Recently, it has come to my attention — amazement might be a better word — that there are some well known personalities within the USPSA/IPSC community who are trying to eliminate or at least discredit the High Lady title at major matches.
Look, I admit it: I happen to like girls. I have ever since the fourth grade when I saw Dana Stein in her red satin jacket roller skating past my house. Heck, I even married one of them! So yeah, I’m biased. But my weird bias aside, it still makes sense to recognize top women competitors.
There are two obvious reasons to award High Lady at matches. First, it encourages more women to participate. I know, right? Like, who wants to increase membership and participation in the shooting sports? That’s just crazy talk. While we’re at it, we should get rid of High Military, High Law Enforcement, High Senior, High Junior… I mean, if everyone should compete on an even level, why recognize those other categories? All they do is bring in more people, more revenue, and more publicity to USPSA which in turn makes it a more powerful organization representing shooters across the country. Nobody wants that!
Second — and warning, this may be NSFW! — girls are physically different than boys. I don’t want to give away any spoilers for the guys in Sedro Woolley who haven’t discovered this themselves yet, but trust me, it’s true. And apart from the differences that most often occupy men’s minds, there are some key things that actually matter when it comes to an action shooting sport like USPSA. Human females as compared to males have on average shorter arms, shorter legs, smaller hands, less body mass, and less upper body strength. How does that matter?
Notice that in the Olympics, women and men are separated for running events all the way from the 100m sprint to the 10,000m. That’s because some of those physical differences I mentioned add up to a big advantage for guys when running. And if you’ve never been to a major USPSA match, trust me, there is a lot of running. It may happen in short bursts, but a typical field course can easily have 20+ yards of movement. In a game where winners are determined by hundredths of a second, being even just a little faster is a big advantage. There’s also the simple fact that things like hand size, body mass, and upper body strength play a role in recoil control. The next time you find yourself amongst a group of USPSA Grand Masters, take a close look. I’ll bet you that most of them are taller, more muscular, and have bigger hands than the top females in the sport. That equals a competitive advantage that women cannot overcome simply by working harder.
Even if all that wasn’t reason enough, here’s the real kicker: How many major USPSA High Overall titles have been won by women? If guys don’t have a competitive advantage, you’d think there’d be at least some. But alas, no. Even though the top women competitors in the sport (a) spend just as much time practicing, (b) spend just as much time working out, (c) have just as much competition experience, and (d) get just as good gear and sponsor support, they aren’t beating the top male competitors in the sport. Seriously, you may need to get one of these.
I’m not even sure why guys would get upset about High Lady in the first place. I can only assume that certain people used to get bullied by those big mean girls in junior high…
Train hard & stay safe! ToddG
(R.I.P. Adam Yauch)
I think you’re confused about the objection.
No one is suggesting they get rid of the high lady recognition. What some are suggesting is that it isn’t within the rules and it isn’t consistent to refer to the high lady as a National Champion when we also do not refer to the high senior, high military, etc. as a National Champion.
If you go to Nationals you will see high senior, high LE, etc get special plaque commemorating their achievement. These are given to category winners, and the recognition is the same for all of the category winners. Except, that is, high lady. Even though according to the rules the high lady is a category winner, she is given a National Championship trophy exactly like the one given to the high overall National Champion. She is also allowed to give a speech, unlike the other category winners.
I don’t disagree that ostensibly the reason is to encourage female participation, but don’t we also want to encourage LE, military, junior, senior, etc participation? Why not give them a National Championship trophy as well? Or maybe we should give one National Championship trophy to whoever wins it, and recognize each of the category winners in a consistent manner.
It does my heart good to see the simpleton cry baby, daytime television theatrics showing through again.
“It’s not fair!”
Andy — That may be the objection some are making; there are some people who want the category/whatever gone altogether.
Insofar as it becomes a debate solely about whether High Lady is a “national champion,” I still don’t see the objection. Look at just about any other athletic endeavor. Again, I’d use the Olympics as an example. The fastest guy wins a gold medal; the fastest gal wins an equal gold medal. Because unlike LE, mil, or even seniors and juniors, there are inescapable baseline physical differences between men and women.
Also, following the logic from my original post, there have been major matches won by the guy who also won High LE or High Military, for instance. Being HOA and Top LE are not mutually exclusive.
I can only assume that certain people used to get bullied by those big mean girls in junior high…
ROFLMAO
Seriously! How many kids do you see shooting? Most of the matches I have gone to the competitors are adults.
I take my kids and let them shoot. We spent three hours last saturday working on their shooting. If you don’t get get future adults involved now, and may I also add people who have never shot before, the future of firearms ownership is doomed.
Todd – I frankly don’t believe you that some people are making the argument that the category should be removed. You have my email address. Send me the proof if it exists.
Otherwise I agree with you. I think the rules ought to be changed to make a female national champion legitimate. I don’t know if I would go so far as to have two separate classification systems, but to my knowledge no one is asking for that. They’re also not asking for a special 1st place M (there are no female GMs in any division at this time), 1st place A, and so on award for women, probably because the level of participation by women wouldn’t justify it.
However, as it stands “high lady” is a category that get’s special treatment the other categories don’t get, and the rules ought to be changed to correct that by creating an official High Lady national champion.
Could not agree more with you Todd! I would go a step further and say that the reason is deeper…the whiners are loosing to…gasp…GIRLS…these are probably the same guys that couldn’t hang in the 4th grade on the playground playing tag, etc…and lost to…gasp…a GIRL then too!
Remember when Langdon killed the mythical 1911 beast with his…gasp…DA/SA! Same crying…
We as shooters want to grow the sports…if that means having lots of categories so be it!
I for one would rather have the likes of Jessie Harrison-Duff & Tasha Hanish to watch at a match than Joe Fudd anyday…cause like Todd…I like…gasp…GIRLS!
Big +1 R.I.P. Adam Yauch
Andy — I’m not wasting my time with someone who casually questions my personal integrity every time I say something he doesn’t like. It’s been your tactic both here and on the forum and candidly you’ve worn out your welcome as far as I’m concerned.
Teut — Actually, I think the genesis of the whining congress from a very small group of guys who regularly score better than High Lady and then get their cry on because someone they beat is crowned a national champion.
hahaha. awesome blog post.
I personally take issue with the fact that the Women’s category is treated much differently at USPSA nationals than the other categories. I feel like Juniors and Seniors and such ought to get the same recognition as the high lady category. I that makes me a whiner that doesn’t understand anatomical differences… so be it.
Personally, I find it insulting that you are insinuating that I, as a woman, would never be able to win the National Championship because I have a vagina. Also, that I need to be made to feel “special” by being given a trophy for beating…say…two other girls at a match. Yeah, that would make me feel pretty “special” all right. What would encourage me to participate in the sport is working hard to earn a trophy that actually carries some weight and has some meaning. I could get a trophy just for showing up at most matches…congratulations! You have a vagina!
If we’re going to use the Olympics as an example, then why not score the women seperately as they do in the Olympics? Then the High lady would really have 100% instead of 75%.
Also, with as few ladies as there are that actually shoot major matches the awards given out to them feel a lot more like participation awards rather than awards for achievement. Case in point would be JulieG’s Revolver “National Championship” where she was first out of three lady shooters. I’m pretty sure the rule book says there has to be at least five shooters for a special category to be recognized with an award.
Speaking of the Olympic Games, there was an interesting outcome in the 1976 50m Rifle – Three Position event. At the time, there was no division by sex. Two Team USA members tied for the top position: Lanny Bassham and Margaret Murdock. A shoot-off was disallowed, and after some tortuous figuring, Bassham was declared the winner. During the medal ceremony, Bassham reached over and picked up Murdock, hauling her up to the top of podium.
Todd – I have not taken issue with your personal integrity on this subject. I simply think you got the argument from some folks wrong. No one wants to eliminate the high lady category that I’m aware of.
Otherwise obviously I agree with you. I think there should be a Women’s National Champion, but I think they ought to tweak the rules a bit to legitimize it because for now it’s simply a category.
They could always just give a trophy to everyone… Oh wait, I’m thinking of children’s T-ball.
Anyhow, the Olympics analogy makes perfect sense to me.
Dear gasp…a girl,
You’re certainly welcome to that opinion. It shouldn’t be hard to find folks who agree with you. For example, the person who commented twenty minutes before you has the exact same IP address as you, so you two probably live or work right across the hall from one another and don’t even know it!
Same IP addresses! Wow, what a coincidence! Oh, wait……
Todd I have to agree with your first reason to recognize top women shooters. Yes, it does encourage more women to participate in the sport. Everything else I disagree with. Considering only 5 female shooters need to participate in a division to earn a chance at being crowned “National Champion” seems to bring discredit to the term ‘Champion.’ If places 196-200 in Limited were all the females, then female shooter 196 would be crowned a champion. Congrats, you finished 196th, you’re a champion. Seems a little ridiculous.
Moving on….thank you for reminding us that women are physically different than men. You remind me of the little kid in the movie Kindergarten Cop who constantly reminds the class that “Boys have a penis, girls have a vagina.” But by your statements that women are at a disadvantage because they’re women seems like you believe that a woman could never be as good as a man in the shooting sports world. Whether that’s true or not, I’d really like to see you walk into a room full of women shooters and tell them that. You also keep using the Olympics as a comparison. That comparison is completely different than how USPSA is scored. Yes, in the Olympics there are mens competitions and women competitions. In USPSA there are divisions that include BOTH men and women. If you wanted to use the Olympics as a comparison, that would mean that the women shoot their own match and their scores wouldn’t be included with the mens scores; like how the Olympics do. An easier way to understand it would be like the NBA and the WNBA, totally separate entities.
We have the same IP address and the same last name. The persone who commented 20 minutes before me married me because I don’t need to be coddled and have someone tell me I’m good if I come in 196th place because I’m a girl…and for our obvious anatomical differences.
Todd,
“Gasp…a girl” is my wife.. so yeah she has the same IP address as me.
She speaks for herself though… obviously…as I don’t agree with her that a ladies trophy carries no meaning.
It means they beat 16 other girls as opposed to how many in the overall match?
Well yeah.. it means they beat all the ladies. That carries as much weight as you give it I suppose.
Can’t you just walk downstairs to argue with me?
=)
My only thing is that they don’t treat the different catagories the same. Lady’s they treat differently than the other catagories and call me crazy, but they’d also probably follow the rule book in awarding those other catagories unlike the recent revolver champion where they causualy chose not to follow thier own rules. I mean, seriously? You made a rule stating you had to have at least 5 participants and then didn’t follow it? Is USPSA is turning into IDPA?
You gun games folks are weird LOL.
eating our own is what we do best
IPSC’ers are too gamey to eat…
“IPSC’ers are too gamey to eat…”
Damn, I wish I’d wrote that. 😀
I don’t think that the elimination of the high lady award would change anything. I say keep it because I like to see the lady indicator in the results. Would Julie Golob stay home if there was no award? Would your daughter? We all decide what’s important to us at the end of a match. First in class or first lady? What’s the difference?
Ken: No one yet, even on this discussion, has suggested they get rid of the high lady award.
The question is whether or not it’s equivalent to winning a national championship. Some people (myself included) think they ought to legitimize the Women’s National Championship. Others think they ought to keep the High Lady award, but recognize it the same way they recognize other category awards per the rule book. But again, no one is suggesting we ignore completely the fact that women compete – and do well – in USPSA competitions.
Andy,
Nobody has posted it here, (yet) but I have heard some discussion of eliminating ALL category awards. I think the argument being made there is that we already have a classification system that in theory would mitigate any physical advantages some shooters have over others. You would obviously just compete in your class regardless of gender or any other “special status”. (this is not my personal view… just saying I have heard it)
That argument may be legitimate and it may not be… but the point is that it is something that sounds very different from what the initial post described. It isn’t anything against women specifically and it doesn’t “discredit” a High Lady Award.
