Archery clubs and inclusive names.

geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
There is a massive amount of stuff becoming available for clubs to use to help with almost every aspect of running an archery club.
I like what I have seen so far. It is useful and clearly set out. The information is there. and comments can be left for further discussions, so it is open ended in a way.
It is very similar to the information that was made available to schools when massive changes were being made in teaching. It can be overwhelming when you first look.
I asked my question on the club development section as that is where ideas are put connected to clubs gaining numbers and trying to keep archers once they join.
It should be read by someone in the development part of AGB
 


Big George

Supporter
Supporter
I'm thinking that other genders are discouraged from joining a club that has Bowmen in the title. Change that and you will become inclusive, hopefully not just in name - it has to be a mindset running throughout your club that probably is already there and it's just a stupid title that prevents people seeing what you have to offer.
it would be interesting to see a numbers breakdown by gender of clubs with “men” somewhere in the name vs those without. Not a completely scientific way but might give some clarity.
 


geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Hi Big George, I like the thinking.

It does seem from reading the posts that women do join archery clubs with bowmen in the name; and so far I have not read that any of them asked whether or not women were allowed to join. I am guessing they felt they would be.
Perhaps it isn't the word itself that causes the upset, but the treatment they get after joining.
The club I belong to has had several women on the committee; sometimes in equal numbers to the men. Perhaps that is one reason for our thinking that the name is inoffensive.
 


bimble

Well-known member
Supporter
Fonz Awardee
Ironman
it would be interesting to see a numbers breakdown by gender of clubs with “men” somewhere in the name vs those without. Not a completely scientific way but might give some clarity.
my club's name does not involve "bowman" it is an "Archery Club"... it is still heavily skewed towards male members*. I am still of the opinion that simply having the name "Bowmen of Wherever" doesn't make people think "oh, that club is only for guys". The useage of _men for words involving all sexes have been in common useage for long enough that the first thought isn't "oh, just men then"... one giant leap for mankind after all...

* - pun intended
 


geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Bimble, I think you are right; but it has been said that a man would say that. But is it not also true that some women already think like that.
I feel it is better for women to be treated equally because it is right that they should be.
Changing names is like an afterthought.
 


Cereleste

Supporter
Supporter
it would be interesting to see a numbers breakdown by gender of clubs with “men” somewhere in the name vs those without. Not a completely scientific way but might give some clarity.
I've just done that using the entries data on ianseo from the indoor nationals, which looked like the largest recent competition. Of the clubs with more than one entry, there were 63 with "Archers", "Arrows", or "Archery Club", of which 27% had more female than male entries, and 48% had more male than female entries, with the rest being equal (mostly one entry of each and a shared surname). There were 25 "Bowmen" clubs, with 8% mostly female and 56% mostly male. One club each of "foresters" and "barbarians", both male entries only.
The data set is too small for any final conclusions, and since there are many fewer Bowmen clubs there's more noise in that data. 8% is still a lot smaller than 27% though, so it does look like "Archer/Arrows" clubs are more likely to send more women than men relative to Bowmen clubs.
 


geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
You may get an uptake if someone prepared a 'How to change your club name' information page. There are lots of things that need consideration such as bank accounts, insurance, registration, publicity/web presence, records and record paper trails, and probably loads more. I think most objections would be from people who do not know what is involved, or simply do not have the time. If AGB were the drivers I suspect it would work easier. But then AGB would need to make changes such as the addition of new classifications such as Bow woman/Master Bow woman etc which would be a good start.
We also have club clothing with the club badge on.
My feelings are that it is better to treat everyone with equal respect, rather than change a name and carry on with old prejudices, if there were any.
I am happy that there are no inequalities at the club, despite the name. It is easy enough to see that a name change will remove all "risk" of sounding un inclusive.
The thread has given me a better balanced view of this matter and will explain my findings to the committee.
Thanks to everyone who contributed.
 


LAC Mark

Member
There's a club in our county that has recently changed its name from "bowman" to "archers", this is for the reasons that have been talked about in this thread. So the change is happening at some clubs.
It would be way to soon to see if it made any difference to the amount of female archers, only time will tell that.

There's a lot of gender segregation in our sport, from the name of the classifications, the differing scores need between male / female. Club/county/Uk/world records are still split male and female.

I can see change is needed in some areas, but is there a benefit to removing the separation completely ?
 


geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
Thanks for that input, useful to know.
As for change in some areas and removing all separations.... that is something else, I feel.
I see no reason to ban women from every event/contest. BUT there must be some contests where being female would be a disadvantage and unfair.Just as there must be some where being male would be a disadvantage and unfair.
So, how about mixed events where everyone is included and let the individuals decide whether or not to take part. It will then become obvious which events do not appeal to everyone and they will possibly evolve back or just remain open to all.
 


deadb0y

New member
Labels.
Gender.
Sexual Preference.
Race.
Creed.
Colour.

None of it means anything unless you want it to mean something, then you are being prejudice/racist/sexist/genderist whatever!

