 Poster: A snowHead
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Can you provide a scientific reference? Not about my hat. |
Googling "biomechanical differences male female" pulls up a high number of articles that describe biomechanical differences between men and women, often in the context of sporting activity.
Can you provide a scientific reference which indicates there are no differences?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
and big bellies. And ...how is a snowboarder's COM compromised with those standard issue trousers he wears halfway down his legs 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
erica2004, I definatly agree that women are more likely to take classes then men. When Im talking equal level skier Im not talking same group in a ski school as that has nothing to do with it. In the same genderly generalizing men tend to go for "better groups then their ability" while women tend to be tooooo humble about their ability. Just like employment interviews.
So no that is not what I mean with equal skill.
What Im refereing to is men and women who actually are equaly good skiers. Ive seen this on some of the best skiers that Ive ever skied with (who have been girls) and its more evident on girls that are shorter. I really dont think it matters much because its not as if it is "back weight" its just hips further back then male skiers. Ill try to see if I can find some pictures of this.
Tex
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| easiski wrote: |
| Men and women do have a different centre of mass, that's not in dispute ... |
| rob@rar.org.uk wrote: |
| Googling "biomechanical differences male female" pulls up a high number of articles that describe biomechanical differences between men and women ... |
What about differences in centre of mass? Why didn't you Google that? That's easiski's exact assertion, not biomechanical differences in general.
| rob@rar.org.uk wrote: |
| Can you provide a scientific reference which indicates there are no [biomechanical] differences? |
I'm sure there are biomechanical differences. But who, except the marketing departments of ski makers, can convince anyone that a difference in ski design is needed? I've never seen any convincing science on this.
It's all tosh, Rob, to target a market with something that sounds credible but isn't. If you talk to people on the inside of ski manufacturing they admit it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rob, I admire your endeavour but wouldn't personally waste time on this stuff.
Women are different from men: they develop breasts and other anatomical differences, such as 'child-bearing hips'. Yes, and we must celebrate this! Is there any significant difference in centre of mass? No, because so many people don't conform to a stereotype anyway, and because a human frame (male or female) is in equilibrium when upright. Any use of that mass by the skier in controlling the ski is a matter of shifting the mass or - more importantly - control from the legs.
There are differences in hip structure (the most important factor) which can (but not always) affect a woman's tilting and edging of skis, but the jury's out on whether that's a ski issue, or an interface issue between ski and boot.
Basically, this concept that women require different tools is sexism for marketing purposes.
I can't believe that Jeannie Thoren has devoted 20 years to her campaign. Had you heard of her before discovering that reference? What has it resulted in?
Women's ski performance is not compromised by using standard equipment, and standard equipment is unisex.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
'Target market' sums it up!
There's certainly value in the accessories you mention, CEM. The boot, and interface between boot and ski, is where many skiers - male or female - can be helped, depending on what's generating a ski control problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Is there any significant difference in centre of mass? No ... |
I think you'll find that the answer to that question is 'Yes'. You asked for scientific references, I supplied a few, but you are ignoring them. That's not very nice, is it? You could at the very least have the good grace to accept that you were not correct to say there were no differences
It's a separate question whether the difference in female CoM makes a significant impact when on skis not tailored for women. I happily admit that I have no idea whether there is any difference or not. I suspect that because you haven't been able to provide any scientific references you don't have any idea either.
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| I can't believe that Jeannie Thoren has devoted 20 years to her campaign. Had you heard of her before discovering that reference? What has it resulted in? |
Actually, yes I had. I was looking at ski instruction in women-only classes for my girlfriend and happened to find her website when Googling. Didn't pay it much attention because she's based in the US, but I had heard of her. CEM has answered your question about what it has resulted in.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
|
The last few trips I've rented transvestite skis that are often used by women.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
|
Zermatt, Gressoney, Val d'Isere, Les Arcs. No, and no.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Without wishing to sound facile, science may say XYZ in theory, but surely in practice only women can tell whether or not women's skis work? Obviously some individuals may prefer unisex skis and obviously everyone's anatomy is slightly different, but isn't the proof of the pudding in the eating? Which brings us right back to availability of the full spectrum of such skis to test - as a rule of thumb nobody is going to shell out hundreds of squid on a ski they can't test
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Zermatt, Gressoney, Val d'Isere, Les Arcs. No, and no. |
When were you in Les Arcs? If you'd said we could have skied together!
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| eng_ch wrote: |
| Without wishing to sound facile, science may say XYZ in theory, but surely in practice only women can tell whether or not women's skis work? Obviously some individuals may prefer unisex skis and obviously everyone's anatomy is slightly different, but isn't the proof of the pudding in the eating? Which brings us right back to availability of the full spectrum of such skis to test - as a rule of thumb nobody is going to shell out hundreds of squid on a ski they can't test |
Agreed. The danger is that if women specific skis become the only skis available in shorter lengths then that element of choice is removed.
I guess the market will decide but in other industries many companies have restricted their range "in response to consumer demand" when in reality it was to reduce costs and/or to justify some new marketing initiative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| jtr wrote: |
| eng_ch wrote: |
| Without wishing to sound facile, science may say XYZ in theory, but surely in practice only women can tell whether or not women's skis work? Obviously some individuals may prefer unisex skis and obviously everyone's anatomy is slightly different, but isn't the proof of the pudding in the eating? Which brings us right back to availability of the full spectrum of such skis to test - as a rule of thumb nobody is going to shell out hundreds of squid on a ski they can't test |
Agreed. The danger is that if women specific skis become the only skis available in shorter lengths then that element of choice is removed.
