# Is archery gender equitable?



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Is archery a sport that is a safe and welcoming to women?


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

Definately. We need more ladies out on the range. (Except when one of the beats my league score. LOL) There are bows specially built with the female archer in mind. Archery is for EVERYONE. 

Automan


----------



## MrC7709 (Sep 5, 2020)

Yup, a bow in a woman’s hand is equally as capable as that in a mans. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## automan26 (Oct 21, 2002)

Often, when watching World Archery on YouTube I've seen women score just as well, or higher, in their gold medal match than the men scored in their's. 

Automan


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

automan26 said:


> Often, when watching World Archery on YouTube I've seen women score just as well, or higher, in their gold medal match than the men scored in their's.
> 
> Automan


Understood, but two things stand out to me.
1. Women and men are shooting at the same distance and at identical targets, but each in their own matches
2. No women answered my question, only guys

It strikes me that archery could be a truly integrated sport, but isn't quite there yet. 

H


----------



## My Two Cents (Jun 26, 2019)

The biggest hurdle to over come is that women need accessories that are sized for women. Some youth sizes work but it's hard finding quality in youth sizes. Kids grow so fast that they don't always put the quality into the product that will likely be used short term. I really hate seeing a guy shopping for a "women's" bow for his wife/girlfriend. A women should use the bow that fits her best. I hate having to use second rate items because nobody thinks I can shoot good enough for the good stuff. I took up shooting in my late 50's. I was blown off by several bow shops. Setting up my bow it was commented many times "that's good enough for you". Well when I finally found someone that took my bow set up seriously, I am no longer the drop score at team shoots. lol. I would say yes it is safe for women if they are shooting appropriate weights. Our joints and muscle are not as strong as males. Welcoming? Depends. Most men welcome women hanging around the range but there is always a few that feel superior. 

Rant: However, I also have the same problem at car dealerships. "Send your husband in". "Hey can you get your husband to move the tractor". Rant over.


----------



## merlinron (Mar 23, 2020)

definitely,....years ago bow fit and draw weight was always an issue when it came to female shooters,.....there just didn't seem to be the variety needed to satisfy the most elementary requirements of decent bow fit for female shooters. that greatly stifled female participation. today,...with all the different brands of bow and different designs and sizes and adjust abilities, finding a bow to fit a female shooter is not a problem anymore. the industry has finally woke up and seen the demand by women archers. most clubs and organizations are encouraging women to try the sport. i taught my daughter to shoot when she was about 16yrs.old,...she is now sponsored by several archery accessory manufacturers and very active in the sport, successful hunter and currently the President of the club we belong to. she has two sons that she has taught to shoot, as well and shoots in a bow hunter league with them . i am also seeing more young women getting into archery and bow hunting in the recent years than ever before. most states have womens' orginizations and shoots aimed at female participation in order to promote the sport. i encourage male archers to volunteer thier help at womens' shoots whenever possible, to promote the idea that the sport is for both genders. not only is archery a sport for both genders,...it is a family sport as well.


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

Humphrey said:


> Is archery a sport that is a safe and welcoming to women?


I would say YES. I've never seen a woman mistreated at an archery event....

If it weren't "safe" and "welcoming" to women (or at least appeared to be) I wouldn't have introduced my daughter to the sport.

The problem as I see it, there aren't enough women in the sport and IMHO, that creates the impression that women aren't welcome to participate.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

My Two Cents said:


> The biggest hurdle to over come is that women need accessories that are sized for women. Some youth sizes work but it's hard finding quality in youth sizes. Kids grow so fast that they don't always put the quality into the product that will likely be used short term. I really hate seeing a guy shopping for a "women's" bow for his wife/girlfriend. A women should use the bow that fits her best. I hate having to use second rate items because nobody thinks I can shoot good enough for the good stuff. I took up shooting in my late 50's. I was blown off by several bow shops. Setting up my bow it was commented many times "that's good enough for you". Well when I finally found someone that took my bow set up seriously, I am no longer the drop score at team shoots. lol. I would say yes it is safe for women if they are shooting appropriate weights. Our joints and muscle are not as strong as males. Welcoming? Depends. Most men welcome women hanging around the range but there is always a few that feel superior.
> 
> Rant: However, I also have the same problem at car dealerships. "Send your husband in". "Hey can you get your husband to move the tractor". Rant over.


Thanks, that's very informative. 
I was using "safe" in the sense of whether women feel safe, rather than if the equipment is safe to use, but you opened up a whole other thread on being fobbed of with inferior productss and service.

H


----------



## raisins (Jan 21, 2016)

Humphrey said:


> Understood, but two things stand out to me.
> 1. Women and men are shooting at the same distance and at identical targets, but each in their own matches
> 2. No women answered my question, only guys
> 
> ...


To have a truly "fair" co-ed competition at targets at unknown distances or windy conditions, you'd have to limit bow speeds to something that a typical woman can achieve without extraordinary efforts, given their shorter draw lengths and lower upper body strength. There aren't many women with a draw length over 28" or that can easily pull over 60 lbs.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

1/2 Bubble Off said:


> ...
> The problem as I see it, there aren't enough women in the sport and IMHO, that creates the impression that women aren't welcome to participate.


That's a good insight, and I guess implies that the sport sends out signals that puts many women off.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Humphrey said:


> Is archery a sport that is a safe and welcoming to women?


 Only if you're smokin hot, have that perfect hourglass figure, single. Not really, actually that's a disadvantage, for some reason it distracts guys shooting on the line.

In all honesty, the more women the better. We welcome them with open arms just as we do kids, older folk, handicap, it doesn't matter, we accept everybody... So long as they're a bit on the goofy, Quirky, a little crazy side... If your normal, please find another hobby.

Find a good coach that works well with women to help get you started. I know it shouldn't make a difference, but some people just have issues with it. When I was coaching, I preferred women… they actually listen.

Good luck, welcome to the addiction


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

I have some really great shooting buddies that happen to be women.... One whoops me pretty regularly in our spot league. Her and I took home some $$$ in a 3D Money shoot last summer!!!!


----------



## Cybercat (Aug 4, 2003)

Well, as a woman here is a true answer. Yes, I have been in shops and on range without my husband. No issues archers are cordial in every way. I actually partner up with a guy who is the other only target person in club. Most are 3D and shoot indoors only during bad weather. But and him and 2 newer gals are indoors only.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Back when I was coaching, we had plenty of young girls that were in the classes. Teaching the kids is what really got me into coaching... Your daughter is plenty safe.


if you need a coach here is a place to start









Find a Coach - USA Archery


USA Archery is nationally recognized for its coach certification courses. Certified coaches lead quality programs that develop high performing athletes. Find a coach near you.




www.usarchery.org


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

My Two Cents said:


> The biggest hurdle to over come is that women need accessories that are sized for women. Some youth sizes work but it's hard finding quality in youth sizes. Kids grow so fast that they don't always put the quality into the product that will likely be used short term. I really hate seeing a guy shopping for a "women's" bow for his wife/girlfriend. A women should use the bow that fits her best. I hate having to use second rate items because nobody thinks I can shoot good enough for the good stuff. I took up shooting in my late 50's. I was blown off by several bow shops. Setting up my bow it was commented many times "that's good enough for you". Well when I finally found someone that took my bow set up seriously, I am no longer the drop score at team shoots. lol. I would say yes it is safe for women if they are shooting appropriate weights. Our joints and muscle are not as strong as males. Welcoming? Depends. Most men welcome women hanging around the range but there is always a few that feel superior.
> 
> Rant: However, I also have the same problem at car dealerships. "Send your husband in". "Hey can you get your husband to move the tractor". Rant over.


Do your female friends have similar experiences of poor service and being fobbed off with inferior products?
Are any on here?


----------



## Rodmor80 (May 18, 2021)

My wife shoots and is the one getting me into the sport. It was her idea, regularly goes to the range and local shops without me and I haven't once heard her say she was treated poorly, differently or "like a woman at a gun shop". That is in quotes because I have witnessed that one first hand.
It seems to me Humphrey that you are asking a lot of questions and getting quite a few good answers to said questions but do not seem satisfied with the answers. If your always looking for the negative in everything you will eventually find it. I'm also sure there are plenty of women archers that have or do have bad experiences as do men. If you don't like your experience then go to a different shop. There are pigs of both genders in every sport, that doesn't make the sport bad or non inclusive, It just proves the ignorance of those specific individuals.
An answer to the quality issue it really depends on your size and strength. My wife is 5'0 and 100 lbs with a draw length of 23 1/2", when she started in archery her initial draw weight she was safely and correctly (most important part) able to pull was 24lbs. She is now up to 32 lbs. Since you generally pull with your dominant hand (stronger) and hold with your non dominant hand (weaker), she chose a youth bow that fit her needs now, she knew when choosing she would eventually outgrow, but was within her ability at the time. (Bear Royale adjustable up to 50lbs). Yes youth bows are not built like a $1600 flagship bow but neither does the $400 price tag on it. We have already added the drop away rest, lighter quiver, and sight she picked out and will carry over to her new bow when she feels like she is ready and wants to choose a different bow to upgrade.
There are all price range bows for men and women $400, $600 $800..... up to $1600. What bow you choose is completely up to how it looks, feels and shoots to you as well as your personal abilities.
Archery is a custom user specific sport when it comes to gear.
The one place I see that could use vast improvement is in the low to mid price range for small women, girls and youth hunting clothing. It's hard to find and there aren't a ton of options. Event the women specific brands seem to forget the very small women.
I hope my long winded response helps fill in some of your questions.