In any event… I think this is something that we should be able to have a conversation about without people taking it personally or getting upset. The subject of category awards tends to end up getting some people very angry.
I don’t have a dog in this fight, but I do think we should be careful about assuming that it is physical differences that determine the male/female differences in a sport like shooting, which is *much* more about a developed skill than it is about brute strength or speed. Especially when there is a much easier explanation.
How big of a pool of competitors are the women drawing from? I’ve heard people mention that only 3-5 women show up at nationals?
Whether ability varies between the sexes or not, you are going to see very different numbers when you are comparing the top competitors out of hundreds than you are when you pick it from dozens.
It’s like why there are so many Canadian hockey players. Canadians aren’t genetically better at hockey, but most Canadians play hockey, so the genetically gifted ones will be hockey players, instead of football players or baseball players.
When the participation at club level events is 95% male, you’re casting a much broader net to find the people who have the dedication and natural skill to become Vogel or Sevigny. There are probably dozens or hundreds of guys who have as many hours behind a pistol as Sevigny does who can’t shoot within thirty seconds of him in a match. The fact that the dozen women who have similar training don’t have his innate gifts doesn’t necessarily mean that they can’t, it might just mean that the girl who theoretically could isn’t trying to.
I read an article on the history of women’s marathon when it was added as an olympic event. It is likely that women will will never match the top men’s times in marathon. However, just by the influx of talent and the growth of the sport, the gap between the top men and the top women shrank dramatically shortly after it made olympic status. I don’t think that shooting sports have jumped that gap yet.
Todd who are you getting your info from we all have come onto this post and posted firsthand knowledge and you have come here and started this with second hand info. So spill the beans. BTW no one is saying get rid of the category just treat it like all the other categories and the national title is 100% marketing when the winner runs around for the next months that she is the only all division “national” champion when she shouldn’t of even had the category awarded.
Don — First, folks here have already explained that yes, there are in fact some who are trying to get rid of it. Second, at least one person who’s commented has expressed that sentiment as well. Finally, as hard as this seems to be for some folks to understand, not every conversation about this topic nor every opinion held by well known USPSA personalities has been made public. If you want to ignore all of that and assume I’m just making it all up, I certainly won’t try to stop you.
Todd,
I realize that this is the web, and it attracts dumb people from time to time, but the fact that these guys think your comments were about them, instead of the guy who was actually involved in the conversation, says a lot about them. Insecure attention whores…
I at one point about two years ago could bench press 270 lbs in a set of ten, I also weighed 275, I was never able to bench press my own weight (at that point) 10 times, to my knowledge, no woman has ever lifted that much weight in that many consecutive repetitions.
I say that to say, I’m not that remarkably big at 6’0”, I’d say at this point, I’m fairly strong, I’m not that strong, I lost aout 50 lbs after that and realized it was playing heck on my knees/ankles/hips, and that no matter how strong I was, weight on joints is weight.
Women can’t do that. I can’t do a split, and probably never will be, but I’ve seen women (on T.V.) that can draw a bow and shoot it with their feet while doing a hand stand. I know no man who can do that, and have never seen a man that can.
Which is more important to you, I have no idea, but those are limitations that we have.
It’s not belittling to recognize them, it’s sexist IMHO, to look at a woman, put her in a group of men, and tell her to perform at the same level and somehow miss the boat when she may not win overall ever.
It’s just a skill set that men are going to have a advantage in, men have a lot more testorone, it’s why the hair’s falling out of my head at 24, because it’s killing their hair in my scalp. (I’m not bald, just a receeding hair line)
To not recognize that is to put your head in the sand, and to look at a woman and think her lesser because she can’t do a task that’s obviously going to come easier to a man, is wrong.
Just my $.02.
As far as should they be allowed to speak and given the same acclaims as the male overall winner? Yeah. We’re in a male dominated sports, let’s face it, women are painting their AR-15’s on the weekends, they’re painting their nails, let them speak, put them on the front of every magazine, heck, if anything the sight of women with guns will attract men anyway, and maybe make women who don’t own guns more comfortable (And try to tell me that’s not the truth).
