MF, ME, MS and WS teams in Beijing Olympics?!

[Boo Boo]

According to the "Special Rules" letter posted on the FIE website (was pointed in the right direction by Estoc), MF, ME, MS and WS are the proposed team events in the next Olympics - WF (again) and WE will miss out.

http://www.fie.ch/download/letters/...in%2005-ANG.pdf

The FIE argues that more men fence than women, so this is perfectly acceptable

Personally I don't think it is - the FIE basically promised that WF would be back in for the next Olympics... Would imagine that, internationally, there will be a lot of peeved women foilists...

The good news for WF is that it should be the proposed women's team event for 2012 (London)...

Boo

[azfencer]

I think that's crap! I don't think it's fair to have three men's team events and only one women's team event and I REALLY don't think it's fair to cut the same event at two olympics in a row!!! So much for adding women's sabre to achieve gender equality.

[oso97]

on the bright side though, the USA is pretty much gauranteed another medal in Bejing, if its going to be Team WS.

Still though, if they can't do all six events, then they should do 2 men's and 2 women's. Random pick.

But then the top European men would get all huffy and puffy and start boycotting the World Cups like they did last time. Ignorant, uncultured, uncouth, and petty louts that they are.

That link is dead btw.....

[DHCJr]

When the FIE pushed to have Sabre for the ladies, the IOC warned them they would not allow changes each Olympics. It appears they were not bluffing.

What is even worse is the IOC pushing the sports federations to bring equality in the committees. That is why the FIE changed the rules that required each commission have at least 2 ladies on each. It is interesting to note one of the SEMI representatives has no technical knowledge, no Armoring experience and only job in fencing has been publicity. There were 2 ladies that were submitted by their national federations for SEMI. Both were automatically admitted.

They should have put in Foil and Sabre Teams for the Ladies.

[misha]

Originally Posted by oso97

That link is dead btw.....

Full link



.

[azfencer]

Thanks for the link Misha. All I can say is, "Helen Smith for president!" In the minutes of this meeting it seems like she's the only one bringing up common sense and willing to present any independent ideas. There is hardly any mention of what most of the committee members did or said, I have to say this reads like the committee is sort of a "puppet" operation. That being said, I've never heard of most of them and must admit this Helen Smith may not really be any different than the current status quo mess in the FIE.

[Frank Pratt]

Originally Posted by DHCJr

...IOC pushing the sports federations to bring equality in the committees. ...

So how are we suposed to keep fencing as an Olympic sport if we allow more men than women to the games?!

[Frank Pratt]

Originally Posted by DHCJr

...IOC pushing the sports federations to bring equality in the committees. ...

So how are we suposed to keep fencing as an Olympic sport if we allow more men than women in the games?!

[RebelFencer]

I know that this is going to get me flamed a bit, but I just don't see why the men's events should be penalized because of adding a new women's event. I really do think it's a huge shame that team WF is being eliminated...but why eliminate one of our events because we added something for the women? It would be like the wrestling federation allowing women's wrestling at the expense of either Greco Roman or Freestyle. I know this sounds kind of sexist, but I'm really not...I've just kind of been frusterated with the unintended results of Title IX here in the states. In all fairness though, I woulld be against eliminating a women's event in any sport for the sake of adding another men's event.

[Boo Boo]

Originally Posted by misha

Full link

Thanks misha

I copied the body of the thread from another forum that I posted on - the url didn't copy properly... doh!

[Boo Boo]

Ok, REALLY it is the fault of the IOC - no more medals (or competitors) makes life very difficult.

It would have been unfair NOT to allow WS into the Olympics. I don't do sabre, but I am realistic. So something had to be done to make room.

Originally, I believe, WF and MS were drawn as the team events not to happen in Athens. There was so much complaining, that it was decided that MS team COULDN'T be excluded.

Personally, I think this was the mistake - a women's and a men's team event should have been opted out for Athens: never TWO women's events.

To be honest, you are being sexist - if the IOC will not give more medals, then there should there should be a 50/50 split men/women for the team events: it is only fair. Otherwise it is not equality. You sound no better than men who said women shouldn't have the vote - because it reduces the control that men would have traditionally had on politics... (the belief was that women didn't understand politics enough to vote sensibly...). If you are not sexist, then you really haven't thought what you are saying through properly...