I guess the market will decide but in other industries many companies have restricted their range "in response to consumer demand" when in reality it was to reduce costs and/or to justify some new marketing initiative. |
A valid point. But at the moment the choice is still removed because unisex skis typically aren't available in shorter lengths either as we discussed here:
http://snowheads.com/ski-forum/viewtopic.php?t=17323
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
… and if what seems to have happened with mountain bikes (see my earlier post in this thread) applies to the ski market, the march of the women specific models will reduce the availability of the smaller unisex skis even further.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
if women buy into these trends. Supply doesn't necessarily force demand.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
| Quote: |
| But have they managed to dispose of the dreaded "Chinese snowplough"? - Try teaching a class with Chinese people in it and explaining that nomenclature |
Lol! I know, it's tricky, isn't it! I always refer to that particular manouvre are "being locked onto an edge" to save any non-PC-ness!
The lingo is fraught with problems:
Swedish Turns
Norwegian Turns
Austrian Turns
Short Swings
Texas Two Step
Charlston
any more? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
|
Well, no, bh1, I'm questioning the argument for women's skis because any anatomical differences between the sexes are as significant as anatomical variations within each sex. They don't add up to an argument for designing skis with different shapes, flex patterns, constructions etc. and saying "these are for you, because you are a woman".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Well, no, bh1, I'm questioning the argument for women's skis because any anatomical differences between the sexes are as significant as anatomical variations within each sex. They don't add up to an argument for designing skis with different shapes, flex patterns, constructions etc. and saying "these are for you, because you are a woman". |
It would help me if you had some evidence to add to that argument, rather than simply making a set of assertions which run counter to what we know about sexual dimorphism.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
Look around you, Rob. There are men shaped like sticks, pears, gorillas, Arnold Schwarzenegger (juxtaposition unintended), Tom Cruise and Luciano Pavarotti.
And women vary quite a bit, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| I'm questioning... [whether]... any anatomical differences between the sexes are as significant as anatomical variations within each sex. |
I've already given an example that shows that, with respect to CoM, the inter sex variation is way greater than the intrasex variation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
|
What you've quoted isn't a statement.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
So I expect there will soon be a growing market for "Lardy Ski's" 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
|
Very good point. One might assume that the performance of a ski is affected by whether there's a 50kg person bolted to it, as against a 90kg person.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| They don't add up to an argument for designing skis with different shapes, flex patterns, constructions etc. and saying "these are for you, because you are a woman". |
That is a load of unsubstantiated codswallop (and sexist to boot!)
The K2 t-nine series were not "these are for you, because you are a woman", but "these are for us, because we are women".
You give a bunch of women the opportunity to design skis that suit them best, they then test them with many other women involved, and you turn round with a ski designed, developed and tested by women, for women. That's what they designed, cause that was what worked best for them.
If you talked to anyone actually involved in the industry in this sort of process, you would know it to be factually accurate. If you are referring to what Salomon and Rossignol were doing at the time in an effort to have "women's skis", then you weren't dealing with the real industry, but the marketing - e.g. the original Rossi B1w was just a cut down B1 with a w at the end. No design changes. Not a women's specific ski.
The Volkls, Nordicas, Heads etc that are coming out now for women are different designs, because in testing and development they have found what works better based on their testing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
| Very good point. One might assume that the performance of a ski is affected by whether there's a 50kg person bolted to it, as against a 90kg person. |
There certainly is - that's why flex patterns on longer skis within the same model range are different to those on the shorter lengths. (and it also shows why with modern ski design and technique that weight is more of a factor than height)
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
| David Goldsmith wrote: |
Look around you, Rob. There are men shaped like sticks, pears, gorillas, Arnold Schwarzenegger (juxtaposition unintended), Tom Cruise and Luciano Pavarotti.
And women vary quite a bit, too. |
Me looking around, using "common sense" as a yardstick, would be a pretty stupid way to assess human physiology. You asked for scientific references earlier - that seems extremely sensible, so why not contribute something along those lines to support your assertions?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well then, let's start analysing mass and body shape, irrespective of gender. Women don't need different skis because they're women. Men don't need different skis because they're men.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
David Goldsmith, even assuming your assertion to be accurate (I abstain on that!), do you mean "need" as in can't get down the mountain on the other? If so, then no, women don't "need" women's skis. But they may well "like" women's skis (or not); whether it's physical or psychosomatic, they may well ski better and feel more comfortable on women's skis. By the same token, there is no "need" for anything more than one make and one type of ski. Isn't the key here to actually have the choice?
|
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
|
That's a wholly different matter. SZK kicked off this thread with the word FACTS, and the thread's been a shambles because there were no facts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Quote: |
David Goldsmith wrote:
Very good point. One might assume that the performance of a ski is affected by whether there's a 50kg person bolted to it, as against a 90kg person.
|
Mrs Ski and I weigh the same (9 1/2 stone).
Do we have similar taste in skis ? No.
As it goes Mrs Ski is much more selective (with skis) than me, and prefers a lighter, softer ski. Some of this is down to ability and experience, for sure, but part of it (it seems to me) is due to the fact that Mrs Ski is a Mrs and I'm not.
Mrs Ski skis better, and enjoys, her female-specifc PhatLuvs more than any other ski - including a selection of other fatties she's used. She didn't pick them because they are a ladies ski, she picked them because she enjoyed using them !
Last edited by Ski the Net with snowHeads  on Tue 3-10-06 10:30; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ
