The Rise of the Female Distance Runner

The Rise of the Female Distance Runner

It takes getting used to, seeing young women run long distances, gasping and gagging and staggering around and going down on all fours at the finish line, pink foreheads in the mud,” began an article in Sports Illustrated in 1966 about the National AAU Women’s Cross-country Championship. “But they are young women, all right, make no mistake.The shaved legs, the singlets that actually do a service, all that symmetry, that fragrant hair.” One athlete’s coach, “a practical man, says it is good that she is trimmer, too, because she is going to be a woman much longer than she is going to be a runner.

So what exactly were the “long distances” writer John Underwood was referring to? A mile and a half. For even the most recreational of racers set to compete in this Sunday’s 2011 ING New York City Marathon, that would barely even constitute a warm-up.

Read the rest of this great article HERE

Sorry if this image makes anyone uncomfortable. I don’t want to scare anyone off with Paula Radcliffe’s “shaved legs” and “fragrant hair” covered in sweat and mud as she drives victoriously through the finish. Maybe I should have warned you before posting such a graphic image. I mean, yuck, nobody wants to see that, right?

always0n:

justrunthroughit:

runningforgood:

I’m sure that everyone has heard about the new IAAF rule that invalidates marathon records set by women if they were run in a mixed field..it’s bullshit.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/more/09/23/Womens-marathon-records.ap/index.html

This is SO MUCH bullshit.  Who’s legs crossed the finish line? Paula Radcliffe’s. Did someone carry her? No. Plenty of track and field races have “rabbits” that set the pace, and that doesn’t invalidate their times. I fail to see the difference. In fact, this is basically saying women aren’t fast enough to run with men either way. Again, bull. Honestly so mad right now.

This

Not to mention the new ruling will have an effect on what races elite women enter. Certain events may lose their elite draw if women know they can’t go for a record time. Try to find a “Men Only” event. They don’t exist. While there are many “Women Only” events, the number of potential record-setting races is cut down considerably. I think it is a huge step backward in regards to women’s athletics in general.

always0n:

justrunthroughit:

runningforgood:

I’m sure that everyone has heard about the new IAAF rule that invalidates marathon records set by women if they were run in a mixed field..it’s bullshit.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/more/09/23/Womens-marathon-records.ap/index.html

This is SO MUCH bullshit.  Who’s legs crossed the finish line? Paula Radcliffe’s. Did someone carry her? No. Plenty of track and field races have “rabbits” that set the pace, and that doesn’t invalidate their times. I fail to see the difference. In fact, this is basically saying women aren’t fast enough to run with men either way. Again, bull. Honestly so mad right now.

This

Not to mention the new ruling will have an effect on what races elite women enter. Certain events may lose their elite draw if women know they can’t go for a record time. Try to find a “Men Only” event. They don’t exist. While there are many “Women Only” events, the number of potential record-setting races is cut down considerably. I think it is a huge step backward in regards to women’s athletics in general.