----------



## Whaack (Apr 2, 2006)

Humphrey said:


> Understood, but two things stand out to me.
> 1. Women and men are shooting at the same distance and at identical targets, but each in their own matches
> 2. No women answered my question, only guys
> 
> ...


Or…….the amount of women that want to be in archery ARE in archery. Maybe given 1000 options or 100000 options of what to spend their time snd energy on women simply choose something else at a higher rate then men. 

Man I’m tired of this whole “everything has to be equal crap”. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Whaack said:


> Or…….the amount of women that want to be in archery ARE in archery. Maybe given 1000 options or 100000 options of what to spend their time snd energy on women simply choose something else at a higher rate then men.
> 
> Man I’m tired of this whole “everything has to be equal crap”.
> 
> ...


There are many possible answers to why women (51% of population) only make up 36% of archers.
Plain preference isn't one of them though, because it just kicks the can one step further down the road, and doesn't explain WHY.

As you said, women have thousands of options. So why is archery less often chosen than what chance would predict? If archery is less attractive, less interesting, less appealing to women than men, then why?

I can understand that you might be tired of talk about equity, but my guess is that those on the receiving end of inequity are a whole lot less happy about the situation than you


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Rodmor80 said:


> My wife shoots and is the one getting me into the sport. It was her idea, regularly goes to the range and local shops without me and I haven't once heard her say she was treated poorly, differently or "like a woman at a gun shop". That is in quotes because I have witnessed that one first hand.
> It seems to me Humphrey that you are asking a lot of questions and getting quite a few good answers to said questions but do not seem satisfied with the answers. If your always looking for the negative in everything you will eventually find it. I'm also sure there are plenty of women archers that have or do have bad experiences as do men. If you don't like your experience then go to a different shop. There are pigs of both genders in every sport, that doesn't make the sport bad or non inclusive, It just proves the ignorance of those specific individuals.
> An answer to the quality issue it really depends on your size and strength. My wife is 5'0 and 100 lbs with a draw length of 23 1/2", when she started in archery her initial draw weight she was safely and correctly (most important part) able to pull was 24lbs. She is now up to 32 lbs. Since you generally pull with your dominant hand (stronger) and hold with your non dominant hand (weaker), she chose a youth bow that fit her needs now, she knew when choosing she would eventually outgrow, but was within her ability at the time. (Bear Royale adjustable up to 50lbs). Yes youth bows are not built like a $1600 flagship bow but neither does the $400 price tag on it. We have already added the drop away rest, lighter quiver, and sight she picked out and will carry over to her new bow when she feels like she is ready and wants to choose a different bow to upgrade.
> There are all price range bows for men and women $400, $600 $800..... up to $1600. What bow you choose is completely up to how it looks, feels and shoots to you as well as your personal abilities.
> ...


Thanks, that's good info. 

"If your always looking for the negative in everything you will eventually find it."

Yes, I take your point. Probing behind the initial answers often comes across as negative, and often results in people answering with more negative examples. There is actually a whole approach to asking questions, called "Appreciative Inquiry" that focuses on the positive. 

The downside of AI is that it often comes across as sugar coating things that really are negative. So I'm kinda caught no matter which way I do this


----------



## Rodmor80 (May 18, 2021)

Humphrey said:


> Thanks, that's good info.
> 
> "If your always looking for the negative in everything you will eventually find it."
> 
> ...


At the end of all of the questions you seek to have answered what is your end goal? To participate in archery, bow hunt, find a sport for your kids, or something else? 
Archery is one of those things that once you try it and like it your hooked. It can be done with friends, family, or solo. That is entirely up to each individual archer. 
Enjoy.


----------



## Historys_Actor (Jan 29, 2021)

I feel like archery could be gender equitable. Im not familiar with the competition scene though. I have extreme performance anxiety so that will likely always be a pipedream for me.

But I am curious if its a competition sport that is separated by gender or just ranked by proficiency? Could it truly be an all inclusive sport? I think it seriously could be. 

I would love to know any ladies opinions on this question though... Could archery be a competition sport that was friendly to transgender women while also being fair to the biological female contenders? 

Asking purely for science... of course.


----------



## laur (Sep 6, 2017)

As a woman, I would say because this sport takes time to learn and practice and participate in, probably moreso than other sports. Once a woman has kids and is trying to balance work, kids activities, household and all that, she has a lot less time for hobbies. Not to mention travel to tournaments. Unless she was into archery already before kids, she isn't likely to take this up at this time of her life. Then when the kids are out, she's 40+ and unless the family hunts or there is some other exposure to archery it's not something a woman is likely to seek out. 

Also, depending where you live, there may not be a shop or club nearby. So add in travel time to go where you would shoot and that is also a limiting factor for a busy person.


----------



## VeritasHunter (May 4, 2020)

Humphrey said:


> There are many possible answers to why women (51% of population) only make up 36% of archers.
> *Plain preference isn't one of them though*, because it just kicks the can one step further down the road, and doesn't explain WHY.


Why not? Why can't "because they don't want to" be a viable answer? Unless you plan on interviewing every single woman who isn't in archery, you cannot get any more than that. Yes, you may get some that say they felt uncomfortable, or were treated poorly, but that is still just a tiny fraction of the total female population. 

I mean, there are some people that don't like football, or soccer, or tennis, and they don't simply because they don't. There aren't any hidden, insidious reasons behind it. They simply don't enjoy them. Why can't that be good enough?


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

VeritasHunter said:


> Why not? Why can't "because they don't want to" be a viable answer? Unless you plan on interviewing every single woman who isn't in archery, you cannot get any more than that. Yes, you may get some that say they felt uncomfortable, or were treated poorly, but that is still just a tiny fraction of the total female population.
> 
> I mean, there are some people that don't like football, or soccer, or tennis, and they don't simply because they don't. There aren't any hidden, insidious reasons behind it. They simply don't enjoy them. Why can't that be good enough?


"_Why can't "because they don't want to" be a viable answer?_"

Because that's the lazy answer.
It's an answer that really says "I am just too lazy, indifferent, and uncaring to bother actually asking anyone"

So no thanks, I actually want to know what people think, so will actually ask the question.

H


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Historys_Actor said:


> I feel like archery could be gender equitable. Im not familiar with the competition scene though. I have extreme performance anxiety so that will likely always be a pipedream for me.
> 
> But I am curious if its a competition sport that is separated by gender or just ranked by proficiency? Could it truly be an all inclusive sport? I think it seriously could be.
> 
> ...


I think it could be truly gender neutral, at least for traditional and Olympic style target. There seems to be no physical barriers to having totally gender blind competition for those.


----------



## VeritasHunter (May 4, 2020)

Humphrey said:


> "_Why can't "because they don't want to" be a viable answer?_"
> 
> Because that's the lazy answer.
> It's an answer that really says "I am just too lazy, indifferent, and uncaring to bother actually asking anyone"
> ...


But what if someone says that they simply don't want to? That was my point. You said that simple preference isn't good enough: "*There are many possible answers ...Plain preference isn't one of them though*." But what if simple preference IS the reason for many of them? Are you going to tell them that they are either wrong, or lying? Why try to read more into something, or create drama, that doesn't exist?


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

VeritasHunter said:


> But what if someone says that they simply don't want to? That was my point. You said that simple preference isn't good enough: "*There are many possible answers ...Plain preference isn't one of them though*." But what if simple preference IS the reason for many of them? Are you going to tell them that they are either wrong, or lying? Why try to read more into something, or create drama, that doesn't exist?


If someone says they simply prefer a different sport, then obviously that's their answer and that's the end to asking them. I mean obviously. 

It's when someone is explaining other people's behavior without asking them, by simply assuming the answer is preference. That's the problem


----------



## fcap60 (Jul 18, 2015)

Yes, I believe archery is safe and welcoming to women. Keep in mind, however, there can be idiots and A-holes anywhere and in any sport generally.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Humphrey said:


> "_Why can't "because they don't want to" be a viable answer?_"
> 
> Because that's the lazy answer.
> It's an answer that really says "I am just too lazy, indifferent, and uncaring to bother actually asking anyone"
> ...


 That is simply untrue. The average woman would rather have a free day at a health and beauty spa then a free trip to a nascar event. The average woman simply does not want to engage in what is typically a man's sport. Finding a woman that truly enjoys archery, other shother shooting sports, hunting, auto racing etc. is quite rare.

Women typically do what they want and if the average women wanted to get into archery, they would.

The answer of simply "they don't want to be" is a reasonable accurate answer. That said, because men are pigs and can often look and a woman is being less capable, ignorant except for maybe a contributing factor but it isn't THE contributing factor.


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Humphrey said:


> I think it could be truly gender neutral, at least for traditional and Olympic style target. There seems to be no physical barriers to having totally gender blind competition for those.


 Except on average there actually is physical barriers.. Pound for pound the average man is stronger than the average woman... There's a reason why women seek out men for doing the heavy work. That said, there's no reason there couldn't be a genderless class in addition to men's and women's classification.


----------



## VeritasHunter (May 4, 2020)

Humphrey said:


> If someone says they simply prefer a different sport, then obviously that's their answer and that's the end to asking them. I mean obviously.
> 
> It's when someone is explaining other people's behavior without asking them, by simply assuming the answer is preference. That's the problem


First off, you just contradicted yourself. Again, to quote you: "_There are many possible answers ...Plain preference _*isn't *_one of them though_." Remember typing that? That's a definitive statement, black and white. You eliminated preference as a possible reason, but now say it is? So which is it, a possible answer or not?

Secondly, I have three women very close to me, my wife and 26 year old twin daughters. My wife shoots, occasionally. She enjoys it, but not enough to prioritize it over other things. My one daughter absolutely loves it, shoots every day, hunts, etc. My other daughter couldn't care less. My guess is that the majority of women who don't shoot, fall into my one daughter's genre. You might find a handful of women who don't shoot because of a bad experience, but that isn't representative of the sport as a whole.

Thirdly, what is your goal in this whole thing? Are you seeking to find discrimination? Your opening question is full of divisiveness. What do you mean by "safe"? Why would you even question whether archery is "safe" for women, when the entire international sport is filled with women? Or are you looking at personal experience and seeing less women at your local range/club and feel there must be some insidious reason behind it?


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

VeritasHunter said:


> First off, you just contradicted yourself. Again, to quote you: "_There are many possible answers ...Plain preference _*isn't *_one of them though_." Remember typing that? That's a definitive statement, black and white. You eliminated preference as a possible reason, but now say it is? So which is it, a possible answer or not?
> 
> Secondly, I have three women very close to me, my wife and 26 year old twin daughters. My wife shoots, occasionally. She enjoys it, but not enough to prioritize it over other things. My one daughter absolutely loves it, shoots every day, hunts, etc. My other daughter couldn't care less. My guess is that the majority of women who don't shoot, fall into my one daughter's genre. You might find a handful of women who don't shoot because of a bad experience, but that isn't representative of the sport as a whole.
> 
> Thirdly, what is your goal in this whole thing? Are you seeking to find discrimination? Your opening question is full of divisiveness. What do you mean by "safe"? Why would you even question whether archery is "safe" for women, when the entire international sport is filled with women? Or are you looking at personal experience and seeing less women at your local range/club and feel there must be some insidious reason behind it?


"_You eliminated preference as a possible reason, but now say it is? So which is it, a possible answer or not_?"
Evidently you think I am talking about answers given _by_ women for their lack of interest in archery. I was talking (rather obviously) about the reasons given by men in this discussion for why women might not be participating in archery.
See the difference? 

"_Why would you even question whether archery is "safe" for women_""

Because I keep tabs on that as a matter of situational awareness. If you feel that it's an inherently divisive question then I am both surprised and curious. As to what "safe" means, it means low risk to physical and emotional wellbeing, but includes things like being verbally or physically attacked.

So here's an interesting experiment. Ask a bunch of guys if in the last 30 days, they had felt unsafe, that their lives were at risk. You generally get one or two.
Ask the same of women, and you get one or two that haven't felt unsafe. Then ask for stories. 

Then look at your favorite sport, hangouts, behavior and you see a new world, one in which guys feel totally safe, and women are constantly on their guard.

Try it


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

So are you saying that you're sexist. It seems to be the problem is you


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Fury90flier said:


> So are you saying that you're sexist. It seems to be the problem is you


Yeah, must be that.
You are so insightful!


----------



## Historys_Actor (Jan 29, 2021)

Fury90flier said:


> Except on average there actually is physical barriers.. Pound for pound the average man is stronger than the average woman... There's a reason why women seek out men for doing the heavy work. That said, there's no reason there couldn't be a genderless class in addition to men's and women's classification.


Or you know there could just be classes based on draw weight... 
I know this might be hard to believe but there's always exceptions to the gender norms. I can draw a 70# bow but my boyfriend can't.


----------



## Historys_Actor (Jan 29, 2021)

Humphrey said:


> Then look at your favorite sport, hangouts, behavior and you see a new world, one in which guys feel totally safe, and women are constantly on their guard.
> 
> Try it


Y'know... I'm not sure this is going to age very well. On one hand you have guys who right now maybe in their late 30s and older and who might be comfortable and more social situations it's always a high likelihood that they're extremely paranoid about something.
Whether it's hoarding/prepping for the apocalypse or stalking a girlfriend in fear of her cheating because they have no self-confidence.

And then on the other hand you've got younger guys who are seemingly just as emotionally vulnerable as girls. Usually thanks to having no father figure to instill fake machismo on to them and pressuring them into beating the crap out of each other at school.

I mean you know... since we're just dropping a bunch of gender stereotypes


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

Historys_Actor said:


> Or you know there could just be classes based on draw weight...
> I know this might be hard to believe but there's always exceptions to the gender norms. I can draw a 70# bow but my boyfriend can't.


That would simply change the names of the classes.... Men and women would still be separated except for a few outliers.

The current system separated by age/gender/equipment type etc is NOT perfect, but is way better than separating classes based on DW/DL.


----------



## Historys_Actor (Jan 29, 2021)

1/2 Bubble Off said:


> The current system separated by age/gender/equipment type etc is NOT perfect, but is way better than separating classes based on DW/DL.



I mean that sounds reasonable. I mean if that's the way it works then it might theoretical scenario a transgender person could still compete amongst the gender they identify as but not be creating an unfair advantage. At least that's how it sounds to me. 

I would ask for the opinion of some of the ladies here but I'm starting to believe there may not be many.


----------



## Jabroney (Sep 30, 2019)

would breaking into classes based on arrows make sense? Length or weight of arrows would group similar bows, regardless of the archer, right?


----------



## Fury90flier (Jun 27, 2012)

Historys_Actor said:


> I mean that sounds reasonable. I mean if that's the way it works then it might theoretical scenario a transgender person could still compete amongst the gender they identify as but not be creating an unfair advantage. At least that's how it sounds to me.
> 
> I would ask for the opinion of some of the ladies here but I'm starting to believe there may not be many.


 If I identify as a winner should I just be given 1st place? 

If you want a transgender discussion, start a thread about transgender and accept the information that you get from everybody. This thread is about perceived safety of women in the sport.

And for the record, there are plenty women on this site, it just appears they don't want to participate in your discussion


----------



## nakedape (Sep 28, 2015)

laur said:


> I would love to know any ladies opinions on this question though... Could archery be a competition sport that was friendly to transgender women while also being fair to the biological female contenders?
> 
> Asking purely for science... of course.


Sorry, not a lady, but I will throw in my two cents.

Men consistently outperform women on spatial tasks. 
It's scientifically proven.

At this Olympic, Canada sent one man and one woman.
The woman is a transgenger.









Another man steals a woman's place on the podium


Laurel Hubbard isn't the only cheat going to the Olympics.




grahamlinehan.substack.com













Canadian Olympic archer triggers clash over transgender transparency


New Zealand weightlifter Laurel Hubbard became Monday the first openly transgender women’s Olympian to compete based on gender identity, but the key may be “openly.”




www.washingtontimes.com


----------



## nakedape (Sep 28, 2015)

Historys_Actor said:


> I feel like archery could be gender equitable. Im not familiar with the competition scene though. I have extreme performance anxiety so that will likely always be a pipedream for me.
> 
> But I am curious if its a competition sport that is separated by gender or just ranked by proficiency? Could it truly be an all inclusive sport? I think it seriously could be.


yes, archery is separated by gender, but some of the men category are considered Open.
Sarah Lopez was the only women to compete in the Vegas open division I believe.

This Olympic has 64 men and 64 women

In the ranking rounds (72 arrows)
30 women shot 640 and above.
57 men shot 640 and above.


----------



## bow up (Sep 2, 2010)

Humphrey said:


> Is archery a sport that is a safe and welcoming to women?


Is this a serious question? Why would you assume it would not be safe or welcoming to women? BTW, I am a female that hunts only and does not do target or 3D...


----------



## BigFish7 (Oct 19, 2017)

Humphrey said:


> Is archery a sport that is a safe and welcoming to women?


The answer is both yes and no, and your framing of the question is wrong. Archery is not a “sport,” it originated as an ancient means of securing food and thus, life and prosperity. Some people I know are average target shooters, but they’re stone cold killers in the woods. Inversely, I know other people who are excellent at the line, but either freeze up or choose not to take the shot when a live animal walks in front of them. Both guys and gals in each scenario. Some people just have it, the ethereal drive to kill and procure food, while others can use the tools equally well in practice, but not implement those tools when confronted with critical situations. Archery as a whole is dependent upon the individual’s will, ability, and desire to make the shot count. I’ve seen several ads for $1k+ bow setups, and the listing proclaims that they bought a bow for somebody and the person took no interest. It’s not something that can be instilled into a person who doesn’t have it, and it equally is not something that can be taken out of people who love it. It is a purely individual practice and execution of an ancient skill set that shaped the world we live in today. It cannot be characterized by trivial concepts like age, gender, or physical strength.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

bow up said:


> Is this a serious question? Why would you assume it would not be safe or welcoming to women? BTW, I am a female that hunts only and does not do target or 3D...


Yes, and I'm not making any assumptions either way


----------



## cbd10pt (Jun 11, 2004)

My Two Cents said:


> The biggest hurdle to over come is that women need accessories that are sized for women. Some youth sizes work but it's hard finding quality in youth sizes. Kids grow so fast that they don't always put the quality into the product that will likely be used short term. I really hate seeing a guy shopping for a "women's" bow for his wife/girlfriend. A women should use the bow that fits her best. I hate having to use second rate items because nobody thinks I can shoot good enough for the good stuff. I took up shooting in my late 50's. I was blown off by several bow shops. Setting up my bow it was commented many times "that's good enough for you". Well when I finally found someone that took my bow set up seriously, I am no longer the drop score at team shoots. lol. I would say yes it is safe for women if they are shooting appropriate weights. Our joints and muscle are not as strong as males. Welcoming? Depends. Most men welcome women hanging around the range but there is always a few that feel superior.
> 
> Rant: However, I also have the same problem at car dealerships. "Send your husband in". "Hey can you get your husband to move the tractor". Rant over.


This is simply not true, every big bow manufacturer makes a high end bow for ladies.
My daughters , wife, ex wife, & friends that have shot with me over the years all grew bored of the sport.
Some hunted, some just shot, but all grew bored.
I have been a hard core hunter/ archer from the time I was given my first bow at 3, I am 45 now.
Maybe archery is to simple for the complexity of a female mind, who really knows?


----------



## My Two Cents (Jun 26, 2019)

cbd10pt said:


> This is simply not true, every big bow manufacturer makes a high end bow for ladies.
> My daughters , wife, ex wife, & friends that have shot with me over the years all grew bored of the sport.
> Some hunted, some just shot, but all grew bored.
> I have been a hard core hunter/ archer from the time I was given my first bow at 3, I am 45 now.
> Maybe archery is to simple for the complexity of a female mind, who really knows?


I did not say that big bow manufacturers didn't make bows for women. I said finding quality accessories to fit women, sized for women, are hard to find in bow shops. And why do they need to label bows as "women's" anyway? Shoot the bow that fits you and skip "labels" . For the record I shoot an Avail because it was a hand me down (up?) from my daughter and an Xpedition MX16 because I like it. I have 3 daughters that have 6 bows between them, None are women's bows. Finding releases that fit their hands has been largely trial and error. Buying and selling on line because no one has anything to fit their hands in a shop.


----------



## cbd10pt (Jun 11, 2004)

My Two Cents said:


> I did not say that big bow manufacturers didn't make bows for women. I said finding quality accessories to fit women, sized for women, are hard to find in bow shops. And why do they need to label bows as "women's" anyway? Shoot the bow that fits you and skip "labels" . For the record I shoot an Avail because it was a hand me down (up?) from my daughter and an Xpedition MX16 because I like it. I have 3 daughters that have 6 bows between them, None are women's bows. Finding releases that fit their hands has been largely trial and error. Buying and selling on line because no one has anything to fit their hands in a shop.


They label them ladies bows and add lady sized/colored accessories, for the same reason they don't sale mens under wear in the cereal isle @ Walmart ' That's what the majority expects' Every Archer should have equipment custom fit to them; Men, women, boy, girl -whatever.
There are some good manufacturers though, She Safari? Eva Shocky series, etc.
I have the most average draw length in the industry and I have to special order things off lancecaster to get exactly what I want.

Good for you, digging into the sport and finding what works for you!


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

My Two Cents said:


> I did not say that big bow manufacturers didn't make bows for women. I said finding quality accessories to fit women, sized for women, are hard to find in bow shops. And why do they need to label bows as "women's" anyway? Shoot the bow that fits you and skip "labels" . For the record I shoot an Avail because it was a hand me down (up?) from my daughter and an Xpedition MX16 because I like it. I have 3 daughters that have 6 bows between them, None are women's bows. Finding releases that fit their hands has been largely trial and error. Buying and selling on line because no one has anything to fit their hands in a shop.





cbd10pt said:


> This is simply not true, every big bow manufacturer makes a high end bow for ladies.
> My daughters , wife, ex wife, & friends that have shot with me over the years all grew bored of the sport.
> Some hunted, some just shot, but all grew bored.
> I have been a hard core hunter/ archer from the time I was given my first bow at 3, I am 45 now.
> Maybe archery is to simple for the complexity of a female mind, who really knows?


Not sure how to explain to you that your reply underlines some of the problems.


You dismissed what she said - "This is simply not true"
Then deflected by addressing a claim she didn't make (manufacturers vs store availability)
Then spoke for all of women and again dismissed her point by citing the experience you think your wife and daughters had.
Then invoked some weird uncomfortable "female mind" thing

I am sure you didn't mean to be dismissive or insulting or contribute to an unwelcoming experience for women, but that's what just happened. 

If women often encounter that kind of interaction, you bet a bunch will vote with their feet and go find another sport.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

My Two Cents said:


> I did not say that big bow manufacturers didn't make bows for women. I said finding quality accessories to fit women, sized for women, are hard to find in bow shops. And why do they need to label bows as "women's" anyway? Shoot the bow that fits you and skip "labels" . For the record I shoot an Avail because it was a hand me down (up?) from my daughter and an Xpedition MX16 because I like it. I have 3 daughters that have 6 bows between them, None are women's bows. Finding releases that fit their hands has been largely trial and error. Buying and selling on line because no one has anything to fit their hands in a shop.


Thanks for the detail, it's helpful to hear directly.


----------



## Amykins753 (Aug 25, 2021)

I learned how to shoot a bow over a year ago because my friend (male) wanted to get back into archery. It was something that I’ve always wanted to learn along with learning how to hunt. I’ve always liked what you would call “male activities” like 4-wheeling, off-roading, fishing, football, etc. If I didn’t have a mentor I most likely would not have tried it although I’m very happy I did. I’m obviously still a noob and I don’t compete but the only challenges I’ve had were that my form has to be a little different than a male due to female anatomy… or that’s what another professional told me (I must slightly bend my bow arm because my elbow kinda hyper extends and if I don’t I’ll get strings to the arm) and obviously I can’t pull back a 60# bow. I currently own a Hoyt Charger and a males release that I was able to adjust down to the right length I needed. I don’t find any of the pink and purple bows appealing and will never buy anything “girly”. There are plenty male bows on the market that can be adjusted to “female” draw lengths and weights. Most arrows you find in a store or online come at a standard 30 inches, so even my friend/mentor has to buy and cut his arrows. Regarding safety…. Standard hunting and safety practices should be followed by all archers and hunters regardless of sex. Not to mention safety is an every day thing that all humans should be aware of in all activities not just archery. Do I plan on giving up archery any time soon, DEF not! I’m obviously on AT and I shoot my bow at least once every week by myself… I’m constantly trying to learn as much as I can about the “sport” and hope to be a master one day. I’ve never felt unwelcomed by the community if anything quite the opposite. Do I know any other females that shoot a bow, no I don’t but I’m also not your average female.


----------



## Gimli's Ghost (Jun 29, 2021)

Women archers have been commonplace since the days of the Ancient Greeks.
Despite modern mantras there are differences in the skeletal structure and muscle mass between males and females, but these are of little importance when it comes to target and common hunting type bows.

You aren't likely to see women drawing an English War Bow of 120 to 160 lbs, but there are probably a tiny percentage of females that could. Not that many men can do so for that matter.

Look up the female archery competitions of the 19th and early 20th centuries. There are several free to read books on the subject at the Internet Archive. In those days when women couldn't even vote and most believed a woman's place was in the kitchen no one turned a hair when it came to female archers.

Rather than putting all women at a disadvantage , as the drive to let biological males who self identify as females dominate female oriented sports, it would be better to have male, female and co-ed competitions. Let those females who can compete with men do so if they wish. Let the Trans gender types compete against other biological males in the co-ed classification.

PS
As a teenager I could draw a 90# long bow using 37inch arrows with little effort. In later years I shot a 60# compound bow fairly well. These days after many years of poor health I'm just now working my way back up to handling the 45# bow I bought over half a century ago, the 35# bow given me by a lady friend is now my favorite. The 60# compound will remain a wall hanger for the foreseeable future.


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

My Two Cents said:


> The biggest hurdle to over come is that women need accessories that are sized for women. Some youth sizes work but it's hard finding quality in youth sizes. Kids grow so fast that they don't always put the quality into the product that will likely be used short term. I really hate seeing a guy shopping for a "women's" bow for his wife/girlfriend. A women should use the bow that fits her best. I hate having to use second rate items because nobody thinks I can shoot good enough for the good stuff. I took up shooting in my late 50's. I was blown off by several bow shops. Setting up my bow it was commented many times "that's good enough for you". Well when I finally found someone that took my bow set up seriously, I am no longer the drop score at team shoots. lol. I would say yes it is safe for women if they are shooting appropriate weights. Our joints and muscle are not as strong as males. Welcoming? Depends. Most men welcome women hanging around the range but there is always a few that feel superior.
> 
> Rant: However, I also have the same problem at car dealerships. "Send your husband in". "Hey can you get your husband to move the tractor". Rant over.


I think you just haven’t spent a enough time around competitive guy’s. A lot of times they to make you fell like your not as good as them or like they are superior to you.

And if you are sensitive it can hurt your feelings. if you don’t understand that the are just joking I could understand how someone could fell unwelcome.

I was not addressing the rant part btw


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Badatarchery said:


> I think you just haven’t spent a enough time around competitive guy’s. A lot of times they to make you fell like your not as good as them or like they are superior to you.
> 
> And if you are sensitive it can hurt your feelings. if you don’t understand that the are just joking I could understand how someone could fell unwelcome.
> 
> I was not addressing the rant part btw


"_A lot of times they to make you fell like your not as good as them or like they are superior to you_."

