Separate Men's & Women's Events Fair or Not?

[Swordmaster]

My question to this board is this... Is the mixing of men's and women's events fair to all concerned or not?

The reason I pose this question is because there is a certain lawyer who is threatening to file suit against LOC's, Div. Officers and Sectional Officers if mixed events are not allowed to continue at sectional circuit events.

A bit of background, for five year these events have been mandated to that they must have women's events but it was optional as to whether or not they had a mixed or men's only. Now the rules have been changed and they are mandated to have men's and women's separate events (just like every national or international event).
I will reserve my comments until later in the thread.

[jetzm]

I haven't decided how I feel about this yet, but I wanted to post what I understand to be the motivation behind this. My understanding is that this is a move to increase the participation of women in fencing in those areas that currently have a mixed event. Currently, the argument goes, that the better women fencers wish to fence the better men and don't ever enter the women's only events. For those who wish to fence only women, either for training for national events or other reasons, they have a very limited pool to fence within and will not fence at all sometimes. By not allowing mixed events, all the women fencer's will consolidate into one stronger body. Now, as I mentioned earlier, this is my limited understanding of the current situation, if I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me.

[Swordmaster]

That sounds about right. Although there are some of the "elite" women that say they do still fence in the women's events. A lot of it is timing. If the mixed events are held before the women's events, the "elite" women fencers normally will not fence in the later because of exhaustion, injury or time restaints.
And as you know LOC's usually place the larger events first so that they can get them done sooner in the day and free up strips for the smaller events - women's events.

[GreenDot]

I think that male events should always allow female entries. In my experience, there are always (and I mean always) many more entries into exclusively male events than female events. At the midwest sectional championships, there were 6 entries into senior women's saber. I don't see how eliminating mixed events will encourage a stronger base, as if I only had 6-8 people to fence at every event, I might just quit altogether. Honestly, I don't see why you wouldn't have a mixed event instead of just men's (excluding qualifying events of course). On an unrelated note though, I really hate how litigious our society is, and I wish every issue where someone didn't get what they wanted didn't end up in a damn courtroom. I don't believe our government has a place in this issue.

-James

[jetzm]

As an interesting side note on litigation, it was brought to my attention that in order for this law suit to succeed, it will need to be extended all the way up to the Olympic Fencing Committee, since all major competitions are segregated. Also, I've heard that there is a counter suit in the works.

[R. Exnicios]

Well I wonder what Lawyer could have stirred up this mess? J

The issue is very simple. Gender equity in sports. If the women's event is not of a similar size or caliber of the men's event then the women should be allowed to enter the event absent a compelling reason to keep the event segregated (i.e. national qualifier, NAC etc.)

The argument that gets used is that this segregation of the events will increase the size of the women's events. This is based on the belief that the high caliber female fencers are entering only the larger and higher rated mixed INSTEAD of the women’s events. Well the numbers simply do not support that. I have looked at the entries of close to 50 tournaments and there are normally only a few women in the mixed event that do not enter the women's event. In a large majority 95+% of he time the women fencers enter both mixed and women’s OR just the women’s.

The segregation would actually reduce the size & caliber of the mixed/men's event as well as the women's events. Women, especially higher caliber ones, are not going to travel to a tournament to fence 5 or 6 people. There would be a loss of two entries (one from the mixed/men's event and one from the women's event). There is also the real possibility that clubs/teams will choose to travel to tournaments that will allow the girls to fence more and further reduce the size of the segregated tournaments.

Another popular argument is that women and men fence differently so the women's fencing ability and growth is some how retarded by fencing mixed events. First off I disagree with this but more importantly if a coach wants his female athlete to only fence women then he or she can control that fencers competition entries. I have spoken to a number of high-level NCAA coaches as well as a few top international coaches who agree that men and women fence differently but that the women BENEFIT from fencing the men.

