Ladies 10 round numbers 2015

RacoonQueen

WTF....all this over a thread title. No...it's staying as ladies. Christ. Ladies is used all the time in athletics. I can't believe people are even talking about this. Is this debate for real??

annapr

RacoonQueen wrote: »

WTF....all this over a thread title. No...it's staying as ladies. Christ. Ladies is used all the time in athletics. I can't believe people are even talking about this. Is this debate for real??

I thought it was a public Internet forum where people can talk about whatever they want, so long as they are not breaking the charter rules.

RacoonQueen

annapr wrote: »

I thought it was a public Internet forum where people can talk about whatever they want, so long as they are not breaking the charter rules.

Where did I say you can't talk about it? I said it's ridiculous. It is actually breaking the charter rules, as it has totally dragged the thread off topic. Last three pages are nothing to doing with the 10 round numbers, people attempting them or talking about races..it's people objecting to the term lady, for some reason that is totally bizarre to me.

Pacing Mule

Jaysus. Change the other thread to gentlemens round numbers. Nobody will give a bollix and all all will be equal.

Sacksian

Surely, if most women contributing to the thread want it to be called the women's round numbers thread, then that should be the determining factor?

It's an important debate.

"Ladies" is an archaic term.

annapr

RacoonQueen wrote: »

Where did I say you can't talk about it? I said it's ridiculous. It is actually breaking the charter rules, as it has totally dragged the thread off topic. Last three pages are nothing to doing with the 10 round numbers, people attempting them or talking about races..it's people objecting to the term lady, for some reason that is totally bizarre to me.

Like I said, not that big a deal. The original comments were lighthearted but it appears to have wound people up a lot. Looks like you have made your decision anyway... I don't suppose you'd consider adding an apostrophe* though?



*runs for cover... Scuttles back to slow training log and away from real athletics

kit3

I asked the question but haven't seen any argument that convinces me it should be changed. Careermove's post made most sense to me

Dubgal72

Ladies terminology

It's all about context. Over the last 100 years, there have been many uses and inferences of the term.

It would have had social class origins certainly, however ownership of the term has changed, depending on the wider historical and contemporary contexts.

For example, contemporaneously from the 60s/70s a bit of class inversion: dinner lady and cleaning lady but never lady doctor. The use of the term has inspired quite heated debate in feminist circles.

In athletics, the feel is generally a throw back to older times but whereas there are no longer 'gentlemen runners' (there were), lady runners :rolleyes: seems to have stuck.

Just because it is a standardised description in other sports doesn't mean it can't be challenged here.

The terminology used in hockey, GAA and horse racing is arguably of class origin: hockey from the turn of the 19C, GAA similarly and horse racing...well, not really an working class estate sport, is it?!
We have to look at the evolution of the usage of the two former in terms of 'the betterment of the working classes', a common gentrification drive since the 1700s, personified in societies such as 'the Reformation of Manners'.

It is not so much that the term here is offensive (I find the use of the term 'girls' to describe grown women slightly offensive but it depends who is doing the using...), more that there is enough consensus among those who will be actually using this table to suggest that the term is inappropriate.

Dubgal72

Pacing Mule wrote: »

Jaysus. Change the other thread to gentlemens round numbers. Nobody will give a bollix and all all will be equal.

No thanks. I ain't no gen'lmon....

Dubgal72

Oh and PS, this is not off topic imo, it relates directly to the thread title. If the 'ladies' bit wasn't in the title, welllll.....;)

Chivito550

Why not just change this to the "B-Standard" tables. Men who can't post on the main table can post here as a stepping stone. If women can post on the other table, then men should be allowed post here. Equality works both ways. It will also remove this title debate, and add more life to the tables. Let's be honest, the tables can use a bit of life!

annapr

Chivito550 wrote: »

Why not just change this to the "B-Standard" tables. Men who can't post on the main table can post here as a stepping stone. If women can post on the other table, then men should be allowed post here. Equality works both ways. It will also remove this title debate, and add more life to the tables. Let's be honest, the tables can use a bit of life!

I think that's exactly what DG was suggesting in the thread that started all the New Year's fun.

Dubgal72

Chivito550 wrote: »

Why not just change this to the "B-Standard" tables. Men who can't post on the main table can post here as a stepping stone. If women can post on the other table, then men should be allowed post here. Equality works both ways. It will also remove this title debate, and add more life to the tables. Let's be honest, the tables can use a bit of life!

