed out quite correctly in this thread, we men and women tend to mix it up a lot, sort of in our 'intermural league.'

In basketball? You really don't see this much? You see guys playing guys - you don't see a lot of women if any at all, on these pickup teams.

Using basketball I can easily see the difference in how climbers 'integrate' when compared to other sports.

I suspect other adventure oriented sports (do the DEW!) have a similar dynamic as well?

DMT


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 8:27 AM
Post #14 of 76 (3556 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [robbovius] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

robbovius wrote:
clausti's observation has been my own, though I would expand the range to include 5.7-5.10.

i actually deliberately left out the lower ranges because it seems like that is more trad, and at those levels it's mostly guys chuffing around with it. the women that i know that climb 5.7 at their limit only follow. and i don't know any women who lead trad who lead less than 5.9.

In reply to:
into the morel elite grades, 5.12 and up it does seem to be mostly males pursuing those levels, but i think that has more to do with males driven to higher levels of competitive urge (and in this case, arguably of an internalized source) simply by their nature.

emphasis added. i'm actually not sure if i would say that quite like you said that. i know a number of women who climb 5.12.... but those women climb with guys that climb .12+ or 5.13, whereas it's more common to see mixed sex groups where everybody climbs more moderate grades, and sometimes the rope gun is a guy and sometimes the rope gun is a girl.


iamthewallress


Apr 21, 2009, 9:43 AM
Post #15 of 76 (3534 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 1, 2003
Posts: 2463

Post deleted by iamthewallress [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  

 


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 9:47 AM
Post #16 of 76 (3526 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [iamthewallress] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT


iamthewallress


Apr 21, 2009, 9:48 AM
Post #17 of 76 (3526 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 1, 2003
Posts: 2463

Re: [iamthewallress] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
For both climbing and basketball - at the very pinnacle (haha) of performance, males dominate. Sorry, they just do, there is no arguing the point. Sure you can cite a woman or two who has held their own for a time but they are the exceptions.

On average, the intermural league is probably a better measure for the whole "sport".

For most of us, the elagitarian nature of the sport has little to do w/ what the superheros can climb and more to do with what happens when you head to the rock with someone who has been working about as hard as you to get where they are.

Are you both in more or less the same place for your efforts?

Can you share responsabilities...not identically, but can each person constribute his/her share? Can your strengths and deficiencies complement each other? In this way, I find climbing to be very egalitarian.

Society isn't egalitarian, so whereas many of my male partners would quit before indulging their inner wimp in ways that are totally socially exceptable for women, plenty of gals that I know are having a great time but not necessarily pushing their comfort zone as far as they might.

Biologically, the guys will always have more strength than us at the top end and most will have more reach too. Sometimes, biologically, they will be able to outclimb us or do climbs that, biologically, we might not have the equipment to ever do.

The reverse can be true too for other reasons.

Undeniably, there are biological advantages and limitations for every individual. Perhaps because there isn't much we can do about our biology other than learn to work w/ what we've got as best we can, I don't see much utility in whining about what nature didn't give us.

Often, the biology seems to get overstated to me when people aren't making the most of their own body and technique. (Personal pet peeve is people w/ shitty technique on any given crack size whining about their body doesn't fit right and reducing someone else's accomplishment to being merely due to their magic, effortless fit. It must suck to be the tall guy getting told that he can only climb x, y, or z b/c of his long reach too.)


(This post was edited by iamthewallress on Apr 21, 2009, 9:52 AM)


iamthewallress


Apr 21, 2009, 10:00 AM
Post #18 of 76 (3515 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 1, 2003
Posts: 2463

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

I think everyone should do what they can. I carry as much as I can, you carry as much as you can.

If I climb harder thin hand than you, I'll lead that pitch. If you're better at slabs, you lead that pitch.

I'll try to get better at carrying loads and climbing slabs (instead of leaning on biological excuses) and will appreciate your skills instead of reducing them to something that you should be able to effortlessly do b/c you're a guy who is built a certain way, even if that is a factor.

In a perfect world, that's how I like to go, anyway.

If we expect to only climb w/ people who have IDENTICAL skills too our own, the team is actually more limited. Lynn Hill made an interesting comment about this in the little video about climbing the Leaning Tower w/ Katie Brown...there was a limit to how well they would be able to complement each other biologically.

PS Sorry about the ordering thing. My post got copied when I was editing.


(This post was edited by iamthewallress on Apr 21, 2009, 10:04 AM)


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 10:06 AM
Post #19 of 76 (3506 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [iamthewallress] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

iamthewallress wrote:
dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

jesus cherry-picking christ.

dingus, no matter how much you say that, i doubt you split your load evenly between you and your daughter(s?).


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 10:32 AM
Post #20 of 76 (3493 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [iamthewallress] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

iamthewallress wrote:
dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

I think everyone should do what they can. I carry as much as I can, you carry as much as you can.

If I climb harder thin hand than you, I'll lead that pitch. If you're better at slabs, you lead that pitch.

I'll try to get better at carrying loads and climbing slabs (instead of leaning on biological excuses) and will appreciate your skills instead of reducing them to something that you should be able to effortlessly do b/c you're a guy who is built a certain way, even if that is a factor.

In a perfect world, that's how I like to go, anyway.

If we expect to only climb w/ people who have IDENTICAL skills too our own, the team is actually more limited. Lynn Hill made an interesting comment about this in the little video about climbing the Leaning Tower w/ Katie Brown...there was a limit to how well they would be able to complement each other biologically.

PS Sorry about the ordering thing. My post got copied when I was editing.

Sounds reasonable.

DMT


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 10:35 AM
Post #21 of 76 (3490 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
iamthewallress wrote:
dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

jesus cherry-picking christ.

dingus, no matter how much you say that, i doubt you split your load evenly between you and your daughter(s?).

They are dependant children. Not really a useful comparison, imo. Feel free to run with it though...

DMT


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 10:41 AM
Post #22 of 76 (3481 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
clausti wrote:
iamthewallress wrote:
dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

jesus cherry-picking christ.

dingus, no matter how much you say that, i doubt you split your load evenly between you and your daughter(s?).

They are dependant children. Not really a useful comparison, imo. Feel free to run with it though...

DMT

so, on her 18th birthday, she'll carry 40 and you'll carry the other 40 to celebrate?


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 10:47 AM
Post #23 of 76 (3479 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
iamthewallress wrote:
dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

I think everyone should do what they can. I carry as much as I can, you carry as much as you can.

Sounds reasonable.