The world was a much nice place when people where just people.. Identity politics (which is EXACTLY what this thread is) is ruining the western world!
 


geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
I have to say, I wasn't around when the world was a much nicer place.
There are things still in place that have outlived the original thinking that put them there.
Slavery is just one example of the world moving on. Smoking in public places, is another. Not treating women as possessions.
The reason so much is needing to be replaced, is that so much has been held onto for far too long.
 


LAC Mark

Member
Thanks for that input, useful to know.
As for change in some areas and removing all separations.... that is something else, I feel.
I see no reason to ban women from every event/contest. BUT there must be some contests where being female would be a disadvantage and unfair.Just as there must be some where being male would be a disadvantage and unfair.
So, how about mixed events where everyone is included and let the individuals decide whether or not to take part. It will then become obvious which events do not appeal to everyone and they will possibly evolve back or just remain open to all.
I wasn't aware that there are events that women are band from.

The name of Clubs, Classifications etc is a good place to start.
I'm not sure if completely removing the separation of scores is the right way to go though.
Women's scores are generally lower than men's (not being sexist, records clearly show this) I feel some women may get disheartened if they are up against the men, but I see no reason why scores can't be recorded/announced in highest female, highest male, highest overall.

I was recently beaten by a 13 year old girl, I won my class but she had 12 points on me (both shooting barebow), so why shouldn't she of received that extra accolade.
 


geoffretired

Supporter
Supporter
I wasn't aware that there are events that women are band from.
I didn't really mean banned in that sense, I meant events that are for men and others for women.
Almost every athletics events are split into men's and women's. Swimming, Gymnastics, football, cricket are much the same.
What I really meant was archery rounds could be inclusive; no need to separate them. Those that showed to be unfair to one gender would end up evolving back into single gender event. So, for example, the indoor rounds might stay mixed.
I was agreeing that in some instances some separation might still be the way to go.
 


dvd8n

Supporter
Supporter
I'm in two clubs, XXXXXX Archers and YYYYYY Bowmen.

As a bloke, it's never been one of my concerns, but I can understand how some members would find the name 'Bowmen' non-inclusive; I'd be perfectly happy if both clubs were called ______ Archers, and I'd support the name change and anyone proposing it. I'd be surprised if anyone at either of my clubs would oppose such a measure proposed in good faith.

But...

This is a big change and will need a lot of work. It's not just a case of picking a new inclusive sounding name and going with it. You'd have to:
  • Canvas the club for support.
  • Draft a resolution for the AGM, propose it, and drive through the change at the AGM.
  • Update the club constitution.
  • Contact the club's governing body notifying them of the change and make sure that they act upon it.
  • Contact the club's insurers (if the club is independently insured) notifying them of the name change and make sure that they act upon it.
  • Contact the club's bank and get the name of the accounts changed.
  • Contact any lessors and/or rentors notifying them of the name change of the lessee/rentee.
  • Update the club's website/e-mail/social media presence to reflect the change.
  • And do any other stuff that doesn't spring to mind off the top of my head.
Most of this stuff should theoretically be simple but any or all of these could easily turn into a massive pain in the ***.

In my experience most committee members think that they do enough for the club and aren't looking for more work; if this were to be done and done properly it would need to be done by someone committed to the change, otherwise it won't happen or will get started and won't get finished.

In my opinion (and this may sound harsh, and if it does I'm sorry) if anyone wants this change then I'll support them but they need to take ownership of the issue and drive it through themselves, which they can do if they are a member of the club. And if they won't then they must not care enough. But if they do then they will get a sense of achievement at making a difference, an insight into the workings of the club, and maybe enthusiasm to become a future committee member or president.

TL;DR: It's your club; if you want a change then crack on and make it.
 


ben tarrow

Active member
There are clubs where you can just turn up and "pay and play" at virtually any time of day.
Archery is, as you describe Geoff, run very much for the benefit of the current membership who see growth as a potential for "crowded shooting lines" rather than potential for expansion and extension; where beginners courses are a mandatory restriction to participation, but those same beginners courses are the monopoly of the clubs who only run courses to suit themselves.
If we as an archery community really want more participation, we have to find ways to make our sport more available to people who dont want to "dedicate" themselves to our sport, with pay to play facilities - and that starts with the governing body making that possible, as well as having clubs and volunteers who want to offer the hand of participation to folk who just want to have a go, but when THEY want to, not once a year at the local fete.
@ben tarrow
Hi Ben,
Will you allow me to start a new thread to follow up on this idea?
Or would you start a new thread? I think it is a good topic for anyone in archery at the moment.
Go for it Geoff
 


ben tarrow

Active member
I knew I wouldn’t be there enough. We do so much other stuff and the clubs are so far away that’s it’s quite hard to commit too much.
This is one of the most common things I come across in clubs. Everyone wants there to be a club there for them to come to, but very few want to be the ones who are there to do the things that need to be done. I realise Kernowlad that thats not really quite what you are saying, and I am taking your comment out of context, but it rang a truth with me.
I ran a survey recently and one of the questions was about what members needed to be able to attend more frequently. 20% of replies said "more opportunities to shoot", but during the summer (when this survey was done) our club shoots 7 days a week. When I asked for volunteer key holders to open up, no one was available. You can lead a horse to water
 


Top