More importantly, and probably most importantly, unless it is a NAC or National qualifiers there is no compelling reason to segregate the events. A compelling reason needs to be one which the benefits greatly outweigh the harm. I simply do not see a reason for the segregation that rises to the level. I’m sure the courts will agree.

Women athletes are a historically discriminated class and especially so in fencing. So the Court will apply a strictor standard and a stronger reason for the segregation.

Denying a female fencer the opportunity to compete in a higher caliber men’s event is, among other things, a violation of her equal protection rights as defined by the 14th Amendment.

Because sport participation opportunities for females have been historically limited, females have a right to participate in men’s competitions if the women’s event is a lower in caliber and size. Since the opportunities for men have not been historically limited, men do not have these same rights. While some state courts have found and there are those that argue that such a position violates the individual rights of men, federal courts have found that protecting the participation rights of women as a previously discriminated against "class" outweigh the rights of the "individual" men. Sorry guys

Physiological differences within the sexes are greater than the differences between the sexes. Thus, especially in sport leagues below the professional sports level, there will be some individual females who are able to compete with and against men, despite the physiological advantages of most men. In such situations, women should be permitted to compete on men's teams (per the 14th Amendment equal protection argument).

Please understand that this is NOT, in anyway, an attack of fencing or an attempt to get women into men’s events at Nationals, NACs or the Junior Olympics. I think that is an issue that the FIE and IOC are already looking at and that is not a can of worms I’m going to open. I am trying to protect the rights of female fencers in my club, my division and my section and ensure that they will be able to enter the largest and highest caliber events in our section..

And I too hate how litigious we have become but when your back is to the wall…

I welcome your support, comments and even criticism.

Cheers

Richard Exnicios

[jetzm]

Wait, you have an opinion?!? How dare you! I'm suing!!!

[R. Exnicios]

Originally Posted by jetzm

Wait, you have an opinion?!? How dare you! I'm suing!!!

It's not opinions that are the problems; it is the actions based on those opinions. When those actions infringe on someone's rights it is illegal.

I can think and even say that someone should be slapped and that's fine but as soon as that opinion becomes an action that's a different story.

But for litigation, women would not have the right to vote, blacks would be riding in the back of the bus, police could arrest and jail you without telling you why etc. etc.

[jetzm]

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that people shouldn't be allowed to take legal action, but it sure seems like it happens ALL the time over every little slight. The legal system is a great thing, but it is often abused. I say we go back to dueling.

[edew]

There is no inherent right for people to fence in any event. If the executive committee (or whatever committee that decides on such things) choose to run only events for left-handers or fencers with glasses, and a vote was cast to agree to that, then that's it.

Gender equality is to offer commensurate opportunities, not a requirement to mix the genders in competition. Otherwise, the LPGA and the PGA will have to join together. The WNBA and the NBA will have to join together. The WWE and GLOW will have to join together. And so forth.

Obviously, astute tournament organizers will make events mixed if they know that the number of women fencers won't add up to more than 5 or so.

If the number of women is about 15 or more, there is no reason to have to have a mixed event. The added 15 women means an additional two or three strips, which might not be physically feasible. The difference for most fencers fencing in a tournament with 15 fencers versus 70 fencers may be one extra bout, so the amount of fencing opportunity is negligible.

I'd say this lawyer hasn't a leg to stand on.

[Purple Fencer]

Originally Posted by edew

I'd say this lawyer hasn't a leg to stand on.

Sadly, that's never stopped anyone before.

You KNOW this is going to get news coverage of some sort...hopefully someone will point out that fencing is possibly the most equitable sport out there....vew few women can compete against men in a sport where physical strength and muscle is a major factor...biological differances get in the way.

However, WE all know that physical power is not the be all, end all of fencing...control is a major factor, and that's not gender specific. I'd hate to place a bet on a bout between Erin Smart and Dan Kellner...both at the top of their game...

[Inquartata]

Originally Posted by edew

There is no inherent right for people to fence in any event. If the executive committee (or whatever committee that decides on such things) choose to run only events for left-handers or fencers with glasses, and a vote was cast to agree to that, then that's it.