DMT

ok, you acknowledge that that's reasonable there... but how is "i'll carry what i can and you carry what you can" different from "someone who is 110 shouldn't have to split by weight an 80 lb load with someone who is 170"?

it seems more than a little ridiculous that you keep coming back to this every time sexism comes up, especially since it doesn't really seem like an issue of sexism so much as practicality, to me. do you want to get there faster, or do you want the load to be "fair"?

if i went climbing with a girl that weighed 170 (with me at 110), i'd be perfectly incredulous if she informed me that we were splitting the gear in half by weight and that was the only fair way. i mean, i'd carry it, because i'd rather go climbing than have a fight in the parking lot, but i don't think that person would be very high on my list of people to call for future trips.


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 10:49 AM
Post #24 of 76 (3474 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
dingus wrote:
clausti wrote:
iamthewallress wrote:
dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

jesus cherry-picking christ.

dingus, no matter how much you say that, i doubt you split your load evenly between you and your daughter(s?).

They are dependant children. Not really a useful comparison, imo. Feel free to run with it though...

DMT

so, on her 18th birthday, she'll carry 40 and you'll carry the other 40 to celebrate?

80 pounds to go rock climbing? No that won't happen. She's not into bigwalls or first ascents, yet.

Look I get your point. And you get mine.

Climbing is egalitarian to a point and will likely get better over time, as well. And I say that is a good thing.

Cheers to you both
DMT


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 10:51 AM
Post #25 of 76 (3471 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
dingus wrote:
iamthewallress wrote:
dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

I think everyone should do what they can. I carry as much as I can, you carry as much as you can.

Sounds reasonable.

DMT

ok, you acknowledge that that's reasonable there... but how is "i'll carry what i can and you carry what you can" different from "someone who is 110 shouldn't have to split by weight an 80 lb load with someone who is 170"?

Gonna keep hammering on this are you.

SOUNDS REASONABLE is me... trying to meet someone half way. Apparently that someone is not you.

That's OK.

Carry your own load.

DMT


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 10:56 AM
Post #26 of 76 (1829 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
clausti wrote:
dingus wrote:
iamthewallress wrote:
dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

You mean weight in the back pack?

I think everyone should do what they can. I carry as much as I can, you carry as much as you can.

Sounds reasonable.

DMT

ok, you acknowledge that that's reasonable there... but how is "i'll carry what i can and you carry what you can" different from "someone who is 110 shouldn't have to split by weight an 80 lb load with someone who is 170"?

Gonna keep hammering on this are you.

SOUNDS REASONABLE is me... trying to meet someone half way. Apparently that someone is not you.

That's OK.

Carry your own load.

DMT

I'M the one that keeps hammering on it? i do keep disagreeing with you every time YOU bring it up.

80 lbs adds up pretty quickly with a rope or two, a trad rack, sport draws, a thermos of hot tea, extra jackets, the pack itself weighs 5 lbs, and three liters of water a person. sunscreen. just saying.

and sorry, but i don't accept your "sounds reasonable." you either do or do not think the only fair way is to split in half by weight, which has been your stated position to date. so you're either conceding or not, and i was trying to figure out which. the answer appears to be "not, lets quit talking about it," which i do accept.


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 11:10 AM
Post #27 of 76 (1821 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

You don't accept me trying to meet IATW halfway? Mighty big of you there.

You know the funny part? She carried HALF THE COMMUNITY LOAD the time we went climbing.

We never even discussed it. Imagine that.

DMT


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 11:20 AM
Post #28 of 76 (1815 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
You don't accept me trying to meet IATW halfway? Mighty big of you there.

You know the funny part? She carried HALF THE COMMUNITY LOAD the time we went climbing.

We never even discussed it. Imagine that.

DMT

oh so you DO want to keep talking about it.

no, i don't accept your logical fallacy. you either do think that half by weigh is the only fair way, or you don't. there's not really any way around it. and you can think whatever you want, and i can tell you i think you're ridiculous, too.

i have never weighed packs with a partner. but by virtue of the fact that my pack is an small and my main partners is a large, stuffing them both usually results in an uneven distribution of weight. mostly because a rope weighs more than 15 draws. on the flip side, though, he still carries the rope (because it fits in his pack better) and i still carry the rack when we're going trad climbing, where often the rack weighs more. so that's how it usually works out.

and when i was climbing with guys i'd picked up in the parking lot at indian creek, i carried 5 sets of cams and my rope to often their 2 or 3 plus rope. i assure you mine weighed more.

but i STILL think it's ridiculous on the face to say that the only fair way is to split the load in half by weight. what are you going to do, weigh it??


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 11:45 AM
Post #29 of 76 (1809 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I don't recall saying that an equal share of community load is the ONLY way to split it up. There are certainly other less equivalent methods and I've used those too.

I was grateful to Nurse Ratchet the day she took the rope out of my pack because I was bonking.

But I don't want to depend upon stronger climbers to carry my shit for me (or drag me up routes beyond my means). Has nothing to do with you, what's in your pack, what you climb or how, or the chips you may tote on your shoulders.

Ideally speaking I don't want Nurse Ratchet or anyone else to have to carry my shit so I can go climbing. Its that simple.

As far as meeting halfway, I do that with my friends. Logic? What EVER.

DMT


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 11:55 AM
Post #30 of 76 (1804 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:
I don't recall saying that an equal share of community load is the ONLY way to split it up. There are certainly other less equivalent methods and I've used those too.

dingus wrote:
Yup got and see the point.

I still think climbing partners should carry an EQUAL share of the community load though. Along the lines of the thin hands comment, really.

DMT

from earlier in THIS thread, even. no, the word only isn't in there this time. so, do you or don't you think that equal by weigh is the only fair way? or are there other, equally fair ways?

In reply to:
I was grateful to Nurse Ratchet the day she took the rope out of my pack because I was bonking.

congrats to you? i related a few instances because you seemed to be implying, because i find your definition of a "fair" split ridiculous, that i don't carry an adequate amount or that i try and get out of carrying things.

In reply to:
But I don't want to depend upon stronger climbers to carry my shit for me (or drag me up routes beyond my means).

congrats to you again? i had no idea we were talking about stronger climber carrying more when hiking. i was pretty sure we were talking about weight of pack as relative to weight of person carrying it.

In reply to:
Has nothing to do with you, what's in your pack, what you climb or how, or the chips you may tote on your shoulders.
nope, has nothing to do with me or my chips. has something to do with yours, though, it would seem.

In reply to:
Ideally speaking I don't want Nurse Ratchet or anyone else to have to carry my shit so I can go climbing. Its that simple.


i don't think anyone is disagreeing with that, either?

In reply to:
As far as meeting halfway, I do that with my friends. Logic? What EVER.

DMT

if you have no use for logic, then what is the point of having a rational conversation? shall i just call you a poo poo head and have done with it?

edited for the quote cheesetit.