Right
So must women and sensitive men just go find a more welcoming and inclusive sport, or should those competitive guys learn how to be social?


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

Humphrey said:


> "_A lot of times they to make you fell like your not as good as them or like they are superior to you_."
> 
> Right
> So must women and sensitive men just go find a more welcoming and inclusive sport, or should those competitive guys learn how to be social?


I've met all types of folks in my travels and the problem with our society is... Everyone wants the other guy/gal to change to accommodate them.... Why can't both groups grow and learn from this???

Arrogant Men and Women - could easily learn to be a little less douchey.... 

Sensitive Men and Women - could easily learn to develop a little thicker skin....


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

member: 966080"]
"_A lot of times they to make you fell like your not as good as them or like they are superior to you_."

Right
So must women and sensitive men just go find a more welcoming and inclusive sport, or should those competitive guys learn how to be social?
[/QUOTE]

All I’m saying is that people need to man up and get there feelings off their shoulders.

After you prove yourself you will be accepted. That’s how it is. 

Who cares what people think of you do you your best and try hard regardless if people are rude to you. 


Btw it happens to everyone not just women.


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

All I’m saying is that people need to get their feelings off their shoulders and man up/ grow up.

After you prove you will be accepted.
In most sports and jobs etc. their is a hazing period. It’s normal. 

Btw it happens to everyone not just women🤓.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

1/2 Bubble Off said:


> I've met all types of folks in my travels and the problem with our society is... Everyone wants the other guy/gal to change to accommodate them.... Why can't both groups grow and learn from this???
> 
> Arrogant Men and Women - could easily learn to be a little less douchey....
> 
> Sensitive Men and Women - could easily learn to develop a little thicker skin....


Sure, they could try developing a thicker skin, but many would just vote with their feet and not participate in the sport. The question is whether that's what we want.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Badatarchery said:


> All I’m saying is that people need to get their feelings off their shoulders and man up/ grow up.
> 
> After you prove you will be accepted.
> In most sports and jobs etc. their is a hazing period. It’s normal.
> ...


"_In most sports and jobs etc. their is a hazing period. It’s normal_"

That's not really a good reason for it to stay that way.


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

I didn’t say it should stay that way did I ? 
Lol some people 😵‍💫


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

If you are so sensitive that you stop doing something you enjoy just bcc someone does something you don’t like you need help.

(BTW not saying it’s good to haze people)

It’s just that some people have trouble excepting people into their groups. and for some people that’s the only way they will except people. Again not saying it’s good 😊.

Hazing in this case is not beating people up it’s just talking smack witch doesn’t hurt my feelings or make me stop something I enjoy.

Btw most don’t rlly do that.


----------



## Torque_tune (Aug 23, 2019)

There are equal places to compete and practice. All accessories are built by size. You will see large and small as opposed to male and female. You will even see youth and adult more than male and female.

You are asking a loaded question that can only be answered by opinion. Noone can speak for all women. Even a woman. Better yet a group of 10 women can only speak for themselves not the entirety of the women in or out of archery.

This in itself is the type of thing that ruins people's perception of an activity. They could know absolutely nothing about archery and hear a note of this garbage and not participate out of sheer drama avoidance. 

Maybe just maybe the potential issue ,if there is one, is your framing of the subject. 

But I'm not smart. I take it you are so you probably thought about my take already and you were still inconsiderate enough to follow through. I'm glad you can say what you want in this country. But I'm sad that is what you choose to say


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Torque_tune said:


> There are equal places to compete and practice. All accessories are built by size. You will see large and small as opposed to male and female. You will even see youth and adult more than male and female.
> 
> You are asking a loaded question that can only be answered by opinion. Noone can speak for all women. Even a woman. Better yet a group of 10 women can only speak for themselves not the entirety of the women in or out of archery.
> 
> ...


"_You are asking a loaded question that can only be answered by opinion_."

Loaded would imply that I was saying it is equitable. 
Yes, it's encouraging opinions, sentiments, examples. 

"_you were still inconsiderate enough to follow through"_

That's some next level of hypersensitivity there. 
Maybe you could expand on why asking about equitability is so bad.


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

This why I don’t like liberals most of em don’t have thick skin. Say one thing they don’t like and all the sudden they freak out. Kinda similar thing here lol.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Badatarchery said:


> This why I don’t like liberals most of em don’t have thick skin. Say one thing they don’t like and all the sudden they freak out. Kinda similar thing here lol.


Are you saying that Torque_tune is a liberal?


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

Humphrey said:


> Are you saying that Torque_tune is a liberal?


No I was hinting that people not having thick enough skin may be part of the problem. I don’t know why I put liberals into that. Sorry if you took it the wrong way.


----------



## Limb_bow (Sep 15, 2021)

I would say highly accepting of women. When I started a couple months ago me and my girlfriend started and even when we went the session before there was a couple and our class was 2 male 6 females which should say enough. Plus back in Korea women love the sport and have excelled at it for a long time.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Badatarchery said:


> No I was hinting that people not having thick enough skin may be part of the problem. I don’t know why I put liberals into that. Sorry if you took it the wrong way.


No worries


----------



## Steven Bressan (May 6, 2009)

When and where I grew up we had to compete against Ann Butz, a multi time National Champion. She could beat most of the men in our league and was a great shot, shooting a number of 300 PAA rounds. I was fortunate enough to have her husband coach me as well as Lenny Cardinale.


----------



## Reaper in the Trees (Apr 18, 2021)

Humphrey said:


> Understood, but two things stand out to me.
> 1. Women and men are shooting at the same distance and at identical targets, but each in their own matches
> 2. No women answered my question, only guys
> 
> ...


----------



## Reaper in the Trees (Apr 18, 2021)

I’m a women who loves archery, hunting and competition. I also share this account with my husband. Trying to make archery about anything other than what it is is just silly. We all have the same opportunities to reach out for what we want. I had the opportunity to get the job I have, make as much money as I deserve based off of my performance (really my salary is based on a competition based off performance by other other women in my department, because it’s a finance job and 100% of us are women, and not complaining about the “sexism” our company has since there aren’t an equal amount of men and women tend to get jobs like mine more than men). Therefore, with my money I had the opportunity to walk into any bow shop of my choosing and pay the same amount of money as any man would would (I actually got an amazing deal on a Hoyt rx5). When I buy all of my accessories and arrows I pay the same price as anyone else would too and the admission charges are the same. Therefore, every part of me going out and buying a bow and getting involved in archery is the same for my husband... if you want to make this a sexism thing, tell me where the difference lies other than just the percentages of men and women that hunt. Don’t throw out some survey crap either, tell me the exact examples you have that is it more difficult for women to get involved in archery. TRUTH matters in nature. Women are naturally not as interested in hunting as men. That doesn’t mean there aren’t women who don’t love hunting as much as some men, because there are, but the number of women that are interested in it is a lot smaller than men who do.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Reaper in the Trees said:


> I’m a women who loves archery, hunting and competition. I also share this account with my husband. Trying to make archery about anything other than what it is is just silly. We all have the same opportunities to reach out for what we want. I had the opportunity to get the job I have, make as much money as I deserve based off of my performance (really my salary is based on a competition based off performance by other other women in my department, because it’s a finance job and 100% of us are women, and not complaining about the “sexism” our company has since there aren’t an equal amount of men and women tend to get jobs like mine more than men). Therefore, with my money I had the opportunity to walk into any bow shop of my choosing and pay the same amount of money as any man would would (I actually got an amazing deal on a Hoyt rx5). When I buy all of my accessories and arrows I pay the same price as anyone else would too and the admission charges are the same. Therefore, every part of me going out and buying a bow and getting involved in archery is the same for my husband... if you want to make this a sexism thing, tell me where the difference lies other than just the percentages of men and women that hunt. Don’t throw out some survey crap either, tell me the exact examples you have that is it more difficult for women to get involved in archery. TRUTH matters in nature. Women are naturally not as interested in hunting as men. That doesn’t mean there aren’t women who don’t love hunting as much as some men, because there are, but the number of women that are interested in it is a lot smaller than men who do.


I'm glad things are working out for you!

"_if you want to make this a sexism thing_"

Asking if archery is gender equitable isn't making anything a "sexism thing". It's just a question to gather opinions and experiences.

"TRUTH matters in nature"

Agreed

"_Women are naturally not as interested in hunting as men"_

Is that your opinion or a fact? - If you think it's a fact, how do you know that? 
What about archery not related to hunting?


----------



## Reaper in the Trees (Apr 18, 2021)

"_if you want to make this a sexism thing_"

Asking if archery is gender equitable isn't making anything a "sexism thing". It's just a question to gather opinions and experiences.

Your original post seemed like you genuine interest in the subject and drew me into reading the comments. After further investigation, it really appears that you were trying to gather more information to push the sexism card. 



"_Women are naturally not as interested in hunting as men"_

Is that your opinion or a fact? - If you think it's a fact, how do you know that? 
What about archery not related to hunting?
[/QUOTE]

I supposed I should of said “women are not as interested in archery as men” not only hunting. I believe the static regarding the percentage of female and males hunters shows the evidence of women not being as interested in archery as men, since there are no other factors that I can see other than pure nature.