You're right. There's also no inherent right for organizers to have people show up to their tournaments. If a committee wants to throttle entries, it can do so however it pleases, and very likely watch participation ebb, maybe terminally so. Just ask Evan Ranes what can happen when segregated events are mandated.

If the number of women is about 15 or more, there is no reason to have to have a mixed event. The added 15 women means an additional two or three strips, which might not be physically feasible. The difference for most fencers fencing in a tournament with 15 fencers versus 70 fencers may be one extra bout, so the amount of fencing opportunity is negligible.

Good of you to offer your own opinion as fact, Eric. ( "No reason", indeed! )

[Schiavona]

A little humor here....

This thread reminds me of a story a friend of mine told me.

My friend was at a tournament watching a WE event, when he started talking to another fencer, who was watching his wife fence. The man watching his wife said, "God! I wish I was out there fencing." My friend replied, "Yeah, I know what you mean. Every time I watch people fence it just makes me want to get up and fence too." The man looked at my friend as if he were nuts. "No, that's not what I mean at all. If I were out there I'd be kicking ***!"

[CarlKnoch]

Of course to the woman fencer who would place in the top 4 of the mixed event with 70 people that is a possible A2 event, it would make a huge difference if she was told she had to fence in a 15 person D tourney of all women instead. No woman would be able to get a better classificaiton that way! Most of the women I know got their C and above classifications in mixed tourneys. I'm not sure they could have done that if we had gender separate events all the time.

[Swordmaster]

Originally Posted by Purple Fencer

However, WE all know that physical power is not the be all, end all of fencing...control is a major factor, and that's not gender specific. I'd hate to place a bet on a bout between Erin Smart and Dan Kellner...both at the top of their game...

Evedently you were still in CA when the Olympic Trials in Atlanta were going on...There is no way ES could've won against any of the top four men. As you said "it is not all about physical power", but as you said "with both or them at the top of there game", that is a major factor in who wins and who looses. Besides the fact that the games are so different.
In some respects, women have been included in men's events during the past several years, to thwart just such an attack as is being brought about by the afore mentioned lawyer. I can remember when peewee football was just a boy's game. But now you can go to any city and find little girls on these teams. I am sure that this makes some people happy, but it actually saddens me because we are watering down the created differences between men and women and raising a generation of young men who may not feel the need to protect and honor women.
One of the reasons for mixing these events for the past five years has been that if we do this it will draw higher level women fencers to these event and strengthen the weaker women's events. Statistics of these past years do not show that to be occuring. In fact the opposite is true, women's events are steadly getting smaller and weaker, with only the beginners mainly fencing them. As I said in previous a post, A lot of it is timing. If the mixed events are held before the women's events, the "elite" women fencers normally will not fence in the later because of exhaustion, injury or time restaints. I have heard women say that they were not staying for the women's event because of these facts. So if this originally was done to strength the women's event and not some exersize in women's equality, it has failed (at least in this section). If the lawyer had wanted to he could have been at the sectional meeting were this was discussed and voted on by the membership (including women) in a section that three of the four members of the EC are women. The decision was not for or against the equality of women it was for the promotion of women in the sport of fencing.
So are we now to make sure and hold women's events before the mixed events? Should the stronger men be excluded so as to not injure the women? Will we need to make sure and put them on separate days so that the women have a chance to recover? All of this rangeling is so unnecessary. The decision of the USFA is approaching the use of Sectional Circuit events in the selection of who is qualified to go to the Divisional NACs. So if this lawyer is successful in persuing this case, what will it do to those plans? Will it not in fact effect the game all the way to the top? Sadly, I think so.

[Inquartata]

I have also heard women sabre fencers say they used the mixed event as a warm-up, and then went on to do well in the women's event ( and in at least one case to win it ).

Perhaps this is an issue best resolved by women fencers, and neither men fencers nor buraucrats ought to be volunteering to decide for them?

