@coffeehag, I am currently a eventer/jumper. I grew up doing the equitations and the medals all through my juniors. Even did a few years of A/O hunters. I believe my experiences of being a man/boy in this sport from the 1970 until today gives me a unique perspective completely lost in this conversation given that it has become about BEING A BOY in this sport. I have yet to see another male as part of this conversation.
8 Likes
Honestly, the whole question of “Equitation” gives me a head ache. When people go online and talk about how their “eq” is so much better than Tori Colvins. Or they criticize John French for his “eq” (that term sets my teeth on edge) I could go on and on. Point being, a beautiful position over the jumps is absolutely no indicator of talent or skill. Watch the big equitation rings; you will see a small handful of smooth, confident, poised young riders, and a whole lot of rigid, stiff posers. This is what makes a judges eyes glaze over. It’s not to say they aren’t watching or judging. But those big finals weed out the posers.
Give me a little relaxed slouch any day over the phoney baloney pose. Watch the horses, they always tell you who they like riding them!
On the subject of eyes glazing over, I would interpret that as “oh no, another stiff kid that’s gonna miss”. Judges have to judge every round, but honestly, in a big class, after you have enough to pin it, the judges are most likely making the required notes, but not as interested because there is no chance of pinning those riders.
4 Likes
and I am guessing you know a lot 
But isn’t the whole point of this thread that the article was very one-sided, and only showed things from the perspective of the male riders and a couple of judges? Of course you’re allowed to have an opinion, but I believe one of the major points being made here is that if you interview young men who were successful in the equitation, they aren’t likely to believe that their success is a result of bias. If you’re the one receiving the opportunities, you’re unlikely to notice that you’re being given preferential treatment unless it’s extremely blatant.
22 Likes
But a boy walks in and she doesn’t think “oh another stiff kid who is going to miss?” Girls have a monopoly on stiffness and missing? I don’t think so 
7 Likes
I didn’t say that. Please reread the post. Made no reference to gender. You did that
3 Likes
@Night_Flight Athleticism, generally. Yes, boys self select in that they don’t stick around if they aren’t good, but they also tend to get it quicker, physically. I’ve also taught a number of boyfriend beginner lessons, and frankly athleticism just helps. Most can canter around on the first ride.
But still, you’re looking at it a bit bass-ackwards in my opinion. The textbook position is the last consideration and it doesn’t count for much since what you are judging is feel and execution. A position mistake is one thing, obviously they can’t get left or jumped loose or go around in a seat suited for upper-level dressage. A position mistake hinders the performance of the horse, it’s not just a style deviation. But, assuming everyone is in the realm of appropriate riding style for hunter seat equitation, If the course flowed, the distances matched, the questions were answered in the way the judge envisioned, and the ride was thoughtful and precise with regards to the best plan for that particular horse on that particular course, well then if you’ve got two equal rounds (which means ALL the phases were equal in a final) then you can look at position as variations in that style. The reality is nothing is ever that equal.
And yes, I do think that there is a bias, conscious or subconscious, towards the boys, and there probably always has been. But how could there not be, really? If there’s a limited number of anything among a large group of something else the human brain is conditioned to notice. And can you honestly say as a bystander you wouldn’t root for the girls if there were only a handful of them against 200 boys? I’m not sure I could say that. If I were then judging that class I would like to think I’d be impartial, but how easy is it to actually completely override on a subconscious level those human tendencies to both root for the underdog and to take notice of the outlier? The only sure way to do so is to become hypercritical, and that’s a worse problem.
10 Likes
thank you for saying this much more nicely and politely than I wanted to. lol
5 Likes
I read this as once the “favorite” riders have done their trips and judges have their top 15 or 20 from which to choose the finalists, the rest of the class are not worth paying any more attention to beyond the effort and boredom of “making the required notes.” Do I have that right?
3 Likes
It probably got lost in all the comments, but I agreed 100% that men who participate in sports or activities stereotyped as “girly” did and still do get bullied and shamed. I think the issue people are specifically focusing on is internal bias in judging here (and also within other fields) by persons influential within the discipline, as opposed to ignorant onlookers.
I totally agree that equitation at its best is much more than about position, and is about navigating the horse and course intelligently, and I do think I see that in the top riders. But I also think that the emphasis on “position” and the very narrow range of horses used in the equitation, and the dominance of a few top barns really makes me question what is the “purpose” of having equitation divisions. Does it really foster better riding and horsemanship? The winners who went on to careers likely would have had great pro careers anyway, with maybe one or two exceptions.