I realized that truth, that there are things women can say to other women, that I never could the day I took a woman who hated guns her whole life, had been abused, etc, into a gun store, and let her handle another gun, and a woman behind the counter showed me how hard it is for some women to rack the slide on semi-automatics.
Anyway,
God bless,
Brandon.
I meant to say (I can’t edit, crap), that I don’t know of a woman who’s walked the earth who was strong enough to lift that weight 10 consecutives times. (and I’ll say this, lifting that much, your vision starts clouding on the corners from oxygen deprivation, because your hearts thundering, your ears are ringing from the blood rushing through it, your eyes get bloodshot, you start struggling to see and it takes some serious dedication, your wrists are screaming, you struggle to open your hands off the bar once you set it in place, when you finish. I lifted for probably at that point 18-20 months prior to that day for 4-6 days a week)
But, I surpassed a goal I never thought I’d meet of 250 lbs ten times by 20 lbs, so I was happy.
Anyway, guys, we live in a free country, where we get to enjoy shooting semi-automatic firearms with magazines over 10 rounds, enjoy the simple things, and Thank God for that.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5x56mzKgyys
BWT: I bet she can. And yes, I bet steroids are involved as well.
It’s still not the average. And Todd made a good point in:
How many major USPSA High Overall titles have been won by women? If guys don’t have a competitive advantage, you’d think there’d be at least some. But alas, no. Even though the top women competitors in the sport (a) spend just as much time practicing, (b) spend just as much time working out, (c) have just as much competition experience, and (d) get just as good gear and sponsor support, they aren’t beating the top male competitors in the sport.
I would like to hear a rebuttal that didn’t feature the word “vagina” used as though it was somehow shocking. If women really do have the potential to beat the men, then why aren’t they?
gasp…a girl & Ben, Why on earth would we get rid of the Ladies National Champion? A high level woman can compete with a mid level man but I’ve never seen the athletic sport where a national or world class woman stands a chance of beating a similarly skilled man. What is the highest a lady has ever placed at nationals or worlds overall?
High LEO and Military strike me as just giving a nod to those public servants and trying to encourage more participation from their peers but ladies, youth & senior are a little different and all have competitive disadvantages against the men.
Yes, it is kind of irritating to win the ladies event when there were only two. My wife deals with that in bicycle racing all the time and just like shooting it’s only at bigger events that you really have a competitive ladies field. That’s the curse of being a minority group in a tiny sport.
Striving to do your best against the whole field is always the goal and not just beating the “other girl” but deleting a national title because “girls are just as good as boys” is delusional.
I dunno man, possibly. I also think I weighed 100 lbs more than she did. Apparently, they also have chest rigs they use, and wrist straps to stabilize their wrists (Your joints aren’t ideal for the stresses of weight lifting).
I’m not going to say it’s impossible, just that I simply haven’t ever heard of it being done, that being said, I didn’t know a woman had bench press 500 lbs until today either. I don’t think I could ever bench press 500… you never know though, I never thought I’d bench press 250 in a set of 10. One of the ways I was able to weight lift 4-6 days a week was one, I kept on a good rotation, chest/arms, legs, back and then day off, and two, I never did anything I couldn’t do a set of ten of before progressing to another weight level, which I did at 5 lb increments, so I saw every weight between 135 and 270 at some juncture.
I started back at 135 lbs at a set of ten, and I started at 3 sets of ten and honestly (when I started… I couldn’t finish the last set… I was strong in my early teens, but once I stopped exercising, regularly, and it wasn’t part of my job to have exercise, I got slack).
I worked up to at that point, bench press exercise, would comprise of a set of 10 of 135, a set of 10 of 185, a set of 10 of 225, then a set of 10 of 270. I wouldn’t let myself lift more weight until I had a genuine set of 10 repetitions without stopping, and I also wouldn’t let myself ever walk away without finishing the set, if that was 4 reps, and then 3, then irk out 1, 1 and 1, then I was that pathetic and that was what it took.
The other rule I set, was I never maxed out, never again, would I get in there and part take in that tom foolery, and do crap like bounce a bar off my chest and break a rib, or tear a muscle straining, it wasn’t a beneficial work out in any way, shape or form, and it hazarded injury trying to find your absolute limits, and to try to impress others.
I guess it’s the same way even though I poke at Todd to strap on a speed rig and go after the world record FAST (not to discredit those who have, I’m just saying), he never would, because though he could probably get in the mid 4’s, IMHO, it would break discipline and it’d be training for a record, not to become an overall better and more skillful shooter.
I also refused to use any kind of hormone, protein shake or what not, as to me, it’s just artificial. There was no honor in it.
So now that I’m done with the inspirational weight lifting story, lol. (Yeah, I’m sorry.)
I also think it’d be good for women to speak to draw attention, let’s face it, media attention with women speaking is also much easier for people to associate with, it brings a much broader spectrum.
Maybe they should have USPSA Junior speakers as well, and promote USPSA being a family environment, and welcome to all ages and genders.
I’m just saying. You want to make money, realize 51% of the population are women, and 99.(some odd)% of the other 49% are attracted to that 51%, and are influenced by seeking to be with that 49%.
I used to work in Sales, one of the things we were taught and learned is, engage the wife, engage the wife, if she gets on board, she can encourage and drive the husband. In fact, most of the time, the husband’s trying to convince the wife of why they want/need the new thing.
As a man who was ambushed on a lunch with a girl that’s possibly interested in him Sunday by her, her mother, her grandmother, her sister and her best friend, I can tell you, you get the women’s approval, it will bode well with you.
God bless,
Take care,
Brandon.
Lomshek – there currently isn’t (per the rulebook) a “Women’s National Championship.” There is a High Lady category award, just like there is a High Junior award (et al). I do not say that to diminish anyone’s accomplishments. In my eyes the High Lady is the National Champion, but that’s not how the rules read. I think it is a historical oversight that needs to be addressed.
Some (like myself) would like to see USPSA make the Women’s National Championship formalized. Others wonder why one category is given more prizes, more access to sponsors, etc than other categories. That’s about the crux of it.
There are a few (though it’s tough to find them) that would like to see all the categories done away with. The argument is that the classification system is enough.
There has been no proof that anyone note-worthy has proposed the idea of getting rid of the High Lady award specifically. I hope this doesn’t get deleted. There is a lack of knowledge of USPSA rules in this discussion, and I think the distinction between a category award and a National Championship (per the rule book) needs to be addressed.
Lomshek,
I didn’t advocate getting rid of the High Lady Awards. I don’t think you read my post very carefully if you got the idea that is what I want to do.
Ben, I did misinterpret it. After a lesson in reading comprehension my take on what needs to happen is USPSA should join the rest of the sporting world and actually award actual national championships for those categories that are substantially physically different than men in their prime (Women, Juniors, Seniors).
I’m just a local USPSA shooter and had no clue that it was not that way already.
Interesting discussion and a debate that has come up quite a bit over the past 20 years. 🙂
This reminds me a bit of the days when Limited was a sub-division of USPSA. Limited shooters were once scored as a percentage of the Overall. As firearms evolved and optics became the norm, those who chose to shoot with iron sights didn’t even have their own true division. It was a major concern because the likes of Brian Enos, Frank Garcia, Jay Christy and other great iron sight shooters were all battling for the Limited Title. But because scores were based on the Overall, entire results could be skewed. Shooter X won the title, but depending on how open shooters faired on given stages, Shooter Y should have won… Hence, true divisions with separate scoring were born.
Shooting is traditionally a male dominated sport and I would love to see more women participating! On the topic of categories, I don’t know if the sport is at that point to make special categories separate divisions just yet. I suppose I wouldn’t be opposed to it, but personally I would still want to know my overall results.
I do wish the sports recognized all champions equally for all divisions and special categories. I also believe in classification systems based on ability and I believe in special categories.
