- This topic has 87 replies, 36 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 6 months ago by
.
- Posts
Crikey –
The Guardian bloke (Will Hayler) has just said (while outlining obstacles to female commentators being successful) ‘you need an in-depth knowledge of the form-book to be a racing commentator, you can’t just turn up, you need to know a bit about these people and these horses to be able to do the job properly’
Any thoughts girls?
Well doesn’t he sound charming.
Obviously I said myself that i don’t think the numbers of women going racing represent the people actually interested in it, my lil sister likes a day at the races and adores Frankel, but isn’t interested in it as a whole. But it’s damned stupid to presume that the only women that ever go racing are there because they felt like all they wanted was a nice day out/dragged by someone else. I can think of a good few that really know their racing and would be a credit to any commentary team. Also, no one is born knowing the industry and form book inside out, I’m pretty sure when we all first went to our first racecourse trip, few really knew much, and men and women I’m sure have a pretty equal aptitude of enjoying the day and thinking "i’ll look more into this." That sort of hostility and arrogance just makes you think, well why bother.
This man writes for the guardian… of all papers…
Is this thread condescending, or even discriminatory, by only aiming to gather only responses from girls?
This is obviously a provocative thread, and with that I don’t know why I’m replying.
I’ve watched the Sunday Forum and I’ve seen the segment referred to. If that was apparently an attempt at being condescending, Mr Hayler will need to take lessons off of someone who’s good at it.
Did Mr Hayler say that the "standards" he feels are necessary above don’t/aren’t applied to men? No, he didn’t.
That doesn’t mean his opinion is right about commentators needing a wide knowledge of the form book, it just doesn’t mean it was "condescendingly" based on gender.
Maybe Mr Hayler was voicing his opinion realistically upon the fact RfC (apparently) hope for the winner to competent enough for the racecourse roster?
And how about Mottershead? Was he being condescending when he said he thought the contest was a gimmick? No, he was probably correct with prior knowledge of how RfC operate.
Sean Boyce produced an outstanding blog covering the fine difference between what some would describe as "politically correct" – even questioning female only awards – and what some would say is condescending. I didn’t have to agree with every last line to appreciate he tackled the issue superbly, in stark contrast to this thread and its dubious title. I’d be fascinated to read/hear how he interpreted Hayler’s comments having chaired the forum today.
Are there female commentators in any other sports? I’m sure there are but I can’t think of any.
There are plenty of female voices as "colour commentators" such as golf, tennis etc. But I can’t think of any females which are the main commentators.
It was the fact that Hayler chose to make those comments in the context of a debate on female commentators that I thought bordered on condecension Jose.
Hayler’s other point related to the ‘pitch’ of the voice, getting at the more general view that there is something about the physical characteristics of the male voice that renders it more suited to commentating. I’m more in tune with that view. The requirement of commentators to build the pitch as the excitement intesifies makes it tricky for female commentators, who generally start at a naturally higher pitch, to achieve that balance without rendering themselves undecipherable.
But I thought that subliminally/explicitly (whichever applied) questioning the ability of the fairer sex to understand the nuances of form and to develop a knowledge of the major players was a bit of an unconsidered remark.
Lee Mottershead just doubted whether it (the RFC initiative) would be successful, citing the lack of female commentators in sport generally as evidence for how difficult it is to find suitable female voices.
But wouldn’t the BBC just
love
to find one.
Tanya Stevenson is a perfect example of a female who has broken through into top level sports presenting based on her talent and personality rather than some aesthetic male ideal.
Problem for female presenters is that they are more often than not employed for their looks rather than their talent. Whereas really ugly male presenters get jobs based on their knowledge and talent women who do not conform to the male ideal will not be accepted through this route as a general rule.
Sad fact of life that women who have purported beauty will achieve more success than those not because men ultimately seek to suppress intelligent women as they threaten what they perceive as a male monopoly on intelligence.
Cormack are you seriously saying that females are not as suited to commentating because of the pitch of their voice? That is like saying someone is less suited to do something because of their skin colour because people are used to someone of another skin colour doing it almost exclusively.
Completely perpetuates the discrimination and unfairness. You should be ashamed of yourself for even thinking this never mind writing it on a public forum. I am utterly speechless that men think this way and it makes me think females have absolutely no hope.
- Total Posts 17716
Excellent post, Jose.
I haven’t seen or heard the conversation referred to above, but unless Mr Hayler suggested – explicitly and without question – that women are incapable of establishing a thorough understanding of the form book and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to commentate, then how can his comments be considered condescending?
The pitch argument at least holds some water and isn’t in the least bit comparable to discrimination based on race, creed or colour, AOTF. (In fact, such a ridiculous statement makes the plight of some so-called minorities seem rather trivial.) Some voices are simply better suited to certain tasks – male voices are rarely used for automated telephone services, for instance – and the general pitch of a female voice doesn’t invoke the sense of emotion and tension that a man’s does. That doesn’t women can’t or shouldn’t commentate, just that men are perhaps better equipped for the job.
As for Tanya Stevenson, I can’t think of a worse example of someone justifying their position with ‘talent’. She may well be overwhelmingly knowledgeable and a complete delight behind closed doors, but she can’t string a sentence together on camera and appears utterly devoid of character.
I
Hayler’s other point related to the ‘pitch’ of the voice, getting at the more general view that there is something about the physical characteristics of the male voice that renders it more suited to commentating. I’m more in tune with that view. The requirement of commentators to build the pitch as the excitement intesifies makes it tricky for female commentators, who generally start at a naturally higher pitch, to achieve that balance without rendering themselves undecipherable.But wouldn’t the BBC just
love
to find one.
Moira Stuart is wasted on the Chris Evans show
Helen Shapiro’s contralto larynx is badly missed
Likewise Cleo Laine, though she is knocking on a bit
Tanya Arnold of BBC Look North is actually a sport’s journalist
Jeannine Edwards, Donna Barton Brothers, Camilla Ball (all ex-jockeys), Christina Olivares, Carolyn Conley, Joanne Jones, and Becky Witzman are all respected racing analysts/hosts on ESPN, TVG, and HRTV. There’s no shortage of knowledgeable women for the job.
The complete absence of female racecallers (I assume this is what you all mean by "commentators") is to me inexcusable. There are female commentators for equestrian sports – showjumping, eventing, dressage, even rodeo – and many other sporting events, and the higher pitch of their voice has no negative effect!
YES it IS comparable. So a woman cannot be as good at something based on an aspect of her physiology that she can never change just because men are used to hearing other men on commentary so that they believe nothing else is possible? Your views on commentary are based on a lifetime of male dominated industry that never allowed women a chance to chance that perception
Women around the world are being persecuted but because men are in charge and they believe it is their right to dominate women. Your sentiments are appalling and incredibly discriminatory.
There are so many male dominated professions in society which are that way not because woman are not good enough but because men believe women are not good enough and because men have prevented women from breaking their monopoly.
Yours is a societal interpretation not a fact. Blue is blue, whether male commentators are better than female is a view based on years of repression. How men are allowed to continue with such unfair prejudices astounds me
Your views on commentary are based on a lifetime of male dominated industry that never allowed women a chance to chance that perception
Possibly true AOTF. I just believe, rightly or wrongly (and I’d be delighted to be proved wrong) that the higher pitch of a woman’s voice in something like horse-racing where there is a crescendo to a climactic finish (unlike, say, eventing) would result in the inability to reflect that cescendo without losing clarity.
But you are right, of course. I don’t think I’ve ever heard a female racing commentator so am potentially spouting complete nonsense and doing the female abilities with voice control a severe disservice.
Drone – Moira stuart is indeed wasted on that show but don’t you find her laugh annoying after a few listens?
Armchair Jockey – can you answer your PM’s re-failure to send the prize out to the comp winner. Thank you.
- Total Posts 17716
Your views on commentary are based on a lifetime of male dominated industry that never allowed women a chance to chance that perception.
Forgive me, AOTF, I didn’t realise women had actually been prevented from commentating on horseracing. Do you have any evidence to support your claim?
I think there’s something in the argument that women might not be suited to racecalling because of vocal pitch. Take someone like Des Scahill, when his commentary starts it’s at an even & low pitch but come an exciting finish & he’s breaking an oscilloscope.
Now, have a woman commentating who has a higher pitch to begin with & in an exciting finish that increase in pitch may make the commentary unlistenable.
That said, whoever did the commentary broadcast on ATR at last year’s Arc (his name I don’t remember) come the finish, if I hadn’t already seen Workforce coming home, there’s no way I’d have known that from his commentary. Mangled I think is the word.
We won’t know unless we give it a try.
Your views on commentary are based on a lifetime of male dominated industry that never allowed women a chance to chance that perception.
Forgive me, AOTF, I didn’t realise women had actually been prevented from commentating on horseracing. Do you have any evidence to support your claim?
Spot on AJ – I don’t like duplicating posts but this has also been touched on in the Rod Street thread.
There is nothing to prevent a female applying to join the Racetech rosta and, more significantly, Racetech have never received a demo tape from an aspiring female commentator.
Regarding the timbre of the female voice, I believe it is relevant. Jacqui Oatley may be a technically competent football commentator but when her voice reaches a crescendo it does grate and indeed actually gets lost in the background effects. It is not necessarily a gender thing, for example former FA Chief Graham Kelly would also have an unsuitable voice for commentating.
Moira stuart is indeed wasted on that show but don’t you find her laugh annoying after a few listens?.
I prefer silence or the Third Programme before midday so am in no position to judge Miss Stuart’s laugh
If she were to present the show and the unbearably garrulous Mr Evans restricted to reading the weather forecast I might ‘tune in’
Feel sure I once saw some grainy b&w footage of the Grand National with a female commentator. Was it Mirabelle Topham?
That said, whoever did the commentary broadcast on ATR at last year’s Arc (his name I don’t remember) come the finish, if I hadn’t already seen Workforce coming home, there’s no way I’d have known that from his commentary. Mangled I think is the word.
Well worth a listen if you don’t remember it, it was awful stuff, went right through me. The only way I can think of describing it was if someone was squeezing his goolies very hard while he was doing it. No woman could have sounded worse. Quite a difference from his commentary on Sea The Stars Arc the year before when he sounded as if he was nodding off.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.