The point DHCJr raises is completely different - people being appointed to positions on a commitee (or in a company) SHOULD have the skills required for that position (and should not be appointed merely because of gender...). The FIE is obviously completely two-faced regarding gender equality: completely over-the-top in some respects, whilst completely sexist in others...

Originally Posted by RebelFencer

I know that this is going to get me flamed a bit, but I just don't see why the men's events should be penalized because of adding a new women's event. I really do think it's a huge shame that team WF is being eliminated...but why eliminate one of our events because we added something for the women? It would be like the wrestling federation allowing women's wrestling at the expense of either Greco Roman or Freestyle. I know this sounds kind of sexist, but I'm really not...I've just kind of been frusterated with the unintended results of Title IX here in the states. In all fairness though, I woulld be against eliminating a women's event in any sport for the sake of adding another men's event.

[D'Art]

Originally Posted by Boo Boo

Ok, REALLY it is the fault of the IOC - no more medals (or competitors) makes life very difficult.

It would have been unfair NOT to allow WS into the Olympics. I don't do sabre, but I am realistic. So something had to be done to make room.

Originally, I believe, WF and MS were drawn as the team events not to happen in Athens. There was so much complaining, that it was decided that MS team COULDN'T be excluded.

Personally, I think this was the mistake - a women's and a men's team event should have been opted out for Athens: never TWO women's events.

I agree completely. If 4 weapons were to be in the Olympics, then surely 2 from each gender would have beenthe most (only?) sensible way to do things?

The problem then though is what weapons to drop? Each have their own merits and skills and appeal to different types of people, so the question is how would the FIE decide (fairly) which ones got in and which didn't?

[Boo Boo]

Originally Posted by D'Art

The problem then though is what weapons to drop? Each have their own merits and skills and appeal to different types of people, so the question is how would the FIE decide (fairly) which ones got in and which didn't?

Since WF and WS team were not in the last Olympics, then WE should be excluded from the next (2008). If WE is excluded, then they should keep ME in (to keep an epee team event in): one of the other two men's team events should be out. As to which one? Draw lots, flip a coin. I propose MF out (makes things tidy later...).

For the following Olympics (2012), WE should be in. There is an argument for including WS too (since WF was in the 2000 games). So maybe WF out. MF should be in (to keep a foil team event in and out previous time), so maybe MS out.

If fencing is in the following Olympics (2016), WS and ME turn to be out.

So, exclusions:
- 2008: WE, MF
- 2012: WF, MS
- 2016: WS, ME (if it happens!)
- then repeat...

Each Olympics you have one men's and one women's team event excluded (seems fair!). You never have both genders for each weapon excluded in the same games.

Ok, maybe I am being pessimistic (realistic?) regarding the IOC not giving us extra medals (so that we can have all individual and team events), but it is certainly a starter to be getting on with.

Simple! Why do they make it so hard and so unfair?

Boo
(thinks that Helen Smith has her head screwed on, but wonders if she has enough money to buy the "FIE Presidentship" next time it comes up for renewal - 2008!)

[D'Art]

Originally Posted by Boo Boo

Since WF and WS team were not in the last Olympics, then WE should be excluded from the next (2008). If WE is excluded, then they should keep ME in (to keep an epee team event in): one of the other two men's team events should be out. As to which one? Draw lots, flip a coin. I propose MF out (makes things tidy later...).

For the following Olympics (2012), WE should be in. There is an argument for including WS too (since WF was in the 2000 games). So maybe WF out. MF should be in (to keep a foil team event in and out previous time), so maybe MS out.

If fencing is in the following Olympics (2016), WS and ME turn to be out.

So, exclusions:
- 2008: WE, MF
- 2012: WF, MS
- 2016: WS, ME (if it happens!)
- then repeat...

Each Olympics you have one men's and one women's team event excluded (seems fair!). You never have both genders for each weapon excluded in the same games.

Ok, maybe I am being pessimistic (realistic?) regarding the IOC not giving us extra medals (so that we can have all individual and team events), but it is certainly a starter to be getting on with.

Simple! Why do they make it so hard and so unfair?

Boo
(thinks that Helen Smith has her head screwed on, but wonders if she has enough money to buy the "FIE Presidentship" next time it comes up for renewal - 2008!)