(This post was edited by clausti on Apr 21, 2009, 11:57 AM)


dingus


Apr 21, 2009, 12:17 PM
Post #31 of 76 (1795 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
from earlier in THIS thread, even. no, the word only isn't in there this time.

Restated - you are correct Dingus, you did not say or imply this was the only method.

In reply to:
so, do you or don't you think that equal by weigh is the only fair way? or are there other, equally fair ways?

Equally fair ways? Seriously?

In reply to:
congrats to you? i related a few instances because you seemed to be implying, because i find your definition of a "fair" split ridiculous, that i don't carry an adequate amount or that i try and get out of carrying things.

That's all you mate. I never said such a thing.

In reply to:
congrats to you again? i had no idea we were talking about stronger climber carrying more when hiking. i was pretty sure we were talking about weight of pack as relative to weight of person carrying it.

Yes I saw you entirely missed IATW's point about tradeoffs. No worries, you may come around one day.

In reply to:
nope, has nothing to do with me or my chips. has something to do with yours, though, it would seem.

Has to do with pack weight, remember?

In reply to:
if you have no use for logic, then what is the point of having a rational conversation?

We're having a rational conversation right now. There isn't much logic involved really, in most rational conversations. I don't fear a self-contradiction, is what I really mean along these lines. I don't think a self-contradiction is bad because OF the self-contradiction. I happily self-contradiuct as it suits me. One size fits all logic... isn't.

In reply to:
shall i just call you a poo poo head and have done with it?

What's that got to do with logic or rational conversations?

In reply to:
edited for the quote cheesetit.

Congratulations.

DMT


Gmburns2000


Apr 21, 2009, 12:42 PM
Post #32 of 76 (1782 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15152

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:

ok, you acknowledge that that's reasonable there... but how is "i'll carry what i can and you carry what you can" different from "someone who is 110 shouldn't have to split by weight an 80 lb load with someone who is 170"?

it seems more than a little ridiculous that you keep coming back to this every time sexism comes up, especially since it doesn't really seem like an issue of sexism so much as practicality, to me. do you want to get there faster, or do you want the load to be "fair"?

if i went climbing with a girl that weighed 170 (with me at 110), i'd be perfectly incredulous if she informed me that we were splitting the gear in half by weight and that was the only fair way. i mean, i'd carry it, because i'd rather go climbing than have a fight in the parking lot, but i don't think that person would be very high on my list of people to call for future trips.

I'm not sure I buy this entirely. OK, so it makes sense that someone who who weighs 170lbs is probably more capable of carrying more weight, but that doesn't mean the heavier person is stronger on a pound-for-pound basis.

I know folks who I outweight by 20lbs who are stronger than me. Do I still have to carry more because I weigh more even if they are stronger? It's kind of a bullshit answer to say "yes." When does it make sense to say, OK, half the load is unfair?

I guess the real question is where do you draw the line? Is the difference 20lbs? 50lbs? 60lbs?

Yes, I think splitting the gear up evenly is important. My partner, who is a woman, wouldn't want to do it any other way. I outweigh her by at least 50lbs. We're partners. We're equals. And it works very, very well. Somedays on the approach I carry the ropes and misc stuff (food, etc) and she carries the gear. Other days it is the opposite. On climbs, the leader takes whatever gear is needed, and the second carries the rest. I don't carry more on lead just because she's a girl and weighs less. We're a team, and we function that way.


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 12:52 PM
Post #33 of 76 (1775 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [Gmburns2000] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Gmburns2000 wrote:
Somedays on the approach I carry the ropes and misc stuff (food, etc) and she carries the gear. Other days it is the opposite. On climbs, the leader takes whatever gear is needed, and the second carries the rest.

i think all of that is perfectly reasonable, and sounds pretty much identical to what i described above as my system. but i bet that you're not weighing the packs to make sure they're even.


Gmburns2000


Apr 21, 2009, 12:57 PM
Post #34 of 76 (1773 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15152

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
Gmburns2000 wrote:
Somedays on the approach I carry the ropes and misc stuff (food, etc) and she carries the gear. Other days it is the opposite. On climbs, the leader takes whatever gear is needed, and the second carries the rest.

i think all of that is perfectly reasonable, and sounds pretty much identical to what i described above as my system. but i bet that you're not weighing the packs to make sure they're even.

No, but we try to be equal. We make assumptions that probably don't work out to being half, but we take "half the weight" as a goal when we pack.


ladyscarlett


Apr 21, 2009, 1:49 PM
Post #35 of 76 (1759 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2008
Posts: 374

Re: [Gmburns2000] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Gmburns2000 wrote:
clausti wrote:
Gmburns2000 wrote:
Somedays on the approach I carry the ropes and misc stuff (food, etc) and she carries the gear. Other days it is the opposite. On climbs, the leader takes whatever gear is needed, and the second carries the rest.

i think all of that is perfectly reasonable, and sounds pretty much identical to what i described above as my system. but i bet that you're not weighing the packs to make sure they're even.

No, but we try to be equal. We make assumptions that probably don't work out to being half, but we take "half the weight" as a goal when we pack.

A case where "up" is foremost on the brain rather than "Fair"? I guess it's a matter of team priorities? If the team priority is "BEER" that beer is going up!

No?

ls


camhead


Apr 21, 2009, 1:50 PM
Post #36 of 76 (1758 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20748

Re: [Gmburns2000] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Actually, I usually put rocks in the bottom of clausti's pack so that our loads come out to an even 50-50.

Don't tell her that, though.


Gmburns2000


Apr 21, 2009, 1:52 PM
Post #37 of 76 (1752 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15152

Re: [camhead] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
Actually, I usually put rocks in the bottom of clausti's pack so that our loads come out to an even 50-50.

Don't tell her that, though.


LaughLaughLaugh


















Oh wait a minute, shit! Busted Unsure


Gmburns2000


Apr 21, 2009, 1:53 PM
Post #38 of 76 (1749 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15152

Re: [ladyscarlett] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ladyscarlett wrote:

If the team priority is "BEER" that beer is going up!

No?

ls

Yes, particularly if she weighs a lot less and can't handle her liquor.


ladyscarlett


Apr 21, 2009, 2:21 PM
Post #39 of 76 (1741 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2008
Posts: 374

Re: [Gmburns2000] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Gmburns2000 wrote:
ladyscarlett wrote:

If the team priority is "BEER" that beer is going up!

No?

ls

Yes, particularly if she weighs a lot less and can't handle her liquor.

Fair play!

ls

ps - shouldn't give away your game plan...heh


Gmburns2000


Apr 21, 2009, 4:07 PM
Post #40 of 76 (1724 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15152

Re: [ladyscarlett] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

ladyscarlett wrote:
Gmburns2000 wrote:
ladyscarlett wrote:

If the team priority is "BEER" that beer is going up!

