Pinburgh Women's final?


#49

There is a fundamental underlying question here: should men and women in pinball be considered equal in terms of potential or not?

Some sports fundamentally divide by sex (such as tennis) because of the height and strength advantage of men (and mix it up in other ways, such as in the mixed doubles comp). Others (someone pointed out equestrian events) do not.

If we assume that women in pinball are just as capable as men, running a separate women’s event seems out of place in the sense that we might as well have a separate event for any other sub-group that is assumed to be equally capable, such as Asians, 35-45 year olds (the “Midlife Crisis Invitational”…), past runner-ups in a major (hi Josh!), or—God forbid—African Americans. In other words, why single out women rather than any other arbitrary sub-group, if women are just as capable as men?

If we assume that women in pinball are not as capable as men, running a separate women’s event seems totally appropriate, just as we don’t think twice about having a children’s event or trophy, a beginner’s event, a B division at Pinburgh, and so on.

If we do assume that women are just as capable as men in pinball, and that the under-representation of women is a numbers game, then a separate women’s event runs the risk of being seen by some as a second-grade competition, with a concomitant ring of discrimination and condescension.

Seeing that women’s events are for women, I’d let the women decide. If there is enough interest, why not? Try it out and see how a big a response you get. If some women want to measure themselves against everyone rather than women only, they can choose not to participate in the women’s events, so no-one would be the worse off for it.

In terms of encouraging participation, women-only events sound like a good idea to me. Due to the discrimination and sexism that has been mentioned here in the past, I suspect that some women feel more comfortable in a women-only environment. (Why else would women have started women-only leagues?)

Women’s events might help to bring more women into the sport, which would be really nice to see. And, heck, it’s more pinball. That can’t be bad, can it?


#50

The height/strength argument is bs. A small boy won PAPA in April.


#51

OK, sure, but I haven’t actually seen anyone make that argument. At least, no one in this discussion has.


#52

So I’m not allowed to have an opinion on a competition that I am being excluded from based purely on my gender?

The same imbalance is seen on the committees which run IFPA and PAPA if I’m not mistaken. Should there be a push to have 50/50 representation there as well?


#53

Hmmm… Try being a woman for a few years and see what other things you might find yourself excluded from based purely on gender.

No, IMO. Roughly 10% of players right now are women. To me, that suggests that roughly 10% of IFPA and PAPA committee members should be women.


#54

The competition / event is Pinburgh which no one is excluded from. The question is whether the Top 4 women should be recognized and have a final round. I have a ton of respect for @pinwizj and if he thought about this idea I think its worth pursuing. If a women doesn’t want to participate, go to the next women. If a man, different ethnicity, or whatever thinks they are being excluded, play better and be in the finals for the main A division. If the idea sucks in 2018, remove it from 2019.


#55

On the IFPA side my wife actually has full veto power over everything we do . . . so it’s 100% Amanda Sharpe. The rest of us just play in the sandbox for fun until she lays the smack down :slight_smile:


#56

We had better do something about this terrible imbalance of power in the upper echelons of the IFPA quick smart then!


#57

Josh obviously needs more daughters.


#58

Hey Mr. Creator of Tilt Forums . . . I need a DISLIKE button :slight_smile:


#59

A full third of the board of directors of Replay Foundation is female.

And I tell all the boys what to do, anyway.


#60

Excellent! Fewer arguments that way :slight_smile:


#61

While I always encourage organizations to make sure their leadership reflects the diversity they’d like to see in the community as a whole, I recognize that running a national/international organization is a lot of work and the people who step up to do that work, unpaid, may be a bunch of white dudes. What IFPA has been doing really well in recent years is soliciting input from female players regarding issues of gender. I’ve gotten to weigh in on topics ranging from separate women’s rankings to the Women’s Championship logo to this, and I appreciate the recognition that any initiative targeting an underrepresented group requires input from that group.


#62

Danni says she likes the idea and she will be there to battle it out :slight_smile:

Danni’s Dad


#63

Bringing this thread back from the dead …

So did they ever decide to create a Woman’s finals for Pinburgh?

As per Josh’s original post, would seem simple enough to take the top 8 Woman’s qualifiers and have a semi-final and then a final. I think just the top 4 is a bit rough … originally INDISC was only the top 4 qualified, and it was changed to 8 midway through, which was great.

Dave.


#64

They wanted the qualifying games to be meaningful for TGP, which wouldn’t have happened once they crossed the 40 player threshold.


#65

What’s that mean?


#66

And we vastly underestimated the demand for a Women’s division or we would’ve added that exact clause (8 finalists for over 40 players) in our rules!


#67

If you don’t take at least 10% of players to finals, then no WPPR’s or WWPPR’s


#68

Technically, then previous games are considered seeding and don’t count towards TGP. The event is still eligible for WWPPRs.