I’m not disagreeing. It just makes me wonder how trainers are able to keep convincing clients to go to (very expensive) shows when the majority of them will never be more than an also ran. It’s not like a lot of other sports where you can at least have the satisfaction of striving for your personal best. Without a standard numerical scoring system there’s no real way to measure whether or not you’re reaching goals.
The horse that is just another good fella may be a true, fun packer for someone in the 2’-3’ amateur and children’s division. I have shown many, many horses that were just another nice horse in the schooling divisions that won tri-colors with the owners.
And, fwiw, most of us don’t have to convince people to go to these show. These are the shows I do, so if you don’t want to go to them, I’m not your trainer. People do like to go and compete for fun and education. Be a part of the big show. There is something for everyone there.
I have junior trainers that take people to the smaller, local circuit and schooling shows. About 10% of those people will eventually move up, because they want to.
I 1,000,000% agree about the open scoring. I wish that they did that for every class
I disagree. I have absolutely no problem striving for my personal best and assessing whether or not I’m reaching my goals at horse shows. For example, at the last show I attended, I did not come home with a basket full of ribbons and those I did earn were of the pink and white variety. But, I was thrilled because I achieved an important personal goal that I’ve been working on for a while.
And a thousand times this. My all-time favorite experience was more than a few years, decades gagcough* ago getting called eight or ninth (ribbons only to sixth or some such, as I recall) in a huge hack. It was an unrated division with a bunch of pros. I was a junior with a horse that I always struggled with in the hack. No ribbon but I was over the moon. It’s not like I could afford to go out and set cash on fire in the parking lot either.
Also, I may be a dork but I will watch 2’6" or 3’ … even 2’3" rounds all day long. I get weirdly invested pulling for people to improve their rounds from one class to the next. If I felt secure in my knowledge or powers of observation, I’d go get a card myself
And yet, football and baseball players who wear similarly tight-fitting pants aren’t looked down on for their sports attire.
I get the point (which others have already addressed), but on a tangent, it also suggests that maybe wearing something OTHER than navy and choosing a chestnut just might be advantageous, no?
Very on brand
I don’t know what it has to do with women on the podium, but I’m sure many of us would love it if our farriers offered shoe sales!
Sorry, terrible joke, but it’s actually where my mind went first.
I have a 20 year old white ribbon I cherish to this day because we beat 27 professionals to get it. I will fully admit it was because my horse landed on her leads rather than make me get the change, which was an iffy proposition. I still cherish that ribbon.
Just a random thought on the subject of all the (very talented) male pros consistently at the top of the hunter divisions…Scott Stewart, Hunt Tosh, etc…
Doesn’t the venerable Dr. Betsee Parker rather infamously only allow men to show her horses in the professional division?
Not an argument that those men at the top of the sport aren’t incredible riders. But one example of how patriarchal structures and individual attitudes can lead to men being overrepresented in the winner’s circle. It doesn’t necessarily mean that the riders in question don’t have talent and work hard (clearly they do). Just that their sex gave them opportunities not available to an equally talented female professional.
P.S. Also on the subject of men and boys being shunned and ridiculed for participating in a feminine-coded activity like riding…sure sounds like systemic misogyny to me. THE CALL IS COMING FROM INSIDE THE HOUSE!!!
As I said before, this thread has been ENLIGHTENING.
I’m pretty sure Tori Colvin has had some rides.
As a junior, but not as a pro.
quick edit: At least per a quick search! But open to being wrong on that.
Or even just the opportunity to be a professional in the first place.
As the paper that was linked up thread showed through its interviews, people (both men and women) expected that men would continue with their professional career throughout their lifetime, while the women would stop to have a family. That’s going to influence who the potential mentors view as deserving of their attention, unless the young woman is a truly spectacular rider. A good, but not spectacular, young man is, in my opinion, far more likely to receive opportunities that would enable him to have a successful career as a horse professional simply because there’s a bias towards the man having the prospect of a professional career compared with the woman being expected to have children.
A couple studies showing there is no physical or psychological reason for women to not be consistently at the top of all equestrian sports…for all the scientists out there…
Sooooo…with the massively dominant numbers of female riders out there, why are so many men at the top of all equestrian sports?
WAIT FOR IT…gender bias and discrimination!
Yup, sexism is alive and well, even thriving in the land of equestrian equality. So for all those guys out there who think they are successful over and over again because they are less “emotional”, more “competitive”, more “athletic”, more “driven”, more “dedicated”, think again. The system is rigged in your favor, and exposing that is the first step in making things right.
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/24748668.2012.11868608
Way to take previous posts out of context. First, it was the same conversation that is being held here, so I stick by my assertion this is nothing new.
Second, if you read the entire thread the men and women were tossing “insults” at each other in the name of fun.
And third, I am actual friends with quite a few people on those threads from competing together, and they know me and my sense of humor.
Entirely because of your participation on this thread, I felt compelled to seek greater understanding of your unwillingness to consider the points of view of many others here regarding gender bias. So I put your username and the word “women” in the search bar. These quotes were among the top six that came up using that simple search. No, I didn’t read the entirety of the various threads.
I spent twenty-five years in a male dominated profession. I’ve heard lots of excuses for misogynistic words and attitudes, including that I and my women colleagues “just didn’t get the humor.”
As I said, even the women on the thread were commenting about making things pink etc. If you must characterize the humor on that thread, it is Eventer humor and had nothing to with any form of bias.
I might suggest that you learn the entirety of a situation before attempting to ascribe direct cause. That is what good, ethical journalism does.
And do good, ethical, scientists discount scientific data because they personally don’t agree with it?
RAyers, you dug yourself a hole here. Put down the shovel. Stop digging.
On another tangent, just the title of this article on a local made me cringe: