Weight a Minute!
This piece in The American Spectator cries foul -- claiming in effect that female driver Danica Patrick has an unfair advantage because, at 100 pounds, her weight is roughly half that of the average NASCAR driver.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm not one of these mindless "pro-woman" cheerleaders whereby Danica Patrick could be an axe murderer, but as the first female to lead the Indy 500 at some point, I'd still admire her. Not so.
That being said, fair's fair. In horse racing, all jockeys are weighed after the race to ensure that the horse was carrying a certain minimum weight. (There is no maximum, but heavier jockeys are decidedly not in demand).
And maybe car racing would like to institute such a rule. But I've never heard of heavy men complaining that thinner men are somehow claiming an unfair advantage -- and surely the weight range between the very heaviest and the very thinnest male racers must be around 75 pounds (175 vs. 250, perhaps). So what's the problem, all of a sudden???
In this piece, the Spectator (which seems to have something of an anti-Danica view, incidentally) accuses her of poor driving that endangered others. That's a real beef, and if it's true, it's well worth noting.
But to ask if Danica "cheated" by virtue of the fact that she didn't voluntarily add weight to herself or her car -- to me, that's unfair. God, nature, whatever you want to call it bestows different gifts on all of us -- Danica doesn't, for example, have the weight or the strength that male drivers might find useful in some racing situations. Should those who do have those advantages be deemed cheaters?
Certainly not.
Don't get me wrong -- I'm not one of these mindless "pro-woman" cheerleaders whereby Danica Patrick could be an axe murderer, but as the first female to lead the Indy 500 at some point, I'd still admire her. Not so.
That being said, fair's fair. In horse racing, all jockeys are weighed after the race to ensure that the horse was carrying a certain minimum weight. (There is no maximum, but heavier jockeys are decidedly not in demand).
And maybe car racing would like to institute such a rule. But I've never heard of heavy men complaining that thinner men are somehow claiming an unfair advantage -- and surely the weight range between the very heaviest and the very thinnest male racers must be around 75 pounds (175 vs. 250, perhaps). So what's the problem, all of a sudden???
In this piece, the Spectator (which seems to have something of an anti-Danica view, incidentally) accuses her of poor driving that endangered others. That's a real beef, and if it's true, it's well worth noting.
But to ask if Danica "cheated" by virtue of the fact that she didn't voluntarily add weight to herself or her car -- to me, that's unfair. God, nature, whatever you want to call it bestows different gifts on all of us -- Danica doesn't, for example, have the weight or the strength that male drivers might find useful in some racing situations. Should those who do have those advantages be deemed cheaters?
Certainly not.
posted by LadybugUSA at 4:19 PM
2 Comments:
I was very upset with one of the NASCAR drivers getting all huffy about her weight. Saying he wouldn't drive if IRL didn't fix the situation. Dear Lord. One look at his photo and you could make the argument that perhaps he should LOSE weight instead of Danica gaining.
She didn't endanger anyone out there on the track. She had some mistakes, as any rookie...male OR female.
These boys are just pissy because she's talented and getting more press than their sorry butts.
A friend of my had a classic comment:
How smooth was she during the post-race interviews? I was extremely impressed with how polished she seemed -- even as she came off as very genuine.
And at the Memorial Day celebration I was at, three men who don't know jack about racing, don't care about it, and had lots of grill food, alcohol, and women about to keep us occupied, instead sat glued to the Indy 500 for the last 40 laps, cheering out loud for Danica to pull off the upset and win the race. (We'd only gone inside to watch it because during one of our periodic Internet checks on her progress, we realized she was making a run from 12th to 9th at that point and wanted to see her race.)
Think the sport just found its newest star to build around? I'd say so.
Well said, and I like the pun in the heading for your post.
American Spectator's always stronger on political than on cultural issues (and I say that as a sometime contributor to the web site who has a good relationship with the editor). Come slow news days, the Spectator boys take exception to Danica Patrick and Laura Bush, if only because it's impossible to take even well-deserved shots at Senators Kennedy, Voinovich, Hagel, Clinton, and McCain every day.
Post a Comment
<< Home