Sexism row: organiser of Holme Moss Hill Climb accused of saying women "don't contribute to the sport" in defence of unequal prize pot

Looks like I've turned up late to this party and when I say party I mean 'internet argument'. 

I can't read through all three pages of around three people going back and fourth.. however a little ramble from me.. 

If we assume there are no 'additional administrational costs' for putting on a womens, mens, kids, vets, para, trans, tandem, 'whatever' category then I don't really think there's a good reason for prizes not to be equal. Surely that's the reasonable conclusion to this. As I put elsewhere on this topic, people don't enter for the prizes, I'm sure most people would be happy to cover the entry fee and the price of a coffee on the way home. I feel it's down to the CTT to put this rule in place and no one else. They should change the rules to reflect this quickly IMO. 

(If there are additional CTT costs per category, then that changes things entirely)

We also should not forget that whether we like it or not, we do rely on goodwill of the organisers to put these things on.. there is no right that the Holme Moss HC must happen and unless you have probably more than (say) three people express interest in a particular category to the organisers, then there's really no point in putting it on.  Also as Alf Garnet (Richard Haigh) pointed out these things are often run by 'old people' who do it for the love of the sport, so you take out one or two of these old sods from organising and suddenly you've lost your local TT season organisers, so some respect I feel should be reserved for the work they do. 

Also while there is total justificaton for the point the lady made before the event, the 'vague quote' about women not making teas' stinks of bullshit and for anyone to complain 'mid race' to a starter is also poor form. I do think the point could have been made without stirring up a twitter hate mob. 

Is this like the tennis argument again where the women's races don't have as much distance to cover?

For anyone not familiar - some female tennis players have been complaining they don't earn as much as the male tennis players, even though men play 5 sets and women play 3. Equal pay for equal work.

have I missed the bit where Mr Haigh explains where he was misquoted ?

It's 2020. I know it's been a bad year, but really, it is still the21st century, discriminatory prize lists  are so 19th century. Get over it, do the right thing.  About time equality was baked into the regs.

My club and all the others in this area offer equal prizes to women & men.  Simple, fair, and entirely uncontroversial.

Originally the prize pot deemed that the 'first fastest' competitor would win £45, the second fastest would win £35, and the third fastest would win £28; while the first female would get £40, the second fastest £30, and the third fastest £20. 

Looking at the way the prize money was originally divided up, the women seem to be favoured because, if Lizzie or one of the dutch ladies had turned up they would of possibly won the 'fastest competitor' prize and the 'fastest lady' prize. Which isn't exactly fair either. Whatever your views, it's sensible to offer the same prize money. Especially as somebody offered to make up the difference. I wonder what would've happened if Pippa York had turned up?!!

There's a heck of a lot of people getting het up over a 1st prize of less than £50.

Anything outwith the pro circuit needs to just forget giving away anything with a £value.

Stick to trophies, engraved plaques etc and let the cash comparers do something else.

Perhaps there should be no men/womens categories and just have prizes for the top three regardless of sex. 

As has been mentioned, equality and equity are not the same. How about all the men's entry fees go into their winner's pot and all the women likewise? Seems proportionate to the chances of winning each event. 

Imagine if there was an event that was mainly entered by women and men took more than their 'fair' share.....

Actually PROBLEM SOLVED. All men enter as women. We can all be whatever we now these days. 

Quote:

“As anyone who has ever assisted in organising activities and events in amateur sport will know, this is all done on a voluntary basis, at a personal cost out of love of the sport and wishing to put something back in.

"Volunteering in grass roots sport had long caused concern as most of it is done by older people in the sport and therefore is not sustainable, something that has been highlighted by Covid and is seen in the many cancelled events on both CTT and BC platforms and something that needs to change of the sport is to continue. 

"It would be nice to think that people’s efforts and energies could be chanelled in this direction rather than negativity on social media."

That's an impressive amount of irrelevant deflection and waffle while avoiding actually addressing the issue...

I think his name is Richard Haigh, rather than 'Haugh', isn't it? Might be worth amending.

Equality and equity are not the same.

If there are equal numbers of participants and the entry fee is the same then the prize money should be equal.

If those conditions aren't met then the prize money shouldn't be equal.

If only one woman enters should she receive the same prize money as the a man who came first out of 500 entrants?