Can't see anything wrong with that, though I'm quite obviously not ever gonna be affected by whatever the FIE/IOC decide.

I'm wondering what sports are up for the extra medals that softball and whatever the other sport dropped from the Olympics is (sorry, can't remember off the top of my head)?

And I see you've lost almost all of your cynicism Boo

[Zelda]

Originally Posted by azfencer

Thanks for the link Misha. All I can say is, "Helen Smith for president!" In the minutes of this meeting it seems like she's the only one bringing up common sense and willing to present any independent ideas. There is hardly any mention of what most of the committee members did or said, I have to say this reads like the committee is sort of a "puppet" operation. That being said, I've never heard of most of them and must admit this Helen Smith may not really be any different than the current status quo mess in the FIE.

Helen can be sensible.....she is the AFF president. I wont say anything else.

[Boo Boo]

Originally Posted by D'Art

Can't see anything wrong with that.

Ok, I think it is ok, you second me... all I need is a trip to Lousanne to scream at some ignorant, sexist old men...

Originally Posted by D'Art

though I'm quite obviously not ever gonna be affected by whatever the FIE/IOC decide.

Not sure I will be affected either, but my strong sense of principle is getting seriously wound up.

Originally Posted by D'Art

I'm wondering what sports are up for the extra medals that softball and whatever the other sport dropped from the Olympics is (sorry, can't remember off the top of my head)?

No extra medals/sports were added, despite sports being removed (although that was 2012, not 2008, anyway... wouldn't solve the problem for the next Olympics....)

Originally Posted by D'Art

And I see you've lost almost all of your cynicism Boo

View my slightly different post on fencingforum for "added cynicism" (it did have even more, but I edited a bit out ).

The more I learn about sporting bodies, the more cynical/angry/despairing I get... too little common sense and objectivity about.

Boo

[RebelFencer]

Originally Posted by Boo Boo

To be honest, you are being sexist - if the IOC will not give more medals, then there should there should be a 50/50 split men/women for the team events: it is only fair. Otherwise it is not equality. You sound no better than men who said women shouldn't have the vote - because it reduces the control that men would have traditionally had on politics... (the belief was that women didn't understand politics enough to vote sensibly...). If you are not sexist, then you really haven't thought what you are saying through properly...

Comparing believing that any one gender's sport should be sacrificed for another gender's sport to believing that women shouldn't vote is completely ridiculous. I am an extremely liberal person on most issues, but this is the one that I just have to go with the other side on. Yes, a 50/50 split would be the absolute fairest way to go about things, but the fact of the matter is that the IOC is being idiotic for limiting medals in the first place...I mean, how much could 6 extra medals cost them? But the fact of the matter is that if something is to be added it shouldn't be at the expense of another, regardless of gender. So you can go ahead and blindly accuse me of being sexist, which couldn't be further from the truth, but I'm just being honest. Yes it is a complete disservice to women, yes I don't see why they can hand out tons of medals for all the different swimming events and not 6 extra for us. But I disagree that someone else besides the IOC should be penalized for this.

Edit:: Don't think I'm going to be able to get on again tonight, so I'll post my follow up argument--

So if I am sexist by disagreeing with this, does it make me racist to disagree with reparations or how affirmative action is being applied?

[downunder]

Originally Posted by Zelda

Helen can be sensible.....she is the AFF president. I wont say anything else.

Helen is lovely, and was very supportive of my fencing at junior worlds. She does a lot for australian fencing.

[DHCJr]

Originally Posted by RebelFencer

I know that this is going to get me flamed a bit, but I just don't see why the men's events should be penalized because of adding a new women's event. I really do think it's a huge shame that team WF is being eliminated...but why eliminate one of our events because we added something for the women? It would be like the wrestling federation allowing women's wrestling at the expense of either Greco Roman or Freestyle. I know this sounds kind of sexist, but I'm really not...I've just kind of been frusterated with the unintended results of Title IX here in the states. In all fairness though, I woulld be against eliminating a women's event in any sport for the sake of adding another men's event.

How about we keep your argument, but change it slightly. I just don't see why the Foil and Epee events should be penalized because of adding a new Sabre event. I really do think it's a huge shame that team WF is being eliminated...but why eliminate one of our Foil/Epee events because we added something for the Sabreists?