Ladies can have this table. Cross post. Have started a B grade.

UM1

Stop all the messin....Burds sounds much better

Chivito550

Dubgal72 wrote: »

Ladies can have this table. Cross post. Have started a B grade.

Ladies can have it, or women can have it?

Tbh, if the B Grade table is there then I see no point of this thread. We will just end up with 2 semi-active threads rather than one vibrant thread.

Chivito550

annapr wrote: »

I think that's exactly what DG was suggesting in the thread that started all the New Year's fun.

It wasn't exactly what was suggested. The original plan was have 3 tables in one thread.

annapr

Chivito550 wrote: »

It wasn't exactly what was suggested. The original plan was have 3 tables in one thread.

God, could you not just let me agree with you for once???? The concept was to have a B/intermediate table. The number of threads was a separate issue.

BeepBeep67

Chivito550 wrote: »

Tbh, if the B Grade table is there then I see no point of this thread. We will just end up with 2 semi-active threads rather than one vibrant thread.

Agree - just remove gender from the equation

Dubgal72

Chivito550 wrote: »

It wasn't exactly what was suggested. The original plan was have 3 tables in one thread.

Roughly enough. Three active tables in one thread would have been messy. Hence google docs suggestion. I approached change very ass-ways. Too much change all at once never goes down well. I should know this :rolleyes: , I worked in an environment where small changes were implemented in terms of months and years, not overnight (or overyear in this case )

Chivito550

annapr wrote: »

God, could you not just let me agree with you for once???? The concept was to have a B/intermediate table. The number of threads was a separate issue.

Yes and I have said on more than one occasion that the idea was a sound one. Jaysus.

annapr

Chivito550 wrote: »

Yes and I have said on more than one occasion that the idea was a sound one. Jaysus.

:pac:

Dubgal72

Chivito550 wrote: »

Yes and I have said on more than one occasion that the idea was a sound one. Jaysus.

Ah c'mon, once more...pleeeeeeaze

Utdfan20titles

What a load of rubbish!
Pity that after two days of bickering about the title the thread will drop into obscurity until next January. This is the first time I've seen the 2015 version on the homepage since I started reading here.

Ososlo

career move wrote: »

I don't give a continental what you call it either. I called it the 'ladies' thread when I was asked to open it in 2014. Some of the women who are complaining about the title 'lady/ladies' were obviously not brought up playing sport as it is a commonly used description in a number of sports for example:
Hockey https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Senior_Cup_(ladies%27_hockey)
Gaa http://ladiesgaelic.ie
Horse racing http://www.fairyhouse.ie/Fairyhouse/News/Ladbrokes-Irish-Grand-National-Leading-Ladies-of-Racing-Named/
None of the girls/women/ladies involved in the above sports, that I am friends with, have any kind of an inferiority complex about the term

This is athletics, not hockey or GAA or Horse racing or tiddleywinks.
I don't see any ladies here: http://www.olympic.org/athletics-100m-women
Or here: http://www.athleticsireland.ie/competition/statistics

Move with the times women.

RacoonQueen

Anymore snide comments and we'll be carding. You have already been told that this discussion is off topic

annapr

I'm genuinely shocked to see the new B thread shut down, when clearly there is a lot of support for it. Can we at least have a reasonable explanation of this decision and who made it?

Chivito550

Ososlo wrote: »

This is athletics, not hockey or GAA or Horse racing or tiddleywinks.
I don't see any ladies here: http://www.olympic.org/athletics-100m-women
Or here: http://www.athleticsireland.ie/competition/statistics

Move with the times women.

I'd be putting more attention into the targets themselves rather than the name of the thread. No reason whatsoever why you shouldn't be hitting at least half of these in 2016. In general this thread has been too much talk, no real action.

How about if you hit 5 of these in 2016, the term ladies gets banned from AR forever. Nice motivation there.

tunguska

Pacing Mule wrote: »

Jaysus. Change the other thread to gentlemens round numbers. Nobody will give a bollix and all all will be equal.

This is true. We dont give a fook.

UM1 wrote: »

Stop all messin....Burds sounds much better

Ah finally, the voice of reason.

laura_ac3

tunguska wrote: »

This is true. We dont give a fook .

Yes but I think the point that DG made with her subsequent post is that one isn't confined to gentlemen. Ladies/women/Females/non males can post their times there if they achieve them. Which has been done before I believe.

Dubgal72

tunguska wrote: »

This is true. We dont give a fook.

.

Tough "we" do....