Every fall, a huge group of runners on my team participate in the Nike Women's Marathon in San Francisco. Although men are allowed to run the race, we usually only get a handful of guys. Even if some dudes can get past the actual name of the race, they change their minds when they hear about the free pedicures at the race expo, Tiffany necklaces (in place of a finisher's medal) handed out by tuxedo-clad firefighters at the finish, and feminine-looking giveaway shirts. Another women-friendly race, the Disney Princess Half Marathon, promises runners a princess medal, ladies' tech shirt, and maybe "even a visit from Prince Charming". To avoid potential legal issues, race organizers don't officially make these types of races women-only. But they make all the race perks girly enough to steer most men away.
Yet, as a recent article in the Wall Street Journal points out, a growing number of men are looking beyond the princess or diva themes and the feminine swag and realizing there may be other reasons to run "women-focused" half and full marathons in the U.S. In some cases, they're looking to finish higher than they would in a race with lots more dudes. Others with more altruistic intentions are raising money for a cause or supporting their partner during the race. And the single guys are no dummies - running in a female-oriented race is a great way to meet lots of fit women.
But being a lone guy in a sea of female runners does have its drawbacks. Top male finishers at these races sometimes get booed or heckled, and even those running in the middle of the pack have to listen to spectators yelling, "You go, girl" throughout the race.
Have you ever run in a female-friendly race where men were allowed, but not welcomed? What were your reasons for running it? Did you like it? Do you think race organizers should officially make the races women-only, rather than just discouraging the men from running them? Share your thoughts in the comments section below.
More:
I’ve thought of participating in a local 5k till I realized it was a “women’s” event. Some races don’t really say it’s women’s only and are okay with guys (and I don’t know if that means tolerate or welcome) and others don’t list sex-based award groups. But I just don’t feel unwelcome in any case. Sometimes in small places, there’s only that one race going on and it’s too bad it’s more or less restricted to women.
I must say I don’t really understand why they have to be women-only either explicitly or implicitly by placing other sorts of disincentives. But I don’t get worked up about it… I just give it a shrug of the shoulders and move on.
The idea of making a race “extra-girly” in order to keep men away is embarrassing on so many levels, I don’t even know where to begin. On the most basic level, it suggests that women aren’t REALLY runners or athletes; they’re just giggly, cookie-eating, tiara-wearing dum dums who want to run a women’s-only race so that they can have a Girl’s Morning Out and wear pink.
Frankly, I could take or leave women-only running events today. When I ran some back in the 80s, they were a different thing, and a good idea. They encouraged women to think of themselves as strong…as athletes. Not nearly as many women ran, and many were intimidated by the overwhelming male presence (and the overwhelming catering to men)in races.
Today, more women than men run. As far as I can tell, everyone’s treated moderately fairly. So women’s races? Not really seeing the point. And women’s races that focus on being “girly,” eating cookies, and giggling at half-dressed firemen? Yuck.
My wife and I ran the Zooma recently in Colorado Springs which hosts a “women’s festival” after the race. At first I wasn’t too sure about it because the website is certainly all about women and I thought I wouldn’t be welcomed, but it turned out to be a very nice event. I gave my finisher’s necklace to my daughter and talked to several folks at the booths afterwards and got some good information about activities my daughter and wife can get involved in.
It was a killer course because of the hills but I would do it again. It was very well organized and I never felt unwelcome. The wine at the after party was a really nice draw as well.
I’ll be honest, I didn’t even know there was such a thing as a “women’s” event. I know it Atlantic Canada, we don’t have such events and frankly, I think it’s a good thing. Wouldn’t this be the same (different gender) than not recognizing or making it less inviting for women to run in male dominated races of the past. I’m not sure this is good step forward and seems like a double standard to me.
Daniel, you have a point (sort of), but you should keep in mind that nearly ALL sports are male-dominated, since men are stronger/faster/etc. One of the draws to all-women races is that women get to be up front for a change, win the race, and not have to deal with male egos (it happens).
Road racing is one of the very few sports, actually, where men and women compete together. There is no “double standard” involved, in my mind, if women want to have their own separate competition. It’s only a double standard when one group is deprived in the same way the original group was.
In other words, women were originally blocked from ALL races because they were considered too frail, weak, and unfit for sports. This is obviously not the case when men are discouraged from, oh, maybe a handful of races nationwide per year.
Hubby runs the Nike Women’s Marathon in SF with me. His comment? “No lines for the bathrooms!”