For all the specific mentions… Revolver seems to be a controversial title for some individuals so I will address that specifically. It is a division that has the lowest participation numbers in the sport thus making it a challenge to even qualify for a slot to USPSA’s premier event. It is a recognized division and until it is no longer one, it is awarded national titles.
Some interesting tidbits of info:
– Here is the breakdown of the percentage of women competing in each of the divisions at the 2011 Open/L10/Revo Nationals: Open: 9.57%, Limited-10: 10.52%, and Revolver: 14.28%.
– National trophies/titles have also been awarded to the women’s winner in revolver as long as I can remember. It’s a tradition the nationals has kept over the years.
I chose to compete in revolver in 2011 for personal reasons.
1. Weight training for the heavier trigger requirements in IPSC in preparation for the World Shoot.
2. To see how I would fair against a collection of the world’s most talented revolver shooters.
3. To learn and improve my skills.
If USPSA recognized a win, all the better. Having competed against Annette Aysen, the most accomplished female revolver shooter in the world, I know I have to work hard, very hard to place higher than her in any match with a revolver. I also think the world of her. I did end up posting the highest female score. USPSA awarded me the trophy and the title. I feel honored.
I am proud of all the titles I have been awarded. I am surprised by anyone who takes offense that I share them and all the other things I promote to do what I can to help inspire someone to give shooting a try. Create a goal, achieve it, share it and I will congratulate you! I am not offended by success. I choose to celebrate it.
I also do not find it offensive to compete and be recognized among female competitors. I have huge respect for the ladies I compete against as shooters, sportsmen and as people. I am proud of my femininity, my abilities and am honored that other people are too. My parents taught me to be confident enough in myself and in what I can do so that I don’t get riled up if someone says, “that’s good for a girl.”
I compete to become the best shooter I can in a sport I love. It isn’t my goal to beat other women, it’s to see how I fare overall against competitors who are stronger and faster than I am. It’s a challenge to better myself both physically and mentally. I work hard to improve just as others do. In the end, if I post the best scores and win a women’s title I am excited about it. I am surprised and disappointed when people imply, assume or profess to know why others shoot/compete, what their motivation is and what matters to them. That’s something they can’t possibly know and is something that constantly evolves.
I am sad to say that currently there are no female GM’s in USPSA and no DM’s in IDPA. There are several High Masters in NRA Action but it is also the most accuracy intense and time generous of the action shooting sports.
It would be interesting to see a scientific study on physical differences among a collection of successful male and female shooters to see if the differences are significant. I wish action shooting was so huge that it garnered that sort of attention and therefore the dollars that would inspire it. If any marked differences were found, and women were found to be at a disadvantage, I’d still try just as hard to prove the findings false. 🙂
Just my personal thoughts on the subject – all my own and not of my sponsors. I am sure the topic will continue to drive more responses. Best wishes to you all on the range!
Fact: That there are no female GMs in USPSA is simply proof that for many people the classification system is a ____ measuring contest, and women don’t seem to care a lot about ____ measuring. Many, many men have spent a day reshooting classifiers to get that GM card. Julie, Jessie, Kippie, Athena, et al could certainly do the same, and it’s a credit to them that they haven’t.
As I’ve said numerous times, I believe the Ladies National Championship is legitimate, and the rule book should reflect it. I’ll be writing to my AD to reflect those sentiments as well. However, I really don’t believe anyone out there specifically wants to discredit or remove the High Lady category as it currently stands, which was the point of the original blog post.
Great post, Julie. your insight is appreciated.
As the brother to a lady who is currently developing her own interest in shooting (Better late than never!), I personally think that it is a great thing to recognize women in the sport. My favorite aspect of the shooting sports is that despite the very rigorous demands it places on your ability to shoot well at speed and to micromanage absolutely every aspect of your motion economy, everyone is very friendly and relaxed and non-competitive. It is truly the only sport I have played where you are really only competing against yourself.
For that reason alone, it seems silly to do away with recognizing women (or seniors, or juniors, or LEOs) because that is really what those subcategories are about – encouraging their participation and recognizing their accomplishments.