----------



## Humphrey (May 11, 2021)

Reaper in the Trees said:


> "_if you want to make this a sexism thing_"
> 
> Asking if archery is gender equitable isn't making anything a "sexism thing". It's just a question to gather opinions and experiences.
> 
> ...


I supposed I should of said “women are not as interested in archery as men” not only hunting. I believe the static regarding the percentage of female and males hunters shows the evidence of women not being as interested in archery as men, since there are no other factors that I can see other than pure nature.
[/QUOTE]
"_Your original post seemed like you genuine interest in the subject_"

I do

_"I supposed I should of said “women are not as interested in archery as men” not only hunting."_

Ok, thanks for the clarification 

"_the static regarding the percentage of female and males hunters shows the evidence of women not being as interested in archery as men, since there are no other factors that I can see other than pure nature_"

Hmm
You are using an "elimination" argument which basically says that if you eliminate X and Y, then as the last man standing, it must be Z.

The problem is that it only works if you know every possible explanation already.

I don't think that you can reasonably conclude that women just don't like archery based on low prevalence.


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

This is so dumb. men and women are different and have different interest. Men tend to lean towards the hunting\outdoors it’s been that way sense the dawn of time.


----------



## Badatarchery (Aug 11, 2021)

If they don’t want to get into archery it’s there fault. Just bcc there are are more men into archery than women don’t mean that women don’t have equal opportunity


----------



## NancyNelson (12 mo ago)

I think archery is a great equalizer sport. My husband and I shoot pretty much the same sometimes good sometimes, like tonight, not so good LOL. We also teach archery to youth. We've noticed that girls catch on quicker than the boys do most of the time. I can't say that about me because it took me like 3 years for the light bulb to come on when it came to shooting archery. As far as going into a bow shop I haven't been in one yet that treats me like I don't know what I am talking about. My favorite thing about archery is that anybody can do it if they want to. Any gender, any age, any ability. Love that!


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

Speaking from my little corner of the world... This is the Kids League at my club. On day one we had 11 shooters total. 6 girls and 5 boys. We picked up 9 more kids over the last few weeks and now we have 20 shooters total. 12 girls and 8 boys.

We are coming on our 4th week. So far for weeks 1-3, the overall high score was turned in by a girl. In fact there hasn't been a boy champion in any compound class in the last 3 years. (we had a brother and sister who shot OR and the boy won that class both years they were with us)

We don't separate the kids by gender. Only equipment and distance. It just so happens that all but one of our kids shoot a Hunter Class bow this year.

All in all, archery seems pretty equitable to me...


----------



## "TheBlindArcher" (Jan 27, 2015)

It's far more gender equitable than it is disability equitable... How many of your ranges are fully wheelchair accessible; how many have braille signage on all the doors or vending machines ... How about at a national level: D.O.S. who don't fully know all the para rule adaptations; Very very few coaching seminars geared towards para archery, and even fewer who have any training in coaching visually impaired [VI]; The number of USAT qualifiers for able bodied versus para, and events the VIs are often times "uninvited" to... How about internationally: many countries don't even have a para division, and again even fewer support VI archery; fewer Paralympic quota spots than Olympic quota spots... and the one rare "gender inequality" as at the Paralympics there were fewer women's quota spots than men's; and oh yeah, no VI quota spots at all... 

Sorry, and I know this is a very "me man" chest thumping that I gladly welcome the roasting of, but I am far less sympathetic of opportunities not taken than I am of opportunities not provided.


----------



## NancyNelson (12 mo ago)

My Two Cents said:


> The biggest hurdle to over come is that women need accessories that are sized for women. Some youth sizes work but it's hard finding quality in youth sizes. Kids grow so fast that they don't always put the quality into the product that will likely be used short term. I really hate seeing a guy shopping for a "women's" bow for his wife/girlfriend. A women should use the bow that fits her best. I hate having to use second rate items because nobody thinks I can shoot good enough for the good stuff. I took up shooting in my late 50's. I was blown off by several bow shops. Setting up my bow it was commented many times "that's good enough for you". Well when I finally found someone that took my bow set up seriously, I am no longer the drop score at team shoots. lol. I would say yes it is safe for women if they are shooting appropriate weights. Our joints and muscle are not as strong as males. Welcoming? Depends. Most men welcome women hanging around the range but there is always a few that feel superior.
> 
> Rant: However, I also have the same problem at car dealerships. "Send your husband in". "Hey can you get your husband to move the tractor". Rant over.


I agree with you while the sport itself is equitable for both men and women, the equipment is not. I shoot a Hoyt Charger but would much rather shoot a Hoyt carbon bow but they don't come in a low enough draw weight for me. I shoot at just under 40 lbs which is fine for most settings . . . accept when I need to shoot beyond 40 yards, which I could do, but my equipment can't. I think the archery industry is losing out on a huge market. Because in reality, in the marketplace women make up more than 60% of household buying decisions.


----------



## Matt C Smith (12 mo ago)

Humphrey said:


> Is archery a sport that is a safe and welcoming to women?


using my husbands account...
in the beginning it was intimidating being a woman in the archery world because there are so many men. That was years ago and now i'm seeing much more women. now i feel totally safe and welcomed for the most part and i can shoot as good as the men.


----------



## Hikari (May 15, 2021)

I guess you would have to define "equitable"?

Is there gender bias in archery? Absolutely. Look at some of the posts here. Advertising around archery definitely has a gender bias--representation matters. When you look at a competition such as Lancaster, male and female archers are not treated the same way--the interviews are biased by gender.

Both I and my wife are archers. She would never shoot at a range without me. She would find it uncomfortable. I doubt she would have picked up a bow if it were not for me. 

Should there be open classes in archery? Well, for barebow, the class would be dominated by men, so I would not support open classes. (When Lancaster had barebow as an open class, women were not in the finals and scores in other competitions show that gender influences results.) 

Personally, I would like to see more women in archery. I think the sport offers a great deal for women on many levels. However, the image is very narrow, at least in the US--it is different in other cultures. Changing that is very complex. This is not simply changing the culture in archery, but expanding it to be more inclusive to allows others in.


----------



## Hikari (May 15, 2021)

"TheBlindArcher" said:


> It's far more gender equitable than it is disability equitable... How many of your ranges are fully wheelchair accessible; how many have braille signage on all the doors or vending machines ... How about at a national level: D.O.S. who don't fully know all the para rule adaptations; Very very few coaching seminars geared towards para archery, and even fewer who have any training in coaching visually impaired [VI]; The number of USAT qualifiers for able bodied versus para, and events the VIs are often times "uninvited" to... How about internationally: many countries don't even have a para division, and again even fewer support VI archery; fewer Paralympic quota spots than Olympic quota spots... and the one rare "gender inequality" as at the Paralympics there were fewer women's quota spots than men's; and oh yeah, no VI quota spots at all...
> 
> Sorry, and I know this is a very "me man" chest thumping that I gladly welcome the roasting of, but I am far less sympathetic of opportunities not taken than I am of opportunities not provided.


Disability rights and inclusion is a really complex topic. I total sympathize with your point of view. I am working in my employer's diversity initiative and simply the understanding of what disability means is discouraging (everything seem to be through the lens of gender or ethnic/racial inequity. The other half is that many disabled live in the shadows--they are tokens or have learnt to fly under the radar. 

BTW, the public outdoor range in Maryland where I shoot has a disabled line with braille signs as well as parking--no vending machines though.


----------



## "TheBlindArcher" (Jan 27, 2015)

Hikari said:


> Disability rights and inclusion is a really complex topic. I total sympathize with your point of view. I am working in my employer's diversity initiative and simply the understanding of what disability means is discouraging (everything seem to be through the lens of gender or ethnic/racial inequity. The other half is that many disabled live in the shadows--they are tokens or have learnt to fly under the radar.
> 
> BTW, the public outdoor range in Maryland where I shoot has a disabled line with braille signs as well as parking--no vending machines though.



One of the world's largest blind consumer/support/rights groups is located in Baltimore; cool your range employed the use of braille signage.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

Hikari said:


> Should there be open classes in archery? Well, for barebow, the class would be dominated by men, so I would not support open classes. (When Lancaster had barebow as an open class, women were not in the finals and scores in other competitions show that gender influences results.)


Don't erase Fawn Gerard like that.


----------



## Hikari (May 15, 2021)

FerrumVeritas said:


> Don't erase Fawn Gerard like that.


I didn't. Fawn will do very well, but that does not contradict my point. In the top 20 for the 2022 Indoor Nationals, there are four women in the 3rd (Fawn), 10th, 17th, and 20th places. I am not sure an open class is going to encourage women in barebow.


----------



## lcasanova1 (Jun 18, 2014)

Humphrey said:


> Is archery a sport that is a safe and welcoming to women?


Yes, I’m 65 and I’ve been competing for almost 2 years now. I love it.


----------



## kiyone19 (10 mo ago)

For the most part I would say yes. There is some male egos out there that can be intimating at first. But in all archers very nice and welcoming to everyone, including woman. If I do get any flack for being a woman though, I'll just shut them up with my shooting 😀


----------



## BMrnak (12 mo ago)

This is without question easily answered. I am a world class competitor with a rifle and can tell you women not only belong but excel at the highest levels in my sport. My sport involves 100% mental strengnth just like archery. Sight alignment, trigger control, perfect grip, etc. A monkey can pull a trigger. This game is just like others where its what's between the ears that count.