No?

ls

Yes, particularly if she weighs a lot less and can't handle her liquor.

Fair play!

ls

ps - shouldn't give away your game plan...heh

DOH!

Twice in one thread. Unsure


clausti


Apr 21, 2009, 4:24 PM
Post #41 of 76 (1719 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [camhead] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
Actually, I usually put rocks cams that I *swear* I'm going to use today in the bottom of clausti's pack so that our loads come out to an even 50-50.

fixied.


notapplicable


Apr 21, 2009, 9:47 PM
Post #42 of 76 (1682 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17766

Re: [Gmburns2000] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Gmburns2000 wrote:
clausti wrote:

ok, you acknowledge that that's reasonable there... but how is "i'll carry what i can and you carry what you can" different from "someone who is 110 shouldn't have to split by weight an 80 lb load with someone who is 170"?

it seems more than a little ridiculous that you keep coming back to this every time sexism comes up, especially since it doesn't really seem like an issue of sexism so much as practicality, to me. do you want to get there faster, or do you want the load to be "fair"?

if i went climbing with a girl that weighed 170 (with me at 110), i'd be perfectly incredulous if she informed me that we were splitting the gear in half by weight and that was the only fair way. i mean, i'd carry it, because i'd rather go climbing than have a fight in the parking lot, but i don't think that person would be very high on my list of people to call for future trips.

I'm not sure I buy this entirely. OK, so it makes sense that someone who who weighs 170lbs is probably more capable of carrying more weight, but that doesn't mean the heavier person is stronger on a pound-for-pound basis.

I know folks who I outweight by 20lbs who are stronger than me. Do I still have to carry more because I weigh more even if they are stronger? It's kind of a bullshit answer to say "yes." When does it make sense to say, OK, half the load is unfair?

I guess the real question is where do you draw the line? Is the difference 20lbs? 50lbs? 60lbs?

Yes, I think splitting the gear up evenly is important. My partner, who is a woman, wouldn't want to do it any other way. I outweigh her by at least 50lbs. We're partners. We're equals. And it works very, very well. Somedays on the approach I carry the ropes and misc stuff (food, etc) and she carries the gear. Other days it is the opposite. On climbs, the leader takes whatever gear is needed, and the second carries the rest. I don't carry more on lead just because she's a girl and weighs less. We're a team, and we function that way.

I think "we are equals" is an incomplete definition of a true partnership. To truly be a team is to be gestalt.

My brother and I hiked a portion of the AT awhile back and for that month our pack weight distribution was not equal. He out weighs me by 50+ lbs. and is built like a football player; I'm taller, thinner and have an altogether different body type. We realized that the most efficient system was for him to carry 15-20% more than myself on average. If my pack weighed 50lbs, his would weigh around 60.

Conversely, he is still afraid of heights despite being a climber for over 5 years and having jumped out of air planes. When it comes to exposed leads, I always take the sharp end. Not because he can't ever make it but that shit gets to him sometimes and we have to go down. Its more efficient and productive for our team if I take the exposed and or runout pitches.

Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses, to meld them such that together you are greater than the sum of your parts is the essence of a partnership. Your equals in that you both have something to contribute and you strengthen one another.


Partner happiegrrrl


Apr 22, 2009, 6:36 AM
Post #43 of 76 (1663 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4615

Re: [notapplicable] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Climbing is a lot more than just the physical act of getting up and off a route.

I look for partners that understand that. I actually get uncomfortable when in the presence of people climbing without that awareness. I want to get away from them, and I sure as hell don't partner with them.

So, while it does seem that more men, in general, have the ability to climb at higher grades, endure more physical discomfort, use physical strength to get up something, and perhaps even be able to compartmentalize fear more efficiently, the fact is that more than 99% of us aren't in that top category.

We're just out there, getting out there. And, we are people, with all our character traits, which help and hinder us. The dynamics change depending on who we are with - we may react negatively to one person(as I do when in that company of narrow-focus, climbing is just that time spent on the route types) and shine when with someone else.

I climb with mostly men and have seen all types, from incredibly competent to incredibly the opposite. And everywhere in between. I think that to compare the reality(the gamut of people) to an idealized concept isn't really very useful.




About the load sharing. I definitely want to carry my share. I quasi-dated a guy for a while who damned well made sure I was carrying half. But most people aren't that focused on such a thing. They divide gear up almost as a symbol of the partnership: We share this experience. It's the aspect of partaking together that is the thing. To me, anyway.

I have had a lot of guy partners who take on more than their share. In the beginning, I resisted this, because I wanted to be doing my part. But....to push the point caused wasted energy and discord. Especially if we were meeting at the crag and the packs would have to be redone for a pretty short approach. The energy of partnership is better focused in other directions.


That said - I also found myself holding back a group a while back, and had to accept giving over the rope I was carrying in order to reduce that ...rope drag....on the approach. It was a 2 1/2 hour approach, and a bit through some scrambling. I was with 4 guys who are totally fit and experienced in heavy approaches. I am ....not.

We divvied up gear in the beginning, and I took a rope on my pack. I was fine for most of the part, though I was slower. But when it came to some thrashing and boulder hopping, I slowed down immensely, compared to these people who just kept going as if it were a walk in the park.

One of the people offered to take the rope and while I initially resisted, the fact was that it would have done more to drag down the partnership by refusing that share.

So....while I was technically an unequal partner, I think they all knew that going in. Not a once did I catch a whiff of condescending attitude or impatience. Nor was I patronized or treated like a liability. On two occasions, someone stuck around me when I *had* to move through a section that would have been a catastrophe if I botched it, but for the most part they left me to get through what I had to. Just not going to enter into that 'helpless femme' dynamic.

It was a good day, and an experience I wouldn't have had with most any other partners I have known. If I were focused on physical equality, the situation couldn't/wouldn't have occurred. My better partners, I believe, received benefit by sharing something I deeply appreciated.

So.... I don't know about this egalitarian thing. It doesn't seem to really matter, in the larger scheme. I could easily set myself up to experience climbing through 'physically equal' or even with me being the more accomplished. Would I want to? No. I like the mix. This weekend I am getting out with someone who has done only two leads, and I am the stronger partner. Sometimes, I get out with people who climb harder, but I know the crag/climbs and have that to offer. Sometimes I get out with incredible, accomplished people and learn from them. It's all good.


robbovius


Apr 22, 2009, 6:51 AM
Post #44 of 76 (1659 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 8405

Re: [happiegrrrl] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I outweigh my usual climbing partner by 100 lbs. sometimes, in the interest of fairness and equitability, necessity demands that I offer to carry her.


dingus


Apr 22, 2009, 7:26 AM
Post #45 of 76 (1653 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [happiegrrrl] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

happiegrrrl wrote:
I could easily set myself up to experience climbing through 'physically equal' or even with me being the more accomplished. Would I want to? No. I like the mix.