I know my sister thinks it’s great that there are shooters out there like you, Julie, who could wipe the floor with me one handed any day of the week. It gives her someone to look up to because she can identify with you as a shooter and say hey, that’s somebody that I can emulate. For that reason alone, I think it is vital that we not eliminate the High Lady titles. Not only, as Todd mentioned, are there physical discrepancies that make it much harder for a woman to shoot a sport like IPSC as well as a man, but also because it deliberately shines the spotlight on women (and younger shooters, and older shooters, and law enforcement officers) and gives them a moment of recognition that I think we can all agree they deserve.
Todd is referring to female’s and male’s (as a whole) separate apexes of raw strength, body mass, and size. In these THREE categories MOST males have a physiological advantage. This has nothing to do with who is better and it certainly has nothing to do with motor skills, intelligence, agility, or many other attributes where the scales are either turned or even. Personal experiential reality is entirely irrelevant.
Sounds like a few guys have issues dating back to being weened. Sounds like a serious case of trophy envy.
I like how you guys are continuing to attack the straw man. No one is seeking to eliminate or discredit the High Lady title. There has not been any evidence presented that supports that claim.
There have been some who have questioned the validity of the Women’s National Championship based on the fact that it is not provided for in the rules. There seem to be two sides of this side of the “questioning” of this omission from the rule book. Some (like myself) would like to see the Women’s National Championship formally recognized in the rule book (because right now High Lady is the same as High Junior, High Super Senior, etc). There are others who believe that if the rules state High Lady is the same as High Super Senior (and the rules do state this) then they should get a similar prize and similar recognition.
If you read that carefully you will see that no one is upset about getting beaten by a girl, it has to do with the fact that USPSA shooters are obnoxiously obsessed with sticking to the rules of the sport. And as far as rules discussions go, this is an extremely minor one. It hardly warrants discussion except for the accusations of sexism. Now you should see the debate on whether or not it’s ok to put paint in a magwell on a Production gun, or whether Production should have a minimum trigger pull like in IPSC. Those discussions get out of hand, this one not so much.
“@Andy -Fact: That there are no female GMs in USPSA is simply proof that for many people the classification system is a ____ measuring contest, and women don’t seem to care a lot about ____ measuring. ”
You don’t know what you are talking about and that is anything but a fact. That no women is a GM means they aren’t shooting at a GM level. You comment implies that every GM got there by ‘grandbagging’.
(For those that don’t know, ‘grandbagging’ is the process of reaching a higher classification than you truly deserve, either by reshooting classifiers or practicing classifiers you know you will be shooting soon, etc.)
If those women were capable of shooting enough GM level classifiers, they would be proud to do it.
“Many, many men have spent a day reshooting classifiers to get that GM card. Julie, Jessie, Kippie, Athena, et al could certainly do the same, and it’s a credit to them that they haven’t.”
Again, kudos that they aren’t grandbaggers. But they also are NOT shooting at a GM level. No other way to say it. Most GMs have earned their cards the hard way, by shooting a GM level average on 6 out of the last 8 classifiers.
I’m all for whatever awards they want to give the women.
Todd, why is this even being discussed on a blog that purports to eschew USPSA competitions.
Bobsineaa – In no way did I imply that every GM earned his card via grandbagging. Plenty did earn their GM card that way, but I never wrote nor implied that they all did. That was an incorrect inference on your part.
I also didn’t imply that they are shooting at a GM level. At all. Re-read my post and tell me where I implied that they are shooting at a GM level. I’m waiting.
In the meantime my point stands: If Julie, Jessie, Athena, et al wanted to, they could easily hit up a local classifier match and reshoot each classifier over and over again until their GM card was assured. Many, many male GMs have done just that (note: for the reading comprehension challenged I did not say all). It’s a credit to each of them that they have not done so, despite the obvious notoriety they would receive for becoming the first female GM in any division.
So your whole point is – Some men grandbag. No women has grandbagged to the GM level.
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?