----------



## Rabbit57 (Jun 15, 2012)

automan26 said:


> Often, when watching World Archery on YouTube I've seen women score just as well, or higher, in their gold medal match than the men scored in their's.
> 
> Automan


That’s not at all true.


----------



## DMZern (Jan 3, 2022)

BMrnak said:


> This is without question easily answered. I am a world class competitor with a rifle and can tell you women not only belong but excel at the highest levels in my sport. My sport involves 100% mental strengnth just like archery. Sight alignment, trigger control, perfect grip, etc. A monkey can pull a trigger. This game is just like others where its what's between the ears that count.


I don't think the comparison is 100% fair, though. Rifle shooting (particularly if its bench rest, or similar) ignores some of the strength discrepancies that exist biologically that are more clear in archery. The average male can pull a higher draw weight than the average female, something that a rifle on a bipod/rest would eliminate.

Diverging from that, though.... in my experience, archery is still quite male dominated, and comes with the pitfalls of an echo chamber of male opinions. A spin through the off-topic section of this forum would certainly turn the nose of most women I know, and the same can sometimes be said of off topic discussions at archery clubs and competition...


----------



## BMrnak (12 mo ago)

DMZern said:


> I don't think the comparison is 100% fair, though. Rifle shooting (particularly if its bench rest, or similar) ignores some of the strength discrepancies that exist biologically that are more clear in archery. The average male can pull a higher draw weight than the average female, something that a rifle on a bipod/rest would eliminate.
> 
> Diverging from that, though.... in my experience, archery is still quite male dominated, and comes with the pitfalls of an echo chamber of male opinions. A spin through the off-topic section of this forum would certainly turn the nose of most women I know, and the same can sometimes be said of off topic discussions at archery clubs and competition...


Wow that was not called for. What does strength have to do with archery. A woman can pull a bow that is suited for her and be just as good as a man. You ASS-U-ME I shoot benchrest or something that does not require physical use. WRONG. I shoot sling supported prone called Palma. And yes the top 2 shooters in the USA and probably the world are WOMEN in my sport dominated by men. When you don't know all the facts maybe you should not have an opinion.


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

BMrnak said:


> This is without question easily answered. I am a world class competitor with a rifle and can tell you women not only belong but excel at the highest levels in my sport. My sport involves 100% mental strengnth just like archery. Sight alignment, trigger control, perfect grip, etc. A monkey can pull a trigger. This game is just like others where its what's between the ears that count.


There are absolutely some women who can compete with men in the shooting sports... but when you are talking about elite level competitors, that number is way smaller. I'm not talking about weekend warriors like myself... I'm talking about the truly ELITE level shooters....

That number gets even smaller when you go into 3D archery. Without "gender norming" you'd almost NEVER see a woman on the podium at an IBO/ASA event if they had to compete with their male counterparts.

Women Pro podium vs Men's Pro Podium scores at Pipestem not so long ago:
451, 443, 431________470, 459, 458

I'm not gonna dig back through the last couple years but, I suspect you'll see what I'm talking about.


----------



## DMZern (Jan 3, 2022)

BMrnak said:


> Wow that was not called for. What does strength have to do with archery. A woman can pull a bow that is suited for her and be just as good as a man. You ASS-U-ME I shoot benchrest or something that does not require physical use. WRONG. I shoot sling supported prone called Palma. And yes the top 2 shooters in the USA and probably the world are WOMEN in my sport dominated by men. When you don't know all the facts maybe you should not have an opinion.


No need to get upset, I thought I gave a level headed reply.

Look at the draw weight of high level competitors in any form of competition, and women are pulling less. Olympic recurve as an example, women are pulling low/mid 30lbs, men mid/upper 40s. On that alone, the playing field is not level. Higher speed and straighter flight give men the advantage all other things being equal.

I've never heard a single person claim strength is not involved in archery....

And I was using benchrest as an example, not trying to offend whatever style you shoot. And no one is saying women CAN'T compete, I think most everyone is saying that women have to work much harder, and overcome strength obstacles inherent to biology, than a male would have to overcome.


----------



## BMrnak (12 mo ago)

1/2 Bubble Off said:


> There are absolutely some women who can compete with men in the shooting sports... but when you are talking about elite level competitors, that number is way smaller. I'm not talking about weekend warriors like myself... I'm talking about the truly ELITE level shooters....
> 
> That number gets even smaller when you go into 3D archery. Without "gender norming" you'd almost NEVER see a woman on the podium at an IBO/ASA event if they had to compete with their male counterparts.
> 
> ...


I still disagree. I think if there were just as many women competitors in archery as there is men. Women would compete at the same level. Look at the percentages of participation vs the quality of shooters. Women would out number men in that regards.


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

BMrnak said:


> I still disagree. I think if there were just as many women competitors in archery as there is men. Women would compete at the same level. Look at the percentages of participation vs the quality of shooters. Women would out number men in that regards.


I'm not saying women can't shoot.... I get whooped by my friend Cathy on a pretty regular basis shooting spots. But if we shot unknown 3D from the same stake, I'd likely whoop her pretty regular.

So you are saying that if more women competed, there would be higher scores??? How exactly does adding more shooters cause the scores of other women go up making them competitive???

Do I believe archery is just as welcoming to women as it is to men? Absolutely. I've shot all over the US at local club shoots, National and IBO Worlds and I've never witnessed a single instance where women were treated any different than men. I'm not saying that Douche Baggery doesn't exist in our sport.... but all of them that I know are Douchey to men and women.... As a matter of fact, it has more to do with equipment (archery equipment, not biology) than anything else.

Do I believe classes should be separated by gender? Yes, absolutely. Once puberty hits, boys become stronger and longer (DW/DL) and that creates an advantage to those who are able to shoot it. Otherwise, there would be women lining up to compete in the Open Pro Classes for bigger paychecks. Forcing women to compete with men would cause the already low female participation to drop further.... If you don't believe me, host a Money Shoot at your club and tell women at the registration table that there isn't a Women's Class and they have to shoot against men.... Some will stay (My friend Cathy does it all the time) but most will either just leave or not show up at all.


----------



## 603Scott (Aug 6, 2020)

1/2 Bubble Off said:


> I'm not saying women can't shoot.... I get whooped by my friend Cathy on a pretty regular basis shooting spots. But if we shot unknown 3D from the same stake, I'd likely whoop her pretty regular.
> 
> So you are saying that if more women competed, there would be higher scores??? How exactly does adding more shooters cause the scores of other women go up making them competitive???
> 
> ...


I find your common sense and clear understanding of basic human biology wildly offensive.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

The very best women can hold their own with the very best men in recurve, barebow, and compound, although they rarely, if ever, end up first. But they do tend to be exceptional.

Archery is certainly not gender equitable in terms of payouts and sponsorships (except WA, AFAIK). Look at Lancaster or Vegas.


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

FerrumVeritas said:


> The very best women can hold their own with the very best men in recurve, barebow, and compound, although they rarely, if ever, end up first. But they do tend to be exceptional.
> 
> Archery is certainly not gender equitable in terms of payouts and sponsorships (except WA, AFAIK). Look at Lancaster or Vegas.


Pay outs are based on participation. Women's classes pay out less because there are less women paying into the pot. Manufacturer Contingencies are the same way. The sponsors need to believe there is going to be a return on their investment.

When Levi went to Elite a few years ago, I know a BUNCH of dudes who switched to Elite. Whether they admit it or not, Levi played a huge part in the sales of those bows. Especially since when he switched back to Mathews, so did they. (I swear, if Diamond sponsored Levi, 90% of the Mathews shooters at my club would switch to Diamond) As awesome as Paige Pearce is, I don't see anyone following her to another brand if she switched.

It's not a Sexism thing... It's a "Dollars and Sense" thing. If both genders were equally represented at these tourneys, the payouts/contingencies would eventually be equal. The problem is, compared to men, much fewer women WANT to shoot a bow and even fewer want to compete. 

I will say as a coach, I'm seeing more and more girls getting into the sport. All of my current students are girls aged 10-14. In our kids league this winter we had 21 shooters, 13 of them were girls. (this was the first time we had more girls than boys in the 16 years I've been involved with the program)


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

I fully understand the reasons. They don’t change that they’re not equitable.
While it may not be sexism on the part of the manufacturers, that’s still sexism. It’s just on the part of the wider archery community instead.

EDIT: Laugh all you like, but if male shooters sell more bows than similarly performing women, then the consumer base is exhibiting sexism. Perhaps not consciously, but they're still doing it.


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

FerrumVeritas said:


> I fully understand the reasons. They don’t change that they’re not equitable.
> *While it may not be sexism on the part of the manufacturers, that’s still sexism. It’s just on the part of the wider archery community instead.*
> 
> EDIT: Laugh all you like, but if male shooters sell more bows than similarly performing women, then the consumer base is exhibiting sexism. Perhaps not consciously, but they're still doing it.


It's NOT sexism!!!! Why is it that in our society today, that any time someone feels a group is under represented in a sport or organization, it's some how an "-ism"? It would be sexist to disallow women to participate. Just like it would be racist if we disallowed Non-Whites to participate. 

If archery is Sexist than the NBA is Racist!!!! 75% of the players are Black vs 17% of the players are White. Not only that, Black players earn significantly more $$$ than White players.