Nice post about your thought processes. Regarding the above...

(how to make this point?)

Being able, willing and actually taking the lead - and I don't mean the sharp end of the rope, I mean the lead, on everything - find a new rock, suss out a trail, get up there, find a line to try, recruit a partner (or 2), go up there and have at it - one example.

Another - I want to climb a wall. Do I hire a guide to 'get the rope up there' for me? Do I find a Gun to put the rope up there for me?

Or does the 13 year old boy stare at a picture of Tom Frost hanging in aiders at the end of roof traverse on Salathe Wall and say to myself - 'I can NEVER do THAT.' And then a couple of decades later find himself DOING AS TOM FROST DID.

And he may ask himself - HOW DID I GET HERE?

He got there with a self-starter attitude. He got there using the notion that a compleat climber, while perhaps never rising to World Standards (whatever those are), a compleat climber seeks mastery of the sport.

Seeks it. I didn't say masterED. Seeks to....

Me? I want to (and have) be able to organize a wall climb, recruit a compatible and fairly equal climber, and have at it, on our own. I want a partner who sorta operates under the same principle. We will both want 'our share' of pretty much the whole experience - leads, first down on raps, hauling, and well, ferrying loads.

Its a mindset.

Its not that I expect HIM to carry half the load - I expect ME to carry half the load. Turns out most of my regular partners, without having ever verbalized this issue, see it the same way and automatically seek to equal the loads out, usually by using the hand-method. Its not some anal-ized quibbling over ounces lol.

Its normal. Laying out the community gear and the 'hefting' half the load, is normal. Barter time too... um.. you take the rack and half the draws, I'll take the rope and the tent poles. or whatever... a water filter for a hammer, etc.

The load gets distributed, packed and toted.

I do not see how the compleat climber gets there byu toting less than his half of the load.

And its not the load per se- its the attitude and expectation... suggests an entirely different approach to the game.

An example of attitude - if I can't take my half of the leads (come what may) I am on a route not within my capacity. Getting lead up such a route (which has certainly happened in my career lots of times - I'm just not that good a climber haha) is not nearly as satisfying as those climbs where I was able to rise to the equal partner standard.

Its an attitude and mindset and I am damn sure not going to apologize for it nor am I likely to change, at this late stage. If I didn't have this attitude I would have hung up my climbing shoes a long long time ago I suspect.

So when I say "I think climbers should carry their half of the community load" I am TALKING ABOUT ME. That's my opinion, that to me is the ideal distribution for CLIMBERS.

The Compleat Climber carries her half of the load (and again, by load I mean ALL of the load, not just pack weight). If this Compleat Climber is guiding clients up a route of COURSE she carries more load. If this Compleat Climber is being GUIDED up a route perhaps she is on vacation?

DMT


Partner happiegrrrl


Apr 22, 2009, 7:45 AM
Post #46 of 76 (1642 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4615

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I get on some routes I wouldn't, were it not for my partners. The .9's and 10's, I don't know if I will ever be able to lead. I hope so, but I don't know. Under that, I may not be willing to lead currently, but I expect that if I found myself somehow wandered into it, I would be able to pull it off.

What about the idea that a person, such as myself, going into such situations(like a 2 hour approach where you and your partners are the only ones there, and if you get hurt, it's bad) being a step towards that mastery you refer to? That's how I feel about it when I am with better partners.

Also - I absolutely agree that it is not about my PARTNER carrying half, but ME carrying half. And not just the physical gear. Alas, some things are not tangible. I must be carrying half of something to have the wonderful people in my life who come looking to climb with me on a repeated basis, I think. And it isn't the idea they're going to get laid, which is one a lot of people suggest is the only motivator in such situations.


granite_grrl


Apr 22, 2009, 7:53 AM
Post #47 of 76 (1639 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 25, 2002
Posts: 14800

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Gawd, this whole "carry half the load" stuff is bullshit. Let go of the egos people. GMburns, replace "outweighs by X pounds" and use "partner has a bum leg and is slow as fuck going up hills". Sometimes it just makes more sence for one person to take more of the load, or do more of the work.

But I'll tell you, even though I had my friend carry a heavier load up to the crags when we went away climbing at Easter, we still took turns hanging the draws. And THAT'S where climbing equality comes in. Not that one was more capable than the other, but opportunities are open and I'm not berated as a woman when I take charge in the climbing arena.


dingus


Apr 22, 2009, 8:01 AM
Post #48 of 76 (1637 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [granite_grrl] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
Gawd, this whole "carry half the load" stuff is bullshit. Let go of the egos people. GMburns, replace "outweighs by X pounds" and use "partner has a bum leg and is slow as fuck going up hills". Sometimes it just makes more sence for one person to take more of the load, or do more of the work.

But I'll tell you, even though I had my friend carry a heavier load up to the crags when we went away climbing at Easter, we still took turns hanging the draws. And THAT'S where climbing equality comes in. Not that one was more capable than the other, but opportunities are open and I'm not berated as a woman when I take charge in the climbing arena.

Its not bullshit. Read into all you wish, but the bottom line is if you aren't toting your share of the load to the climb you aren't toting your share of the load to the climb. There is no getting around this.

Slow partner with a bum leg - I'm not sure this is the example you want to use here....

DMT


(This post was edited by dingus on Apr 22, 2009, 8:02 AM)


clausti


Apr 22, 2009, 8:09 AM
Post #49 of 76 (1631 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:

Slow partner with a bum leg - I'm not sure this is the example you want to use here....

DMT

since GG is the one with the bum leg, pretty sure she can use the example whenever she wants.


dingus


Apr 22, 2009, 8:12 AM
Post #50 of 76 (1628 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

OK then run with it!

DMT


Partner happiegrrrl


Apr 22, 2009, 8:15 AM
Post #51 of 76 (1996 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4615

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I don't know....I AM aware when the weight distribution is uneven, and it's me who has less. Whether it be the physical gear or some other, less tangible weight.

I am aware that I am having less, or more - experience, responsibility, pack weight, whatever.

However - NEVER underestimate the value of an interesting, positive personality as part of what gets carried or hauled, along the day! Nor the opposite. Gawd, those days do drag, unmercifully hot, when the partner is boring.......hahahaha


dingus


Apr 22, 2009, 8:29 AM
Post #52 of 76 (1987 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [happiegrrrl] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

happiegrrrl wrote:
However - NEVER underestimate the value of an interesting, positive personality as part of what gets carried or hauled, along the day! Nor the opposite. Gawd, those days do drag, unmercifully hot, when the partner is boring.......hahahaha

I would be privileged to climb with you happi, or clausti or GG... even if I had to tote EVERYTHING up to the cliff (so yall could lead me up routes I can't send myself hah!).

I mean that - priviledged.

I don't care what yall carry and that is the truth.

On 2nd thought - I'd sneak a rock in clausti's pack too!

(angus did that to me more than once haha)

DMT


clausti


Apr 22, 2009, 8:33 AM
Post #53 of 76 (1982 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

dingus wrote:

On 2nd thought - I'd sneak a rock in clausti's pack too!

it would not be as heavy as the rocks i put in the rope bag that you so graciously offered to carry. Laugh


Gmburns2000


Apr 22, 2009, 8:35 AM
Post #54 of 76 (1982 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15152

Re: [granite_grrl] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

granite_grrl wrote:
Gawd, this whole "carry half the load" stuff is bullshit. Let go of the egos people. GMburns, replace "outweighs by X pounds" and use "partner has a bum leg and is slow as fuck going up hills". Sometimes it just makes more sence for one person to take more of the load, or do more of the work.

But I'll tell you, even though I had my friend carry a heavier load up to the crags when we went away climbing at Easter, we still took turns hanging the draws. And THAT'S where climbing equality comes in. Not that one was more capable than the other, but opportunities are open and I'm not berated as a woman when I take charge in the climbing arena.

My other climbing partner (Jello, in the blog) is much more fit than I am and can carry a lot more weight and still move faster than I can on any approach or descent. He often carries more weight on the descent because he knows that I have bad knees and move slowly. He is also a guide, and sometimes sees carrying the load as "practice."

However, I never ask him to do that. I always assume we'll be splitting the duties evenly. I outweight him by about 20lbs, and he's stronger than me. But I always pack the bags as if we're sharing the load. When he packs the bags, he packs his bag heavier because he wants to move and knows that I can't move as quickly as he can.

I think it's more about attitude. I've never asked someone to carry more than me unless I really couldn't do the job (i.e. - I was clearly hurt). Maybe you're OK giving more of the load to someone else when you're healthy. That's fine. I'm really not. I don't have a whole lot to offer people, so I pick up the slack where I can.

I guess I feel uncomfortable asking others to do something that I'm unwilling to do myself. I also prefer to climb with folks who are the same. For instance, I don't ask people to lead routes that I wouldn't lead myself, just so I could top rope it. If they want to do it, then fine, that's great. I'll TR it after they're done, but I won't ask them to do something that I'm not willing to do myself.


dingus


Apr 22, 2009, 8:42 AM
Post #55 of 76 (1978 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Dec 16, 2002
Posts: 17392

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
dingus wrote:

On 2nd thought - I'd sneak a rock in clausti's pack too!

it would not be as heavy as the rocks i put in the rope bag that you so graciously offered to carry. Laugh

So one time Angus sneaks a rock in my pack. This was 3 or 4 miles from the car. He went to go do the business and I found it and transferred it to his pack.

Halfway down I say,

"Goddamn this pack is heavy." I made a big show of adjusting it.

Angus later told me he knew I'd got to him when I did that.

"why didn't you check?" I asked.

"What, and give you the satisfaction? It was better to carry it."

Angus is cool.

So are you clausti. Cheers
DMT


notapplicable


Apr 22, 2009, 8:55 AM
Post #56 of 76 (1971 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 17766

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

In reply to:
Me? I want to (and have) be able to organize a wall climb, recruit a compatible and fairly equal climber, and have at it, on our own. I want a partner who sorta operates under the same principle. We will both want 'our share' of pretty much the whole experience - leads, first down on raps, hauling, and well, ferrying loads.


I think that is the ideal foundation for the most productive type of partnership. Two self-starters who are independently motivated in the pursuit and have every desire to take on their share of all responsibilities. That is the ideal.

What I've found though is that you can have two such individuals climbing together and still have a disparity in ability. Be it a physical or psychological limitation or perhaps simply a difference in experience or knowledge.

I think two such people (and perhaps your not saying any differently, I'm not sure that you are) can work together as equals, while contributing differently to all the individual functions that go to make up a day, a week, a month of climbing.

I've rarely had a bad day of climbing with a self-starter like you describe, no matter how our abilities matched up. The times I've enjoyed the least are when I'm with someone who I had to "drag to the cliff".


fresh


Apr 22, 2009, 9:06 AM
Post #57 of 76 (1966 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Aug 6, 2007
Posts: 1199

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

when efficiency is a consideration, then you determine who carries what based on each person's ability in order to maximize efficiency for the team. if it's not a consideration, who cares? ten extra pounds shouldn't make much of a difference anyway if you're in shape and it's not a day-long approach. be considerate and communicate when you're having a bad day or something. if I'm climbing with someone who's completely oblivious about appropriate distribution of stuff then I'm probably not gonna be climbing with them for too long.

when I climb with my gf I usually make her carry the rope while I take the rack, which usually means I'm carrying a bit more than half of the weight. but she's probably working harder than me.

a year ago, I was basically teaching her everything. now, we're close to being equal partners so I try to relegate more stuff to her. my hope is that soon we'll be at the stage where decisions are made together, instead of me showing the way. I don't the point is equality with everything, the point is to work together as a team to accomplish each undertaking.


(This post was edited by fresh on Apr 22, 2009, 9:08 AM)


desertwanderer81


Apr 22, 2009, 9:35 AM
Post #58 of 76 (1952 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272

Re: [sendit1023] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Just to throw in my 2p, I am a firm believer that men and women are equal, overall.

Men typically have much more upper body strength than women. Women typically have smaller fingers and better flexibility for those high foot holds! In my opinion it all evens itself out in the end.

As for gear, I prefer that my female partners share the load, however if I see someone struggling, I'll volunteer to take more of the load. Male or female.

I'm not quite sure where all of this massive flaming is coming from, truth be told.....


boadman


Apr 22, 2009, 12:15 PM
Post #59 of 76 (1924 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 6, 2003
Posts: 726

Re: [dingus] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I think that the difference in performance in climbing between elite female climbers and elite male climbers is actually much smaller than in sports like Basketball. Has there ever been a Lyn Hill, Josune, Beth Rodden, etc. in basketball? I don't think that we'll see a professional woman basketball player playing in a men's league any time soon.

Also, in per capita terms, my experience at the crags is that there are representitive numbers of women cranking as hard as the men.

dingus wrote:
OK.

Consider basketball as a counterpoint...

using some of the points made in this thread, basketball doesn't seem to be egalitarian by comparison.