[Rolls]

I personally think the publicity from such a lawsuit would be good for fencing. So, if it were up to me, I would enflare the situation until it had no other option but to end up in court. Then, I would try to get every national news organization to cover it. Go on Oprah, etc. In fact, I would make a sercret alliance with the other side to keep the fight dramatic.

Everytime you turn on the news you would see... fencing. CNN would even show up at some of these tournaments as a backdrop for their coverage of the legal battle. They would come up with catchy names for the court cases like "Duel of the Lawyers".

Just my thoughts.

Rolls.

[Philistine]

Originally Posted by R. Exnicios

{snip}
More importantly, and probably most importantly, unless it is a NAC or National qualifiers there is no compelling reason to segregate the events. A compelling reason needs to be one which the benefits greatly outweigh the harm. I simply do not see a reason for the segregation that rises to the level. I’m sure the courts will agree.

Women athletes are a historically discriminated class and especially so in fencing. So the Court will apply a strictor standard and a stronger reason for the segregation.

Denying a female fencer the opportunity to compete in a higher caliber men’s event is, among other things, a violation of her equal protection rights as defined by the 14th Amendment.

I'm a little creaky on my con-law/civil rights law, but what state action is implicated by local/sectional USFA procedures on single-sex or mixed competitions?

Because sport participation opportunities for females have been historically limited, females have a right to participate in men’s competitions if the women’s event is a lower in caliber and size. Since the opportunities for men have not been historically limited, men do not have these same rights. While some state courts have found and there are those that argue that such a position violates the individual rights of men, federal courts have found that protecting the participation rights of women as a previously discriminated against "class" outweigh the rights of the "individual" men. Sorry guys

Have there been cases which hold this outside of Title IX, or otherwise in the context of a private organization like the USFA?

Personally, I prefer mixed competitions because most competitions (even mixed) within a 2-3 hour radius of me are hard-pressed to put together 20-30 fencers. However, I'm a bit leery of filing suit (and requiring depletion of division/section/national funds on defending it) for what appears to be a local issue.

What is the general feeling in the division/section on this issue? Maybe it should be something put up to a vote.

--Philistine

[scarlet_woman156k]

Originally Posted by CarlKnoch

Of course to the woman fencer who would place in the top 4 of the mixed event with 70 people that is a possible A2 event, it would make a huge difference if she was told she had to fence in a 15 person D tourney of all women instead. No woman would be able to get a better classificaiton that way! Most of the women I know got their C and above classifications in mixed tourneys. I'm not sure they could have done that if we had gender separate events all the time.

I reearned my B at a local mixed competition. NEVER EVER have I been to a local women's competition that was more than a D or C event (typically a D or E event) in my division OR section (outside of Remnyik at Northwestern). It BLOWS. I fence the women's comps because women DO fence differently than men in style, etc. However, I LOVE fencing the guys locally because they give me practice on the mental, control, agility, etc., etc. aspects of bouting. The men's competition is more up there on the local level than the women's...HANDS DOWN. Am I to suffer because of segregation? That would just piss me off and frustrate me to no end, what would be the point of competing locally then? National events are a completely different story.

Sectionals was essentially a snooze fest for me except for one interesting bout the whole darn day...and all I did the whole day was pine away watching the lovely men's epee competition, wishing I could compete in it. I just wanted to compete in it...you can even take me out of the results, even, I just wanted to fence the better competition!

[Txakurra]

I have absolutely no problem having both women events and mixed events. The issue should not be so focused on separating the events as it should be at the rating system. Many of us have been destroyed often by legitimately rated women fencers and have no issues with that. However, many of us have also fenced women who have higher ratings that they achieved at “women” events that are FAR from comparable to those acquired at mixed events. Maybe these ratings need to be recognized. If Jane Doe acquires her C rating at a mixed event or a Women only event then maybe that should be indicated as part of the rating. For example:

Jane Doe Foil C04w(women) DO3m (mixed)