I say, neither organization is Sexist/Racist. I can't say why fewer women are interested in archery. I can say that I was never interested in basketball because I'm short and even in my younger (more athletic days) I didn't have the vertical leap to make up for it.


----------



## 603Scott (Aug 6, 2020)

1/2 Bubble Off said:


> It's NOT sexism!!!! Why is it that in our society today, that any time someone feels a group is under represented in a sport or organization, it's some how an "-ism"? It would be sexist to disallow women to participate. Just like it would be racist if we disallowed Non-Whites to participate.
> 
> If archery is Sexist than the NBA is Racist!!!! 75% of the players are Black vs 17% of the players are White. Not only that, Black players earn significantly more $$$ than White players.
> 
> I say, neither organization is Sexist/Racist. I can't say why fewer women are interested in archery. I can say that I was never interested in basketball because I'm short and even in my younger (more athletic days) I didn't have the vertical leap to make up for it.


Have you seen the bigotry in the modeling industry? Men make pennies compared to women. Oh the inequity!!!!!! It's finally clear to me now.

The only solution is communism.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

1/2 Bubble Off said:


> Why is it that in our society today, that any time someone feels a group is under represented in a sport or organization, it's some how an "-ism"?


Because those terms were coined to describe phenomena like under representation and inequality. And institutional/societal inequalities can be and are perpetuated without anyone consciously doing so.

Archery, as a whole, is not equitable. And that inequality have little if nothing to do with a performance disparity. Although it would be worse if the divisions were combined, as even the disproportionate funding available to women would all but disappear.

I'm going to avoid your straw man arguments and stick to archery. I'll even use the examples you initially brought up: Levi Morgan and Paige Pearce.

Paige's record at Vegas, World Archery, and USA Archery events is stronger than Levi's. Her ASA record is also strong (and ASA doesn't have a Women's Known Pro). And yet, by your own admission Levi's influence over consumers is stronger. They're both likable. So why do people follow Levi so strongly but not Paige (who is an equally strong and arguably more accomplished shooter)? The answer is because Levi's a man. Your "dollars and sense" argument is ultimately rooted in sexism.

If men are only interested in bows men shoot, by definition their buying habits have a sexist component. The same is true if men aren't interested in bows women are shooting (barring limitations in configuration, of course). 

Finally, I'd like to point out that you're the one who started using the term "sexism." I answered the question in the title, "Is archery gender equitable?" by saying that it was not. I did not initially (in the post you responded to) describe the reasons it was not as sexist, or indeed provide any rationale behind why the payouts were unequal. I simply said that they were not, which is a verifiable fact. Unequal payouts are inequitable by definition.


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

FerrumVeritas said:


> Because those terms were coined to describe phenomena like under representation and inequality. And institutional/societal inequalities can be and are perpetuated without anyone consciously doing so.
> 
> Archery, as a whole, is not equitable. And that inequality have little if nothing to do with a performance disparity. Although it would be worse if the divisions were combined, as even the disproportionate funding available to women would all but disappear.
> 
> ...


You avoided my "strawman argument" but used the same argument "Unequal Pay" to sum up your post....interesting.


----------



## raisins (Jan 21, 2016)

FerrumVeritas said:


> I fully understand the reasons. They don’t change that they’re not equitable.
> While it may not be sexism on the part of the manufacturers, that’s still sexism. It’s just on the part of the wider archery community instead.
> 
> EDIT: Laugh all you like, but if male shooters sell more bows than similarly performing women, then the consumer base is exhibiting sexism. Perhaps not consciously, but they're still doing it.


Having a preference is not sexism. You dilute the meaning of the term to the point where no one will take you seriously.

By your logic, people preferring to watch the NBA over the WNBA is sexism.

You need to look up the term instead of using it as a label for anything you don't like where it somewhat fits.


----------



## raisins (Jan 21, 2016)

FerrumVeritas said:


> Because those terms were coined to describe phenomena like under representation and inequality. And institutional/societal inequalities can be and are perpetuated without anyone consciously doing so.
> 
> Archery, as a whole, is not equitable. And that inequality have little if nothing to do with a performance disparity. Although it would be worse if the divisions were combined, as even the disproportionate funding available to women would all but disappear.
> 
> ...


I used to be more like you than I care to admit. Your views are skewed in ways that will take years to correct if you are open to being wrong.

I cringe so hard now over it. I'm actually embarrassed.

Little note: The gender studies, etc. social scientists you are reading would be more likely to be doing hard science (physics, biology, etc.) if they were more intelligent.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

1/2 Bubble Off said:


> You avoided my "strawman argument" but used the same argument "Unequal Pay" to sum up your post....interesting.


The cultural factors that go into NBA viewership, recruitment, and pay are only tangentially relevant. I focused on a scenario that was both relevant to the discussion at hand, and that you had previously used and so presumably were familiar with.


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

raisins said:


> Having a preference is not sexism. You dilute the meaning of the term to the point where no one will take you seriously.
> 
> By your logic, people preferring to watch the NBA over the WNBA is sexism.
> 
> You need to look up the term instead of using it as a label for anything you don't like where it somewhat fits.


No, but the strong societal preference for male sports over female sports, and the assumption that male sports are the default (which is also found in archery, where the male categories are often just called "open" while the female categories are "women's open" or similar nomenclature) is. This has played out in soccer and a host of other sports. It's a fact of our society. 

The fact of the matter is that unless you're Korean, male archers have more opportunities and financial incentives available to them than female ones. This is also true in coaching, which is the other way people attempt to make a career out of archery (however misguided that may be). There are far more male coaches, including male coaches of women's teams, than there are female coaches. And the coaches of male teams are often the "national coach" while the women's coaches are subordinate. 



raisins said:


> I used to be more like you than I care to admit. Your views are skewed in ways that will take years to correct if you are open to being wrong.
> 
> I cringe so hard now over it. I'm actually embarrassed.
> 
> Little note: The gender studies, etc. social scientists you are reading would be more likely to be doing hard science (physics, biology, etc.) if they were more intelligent.


If you're just going to both insult me and completely discount the social sciences, there's not much more to say.


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

FerrumVeritas said:


> The cultural factors that go into NBA viewership, recruitment, and pay are only tangentially relevant. I focused on a scenario that was both relevant to the discussion at hand, and that you had previously used and so presumably were familiar with.


The parallels are undeniable!!!!

Your entire argument is "Group A" does the same thing as "Group B" but one makes more than the other/has more opportunities....

Your use of the term "Social Sciences" completely discredits your entire argument!!!! I don't care what some Sociology text book or professor says, all of society's problems are not caused by wealthy white men and their pursuit of more $$$. As a matter of fact, I promise you, if any archery organization or manufacturer thought pumping up the women's divisions would increase sales by a few percent, they would do it in a minute!!!!

The way to get the women's class to pay out at the same rate as the men's classes, is to get more women into the sport AND have them compete at the same level as the current women pros!!!

*I am a huge fan of all things archery. I've spent countless hours watching men and women competing on the biggest stages and loved every minute of it. I agree with most that I would love to see more women participating and see the Prizes and Contingencies match up with the men. Where you and I disagree is:
a) why things are the way they are now
b) how to move forward from here*


----------



## FerrumVeritas (Oct 9, 2020)

You're disagreeing with points that I have not made. I have not made any argument as to how to move forward. 

I'm simply saying that archery is not gender equitable. I then provided a rationale for that. 

We may disagree on the mechanism or reason for why women's manufacturer contingencies are lower (there are biases in division size compared to payout, but those are greater between divisions than they are genders). But you can't dispute that high performing female archers make less money than their male counterparts (even if those counterparts don't perform as highly). 

That's not equitable. You can at least agree on that, right?


----------



## cbd111 (Aug 30, 2021)

Historys_Actor said:


> Or you know there could just be classes based on draw weight...
> I know this might be hard to believe but there's always exceptions to the gender norms. I can draw a 70# bow but my boyfriend can't.


The JOAD competitions do have a draw weight maximum (60#) for the youth. During equipment inspections at competitions the draw weight is measured. The shooter can not compete if their draw weight is over 60#.


----------



## Reelrydor (Jan 5, 2010)

Not when it comes to hunting--We have come a long way with womens camo and bows are somewhat better for short draw/low poundage. But it is tough for a woman that doesnt have private land, is not married or guided by a boyfreind or other man, to get started, go hunting, retrieve kill and be safe. We need more womwns hubting groups and support. Im cool with traveling and hunting alone. Retrieveal sucks, I need to have people to call


----------



## 1/2 Bubble Off (Dec 29, 2016)

Reelrydor said:


> Not when it comes to hunting--We have come a long way with womens camo and bows are somewhat better for short draw/low poundage. But it is tough for a woman that doesnt have private land, is not married or guided by a boyfreind or other man, to get started, go hunting, retrieve kill and be safe. We need more womwns hubting groups and support. Im cool with traveling and hunting alone. Retrieveal sucks, I need to have people to call


I would argue that men have the same problem.... If a man or woman decides to start hunting for the first time, they have the same problems.... 

I just spent 2 hours with a husband and wife for "archery lessons". (they each wanted an hour of private lessons) They each mentioned that they would love to try hunting but don't know the first thing about how to get started. Since they each got their first bows 2 weeks ago, I convinced them to put off hunting for this year in favor of "Learning" to shoot first...


----------