As a kid, I remember reading the jumping column judged by George Morris in Practical Horseman, which seems so ridiculous in retrospect, the idea you could judge the best rider based on a still photograph, versus who was or was not wearing a sheepskin girth.
9 Likes
I know you didn’t. My point was that ASHE did. SHE is the one who “perked up” because boy.
3 Likes
My answer there, is a judge is probably thinking “yay, something different!”
imagine the monotony of seeing the same thing over and over and over, whether is Medal Finals, Pony Finals, or a 2’6 training class with 75 entries; ANYTHING different would spark your interest.
1 Like
No. I mean the vast majority of the class (we’re talking 200+) are just not going to be that good. Once a big mistake is made, yah, you keep judging, but no, you’re not all that interested.
You have to keep judging because you never know; the last horse could be the best
The favorites have bombed too, you know…ask me how I know this 
2 Likes
Why should the fact that a rider is a different sex be the something different that makes a judge say “yay?” It shouldn’t. Any more than a rider being pretty or a horse being a color the judge prefers be criteria that make the judge sit up and get ready to reward the rider. Because none of that is supposed to count.
Ashe has both an implicit and explicit bias here. She is saying that sex makes her pay attention and that her preconceived notion is that boy riders will be more talented. She’s supposed to be judging the trip in front of her, not her concept of whether as a group she thinks male or female riders are better.
As for her boredom, welcome to being an adult. When you sign on to judge 165+ of the same thing you accept that it’s going to be boring. You give everyone the attention they deserve because that’s your job. If you can’t focus for that long maybe this job isn’t for you.
Let’s put it in a different context and see how it hits you. I’m teaching a college English class. Of my 100 students, 5 are men. I’m on my 50th paper grading, and I’m bored. I see the name of one of my male students on the 51st paper. So I add 5 points to the grading sheet before I even read it. Then, I go easier on the mistakes he made as compared to the papers from female students I graded. Or maybe I just see his name and pay more attention to his paper and therefore find excuses to give him points where I didn’t on the papers from female students that I skimmed more quickly. Some of it I do without realizing it. Some I do on purpose because I think we should have more male students studying English and I don’t want to discourage the few we have.
Seem ok to you? What Ashe is doing is no different.
35 Likes
No, it is not. So, they are going to call back 25 or 30. Say 100 have gone and your 30th kid has an 80. Kid 101 comes in and misses the first jump. That kid is not going to be an 80, no matter who it is. So, you watch the kid and mark your card, but your job is to find the top 25 or 30. Your brain can relax a little.
4 Likes
Ya know, all I said was it is something different. That gets your attention. NEVER did I say she is justified in giving 5 bonus boy points or whatever. But read it how you want to
And yah, judging can be boring. Being bored doesn’t mean you aren’t paying attention. It doesn’t mean you aren’t focused. It does mean you are tired of the same old lackluster rides or same old too slow hunter just stepping over a jump, same old stiff positioned rider whether woman or man. The same crap that gets talked about on this board all the time.
1 Like
Are we really pretending that you cannot tell from the opening circle who has a shot and who doesn’t, regardless of their sex/color/trainer/bodytype? You can certainly blow it from there, but at least 50% of the class is out of contention right there.
6 Likes
You are being defensive and accusing me of putting words in your mouth when I’m not. We’re just talking past each other.
I think there’s a real bias inherent in what Ashe says she is doing. You are postulating that there could be scenarios with slightly different facts that are easier to defend. Fine. But that’s not what Ashe is admitting she’s doing.
She literally said she’s bored judging but when she sees a boy it’s a refreshing change that perks her up. You postulated that maybe a better ride is what perks her up. But that’s not what she said. She said nothing about lack of stiffness being what made her sit up and take notice. She said the rider being a BOY is what made her take notice. She is the one introducing sex as a motivator for her judging.
It’s literally an article about whether boys get extra points simply for being male and she’s agreeing with the thesis.
That right there is a problem.
Stiffness and too many riders to judge in a day are all red herrings (though if you can’t do the job well given the number of trips don’t sign up to do it). The issue is that we have a carded judge who when asked whether boys score higher in eq by virtue of being boys says “yes and I do it.”
At worst she’s admitting to explicit bias. At minimum she’s recognizing a form of implicit bias… and it doesn’t seem she cares to do anything about that.
25 Likes
Oh there’s ALL KINDS of bias in judging. I don’t disagree. I’m just kind of shocked that so many people are willing to come out and publicly admit they have a bias in favor of male equitation riders. It’s saying the quiet part out loud.
9 Likes
Of course you can, but the “regardless of their sex/color/trainer/bodytype” is the key phrase.