For both climbing and basketball - at the very pinnacle (haha) of performance, males dominate. Sorry, they just do, there is no arguing the point. Sure you can cite a woman or two who has held their own for a time but they are the exceptions.

In climbing, as pointed out quite correctly in this thread, we men and women tend to mix it up a lot, sort of in our 'intermural league.'

In basketball? You really don't see this much? You see guys playing guys - you don't see a lot of women if any at all, on these pickup teams.

Using basketball I can easily see the difference in how climbers 'integrate' when compared to other sports.

I suspect other adventure oriented sports (do the DEW!) have a similar dynamic as well?

DMT


sendit1023


Apr 22, 2009, 1:39 PM
Post #60 of 76 (1908 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Apr 13, 2009
Posts: 2

OP response [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Wow, thanks for the responses. I just got back from a trip so sorry it's taken so long. My post was more about comparing climbing to older sports (such as basketball) which were designed more for the male's body than the female's. My view is that a sport like rock climbing provides an opportunity for both genders to perform to the best of their ability. I'm not so much worried about who carries what share of the load (I agree with those who said I WANT to carry half of the load, even though my partner may be heavier or stronger than I am).


Partner happiegrrrl


Apr 22, 2009, 6:29 PM
Post #61 of 76 (1892 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 25, 2004
Posts: 4615

Re: [sendit1023] OP response [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

I've rad some historical accounts on rock climbing(not mountaineering) that indicate women were fairly involved, and leading, in the earlier eras.

Not to the same number as men, but still - not as girlfriends being hauled up routes in terror or just to please their man.

It seems there was a decrease in the ration of women to men, and then women came back in numbers more recently. Look at some of the old routes and you'll see a number of the FA's include women.


lvpyne


Apr 22, 2009, 6:54 PM
Post #62 of 76 (1886 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 7, 2005
Posts: 207

Re: [happiegrrrl] OP response [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

happiegrrrl wrote:
I've rad some historical accounts on rock climbing(not mountaineering) that indicate women were fairly involved, and leading, in the earlier eras.

One of the most interesting books I've read about the history of climbing was a booked edited by David Mazel called: "Mountaineering Women: Stories by Early Climbers." The book has everything -- great quotes from Victorian mountaineering/trekking expeditions where "Mrs. Cole" climbed the Aeggischhorn and "saucily declined the proffered help" to a chapter about Gwen Moffat's first season as a professional guide in 1953.

The bibliography for the book is fascinating, too -- a great source for accounts of climbs women did between 1900-1920 that were published in different magazines (i.e. Harper's Bazaar and the Ladies Scottish Climbing Journal.) One of the most interesting articles from there was one by Herman Matteson (published in 1922, Sunset), entitled "How Much of a Coward Are You? A Woman Mountain Guide Tells of her Experiences with Fear on the High Ridges" -- about Alma Wagen, the early professional guide on Mount Rainier.


clee03m


Apr 27, 2009, 10:25 AM
Post #63 of 76 (1841 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 29, 2004
Posts: 782

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
i actually deliberately left out the lower ranges because it seems like that is more trad, and at those levels it's mostly guys chuffing around with it. the women that i know that climb 5.7 at their limit only follow. and i don't know any women who lead trad who lead less than 5.9.

I find this observation interesting. I know women trad leaders who lead less than 5.9's. But other than new trad leaders, I think most women trad leaders I know also fall into climbing 5.9 and harder. I wonder why this is...


clausti


Apr 27, 2009, 11:26 AM
Post #64 of 76 (1835 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [clee03m] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clee03m wrote:
clausti wrote:
i actually deliberately left out the lower ranges because it seems like that is more trad, and at those levels it's mostly guys chuffing around with it. the women that i know that climb 5.7 at their limit only follow. and i don't know any women who lead trad who lead less than 5.9.

I find this observation interesting. I know women trad leaders who lead less than 5.9's. But other than new trad leaders, I think most women trad leaders I know also fall into climbing 5.9 and harder. I wonder why this is...

some men trad climb like it's fucking golf- once a month/to get away from their wives. and those guys never climb harder than like 5.8. i don't know any women who do that.

women who lead trad are not generally the kind of women who dabble in climbing. they're usually pretty into it.


Gmburns2000


Apr 27, 2009, 11:51 AM
Post #65 of 76 (1829 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15152

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
clee03m wrote:
clausti wrote:
i actually deliberately left out the lower ranges because it seems like that is more trad, and at those levels it's mostly guys chuffing around with it. the women that i know that climb 5.7 at their limit only follow. and i don't know any women who lead trad who lead less than 5.9.

I find this observation interesting. I know women trad leaders who lead less than 5.9's. But other than new trad leaders, I think most women trad leaders I know also fall into climbing 5.9 and harder. I wonder why this is...

some men trad climb like it's fucking golf- once a month/to get away from their wives. and those guys never climb harder than like 5.8. i don't know any women who do that.

women who lead trad are not generally the kind of women who dabble in climbing. they're usually pretty into it.

The vast majority of the women I know who trad lead only trad lead up to 5.9. I know a couple of women who could probably trad lead harder than that, but I don't think they do very often.


k.l.k


Apr 27, 2009, 12:00 PM
Post #66 of 76 (1825 views)
Shortcut

Registered: May 9, 2007
Posts: 1190

Re: [happiegrrrl] OP response [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

happiegrrrl wrote:
I've rad some historical accounts on rock climbing(not mountaineering) that indicate women were fairly involved, and leading, in the earlier eras.

Not to the same number as men, but still - not as girlfriends being hauled up routes in terror or just to please their man.

It seems there was a decrease in the ration of women to men, and then women came back in numbers more recently. Look at some of the old routes and you'll see a number of the FA's include women.

Happi--

Yes, that seems to be the case. Women's per capita participation in climbing in North America probably peaked in the late 1930s before falling off to a low somehwere in the '70s or '80s. Britain seems to have followed a similar arc, and the best guess is that the rest of western Europe followed suit.

That's basically the story of women's participation in public sphere stuff generally-- graduate school, professional occupations, etc. --with a brief exceptional spike during WW2.


camhead


Apr 27, 2009, 12:01 PM
Post #67 of 76 (1823 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 9, 2001
Posts: 20748

Re: [Gmburns2000] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Gmburns2000 wrote:
clausti wrote:
clee03m wrote:
clausti wrote:
i actually deliberately left out the lower ranges because it seems like that is more trad, and at those levels it's mostly guys chuffing around with it. the women that i know that climb 5.7 at their limit only follow. and i don't know any women who lead trad who lead less than 5.9.

I find this observation interesting. I know women trad leaders who lead less than 5.9's. But other than new trad leaders, I think most women trad leaders I know also fall into climbing 5.9 and harder. I wonder why this is...

some men trad climb like it's fucking golf- once a month/to get away from their wives. and those guys never climb harder than like 5.8. i don't know any women who do that.

women who lead trad are not generally the kind of women who dabble in climbing. they're usually pretty into it.

The vast majority of the women I know who trad lead only trad lead up to 5.9. I know a couple of women who could probably trad lead harder than that, but I don't think they do very often.

that's because you climb at the Gunks, where everyone climbs below 5.9. In most of the rest of the climbing world, trad below 5.8 is merely choss-gullying.


Gmburns2000


Apr 27, 2009, 12:10 PM
Post #68 of 76 (1815 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 6, 2007
Posts: 15152

Re: [camhead] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
Gmburns2000 wrote:
clausti wrote:
clee03m wrote:
clausti wrote:
i actually deliberately left out the lower ranges because it seems like that is more trad, and at those levels it's mostly guys chuffing around with it. the women that i know that climb 5.7 at their limit only follow. and i don't know any women who lead trad who lead less than 5.9.

I find this observation interesting. I know women trad leaders who lead less than 5.9's. But other than new trad leaders, I think most women trad leaders I know also fall into climbing 5.9 and harder. I wonder why this is...

some men trad climb like it's fucking golf- once a month/to get away from their wives. and those guys never climb harder than like 5.8. i don't know any women who do that.

women who lead trad are not generally the kind of women who dabble in climbing. they're usually pretty into it.

The vast majority of the women I know who trad lead only trad lead up to 5.9. I know a couple of women who could probably trad lead harder than that, but I don't think they do very often.

that's because you climb at the Gunks, where everyone climbs below 5.9. In most of the rest of the climbing world, trad below 5.8 is merely choss-gullying.

That's probably a fair assessment.


clausti


Apr 27, 2009, 3:21 PM
Post #69 of 76 (1780 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [Gmburns2000] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Gmburns2000 wrote:
camhead wrote:
Gmburns2000 wrote:
clausti wrote:
clee03m wrote:
clausti wrote:
i actually deliberately left out the lower ranges because it seems like that is more trad, and at those levels it's mostly guys chuffing around with it. the women that i know that climb 5.7 at their limit only follow. and i don't know any women who lead trad who lead less than 5.9.

I find this observation interesting. I know women trad leaders who lead less than 5.9's. But other than new trad leaders, I think most women trad leaders I know also fall into climbing 5.9 and harder. I wonder why this is...

some men trad climb like it's fucking golf- once a month/to get away from their wives. and those guys never climb harder than like 5.8. i don't know any women who do that.

women who lead trad are not generally the kind of women who dabble in climbing. they're usually pretty into it.

The vast majority of the women I know who trad lead only trad lead up to 5.9. I know a couple of women who could probably trad lead harder than that, but I don't think they do very often.

that's because you climb at the Gunks, where everyone climbs below 5.9. In most of the rest of the climbing world, trad below 5.8 is merely choss-gullying.

That's probably a fair assessment.

really, though, that probably does play a large part. the gunks is highly exceptional in its provenance of routes that are sub-5.8 and are actually decent climbing and not a ledge ladder or a gully.


desertwanderer81


Apr 27, 2009, 3:57 PM
Post #70 of 76 (1771 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

Word.... I remember one 5.3+ which I took some newbies on where only half the group could get up it.... No Picnic I believe it was called!


clausti


Apr 27, 2009, 4:01 PM
Post #71 of 76 (1770 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Oct 4, 2004
Posts: 5690

Re: [desertwanderer81] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

desertwanderer81 wrote:
Word.... I remember one 5.3+ which I took some newbies on where only half the group could get up it.... No Picnic I believe it was called!

beginner's delight- what a beautiful route! unbelievably crisp moves, at 5.3.


desertwanderer81


Apr 27, 2009, 4:07 PM
Post #72 of 76 (1766 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
desertwanderer81 wrote:
Word.... I remember one 5.3+ which I took some newbies on where only half the group could get up it.... No Picnic I believe it was called!

beginner's delight- what a beautiful route! unbelievably crisp moves, at 5.3.

I agree! That one is pretty ass kicking.

I was actually talking about this climb though:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/routes/North_America/United_States/New_York/Upstate/The_Gunks/The_Trapps/No_Picnic_25250.html

They call it a 5.4-..... I think when I did it they called it a 5.3+, heh.

The only 5.3 with an overhang in existance!!!

I miss gunks climbing, heh.


grantjk


Apr 27, 2009, 8:10 PM
Post #73 of 76 (1743 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Mar 13, 2006
Posts: 76

Re: [desertwanderer81] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (1 rating)  
Can't Post

"What's the difference between a Gunks 5.4 and a Gunks 5.7?......The 5.4 only has one 5.7 move in it."

Made me laugh when I heard it...definitely is the area with quality climbs at all grades.


robbovius


Apr 28, 2009, 4:11 AM
Post #74 of 76 (1728 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Nov 20, 2002
Posts: 8405

Re: [clausti] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

clausti wrote:
desertwanderer81 wrote:
Word.... I remember one 5.3+ which I took some newbies on where only half the group could get up it.... No Picnic I believe it was called!

beginner's delight- what a beautiful route! unbelievably crisp moves, at 5.3.

Climbed that for the first time last summer, truly, a gem...


desertwanderer81


Apr 28, 2009, 1:51 PM
Post #75 of 76 (1690 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Sep 5, 2007
Posts: 2272

Re: [robbovius] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

robbovius wrote:
clausti wrote:
desertwanderer81 wrote:
Word.... I remember one 5.3+ which I took some newbies on where only half the group could get up it.... No Picnic I believe it was called!

beginner's delight- what a beautiful route! unbelievably crisp moves, at 5.3.

Climbed that for the first time last summer, truly, a gem...

Just about every climb at the gunks are gems ;) I would say that the ratio of Gems to "Meh" are 3:1.

Well that's my opinion at least.

Shame that the walls aren't a bit higher.


aerili


Apr 28, 2009, 4:44 PM
Post #76 of 76 (552 views)
Shortcut

Registered: Jan 12, 2006
Posts: 1166

Re: [camhead] Thoughts Opinions on Climbing as an Egalitarian Sport [In reply to]
Report this Post
Average: avg_1 avg_2 avg_3 avg_4 avg_5 (0 ratings)  
Can't Post

camhead wrote:
that's because you climb at the Gunks, where everyone climbs below 5.9. In most of the rest of the climbing world, trad below 5.8 is merely choss-gullying.

Granite Mountain, Arizona would be another exception to that rule there, boy.


Forums : Community : The Ladies' Room

 


Search for (options)

Log In:

Username:
Password: Remember me:

Go Register
Go Lost Password?



Follow us on Twiter Become a Fan on Facebook