Vote Rostam!!!

[cap n chris]

..not having those qualities will exclude you naturally.

It's elitist, then. Which is what I said/wrote.

 

[cap n chris]

How long before it devolves into, as it used to be in some places, "you can only come if you're in our club/my mate/a mason/know this handshake".

T'was ever thus and probably forevermore shall be. Re: physical ability - the standard mantra trotted out EVERY SINGLE time anyone suggests placing any kind of fixed aid in a cave is that "If you can't do it without (the fixed aid) then you shouldn't be in there; therefore caving is most definitely elitist, at many levels, as the mindset persists to this day. FWIW my livelihood is based upon making it accessible but it is most definitely not at all helpful for caving to be considered an "inclusive" environment.

 

[menacer]

Are you being disingenuous or are you just thick?

So inclusive, so tolerant.
Liked by people who are also trying to promote equality & diversity.
Sorry Chris you're have the wrong sort of thought to be in their elitist, not elitest, tolerant, not tolerant, welcoming, not welcoming gang 

 

[JoshW]

By definition caving is elitist, surely? It requires attributes that many people lack, even assuming they had any interest in it in the first place, and lived nearby the correct geology etc.. Where the actual did the notion of it being "an inclusive place" come from? Long may it contunue to be the case that caving and caves are exclusive places, with sufficient hurdles and challenges involved that only those with a dedicated mindset can raise their game to overcome.

deep breath, Josh...

I'll take the time to point you in the direction of this article on the BCA website. Glad that there are people like Badger around who were able to help remove the hurdles for young Jamie.
https://british-caving.org.uk/caving-with-cerebral-palsy/

..not having those qualities will exclude you naturally.

It's elitist, then. Which is what I said/wrote.

I'm so confused by your angle here.

You seem to think by people saying caving should be as inclusive as possible to everyone to mean, we should be forcing un-athletic, claustrophobic people underground. Quite clearly there are people who don't want to go underground for various reasons.

What inclusivity means, and what the purpose of things like the equality and inclusivity policy (and the equality act 2010) are is that effort should be made to prevent barriers that prevent people with protected characteristics from doing things (in this case getting underground).

I can't believe it's 2021 and people can't get their heads around this.

 

[NewStuff]

FWIW my livelihood is based upon making it accessible but it is most definitely not at all helpful for caving to be considered an "inclusive" environment.

You want to stuff your bottom line up? You have at it. You may not want caving to be inclusive, but I don't think you actually have a clue what it means. We know you *think* you know what it means, but your replies indicate you don't. Or you're just thick, as alluded to beforehand.

 

[David Rose]

My recommendation is that those who want caving to be elitist and exclusive should take up polo instead. It's athletic, skilful... and dead posh.

https://www.guardspoloclub.com/club-memberships

Membership of the Guards' Club costs ?450 as a joining fee, then ?440 a year. Of course, you also need a pony. And a mallet, or whatever they're called, and all the jodhpur stuff.

Partner organisations on the website include Cartier, Laurent-Perrier, and Access private bank.

And don't forget the club restaurant.

As the site says, "There is no better place to enjoy watching polo than within the beautiful surroundings of Windsor Great Park. This idyllic setting makes an exquisite location to entertain family, friends or clients, with Mosimann's at Guards Polo Club delivering unique and memorable entertaining opportunities. Founded by world-renowned Chef Anton Mosimann OBE in 1988, Mosimann's had the honour of cooking the wedding dinner at Buckingham Palace for TRH The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Mosimann's holds a Royal Warrant to HRH The Prince of Wales.
Mosimann's at Guards Polo Club brings its extensive expertise of entertaining royalty from more than a dozen different countries, heads of state, and a growing list of celebrities to deliver unique, superior quality and tantalising menus at Smith's Lawn."

I gotta say, it does sound more elegant than the Hunter's Lodge or the Marton Arms.

 

[cap n chris]

LOL, I'd love to see the BEC/Eldon websites with sponsor links to Rolex ("Great watches for caving with"). The wider caving world, and geological reality, are what makes caving an exclusive and small audience participation activity. To try and label it as anything other than arduous hard graft unsuited for an average, would be disingenous.

 

[aricooperdavis]

Are you being disingenuous or are you just thick?

Or you're just thick, as alluded to beforehand.

[warning]That's enough of the personal stuff please folks. We'll have a better discussion if we can keep our tempers in check.[/warning]

 

[JoshW]

FWIW my livelihood is based upon making it accessible but it is most definitely not at all helpful for caving to be considered an "inclusive" environment.

You want to stuff your bottom line up? You have at it. You may not want caving to be inclusive, but I don't think you actually have a clue what it means. We know you *think* you know what it means, but your replies indicate you don't. Or you're just thick, as alluded to beforehand.

Outside of the last (arguably unnecessary) bit of abuse, I think NewStuff has hit the nail on the head. There's a fundamental misunderstanding with a section of society with what inclusivity means. I've tried to help above, but clearly I've got some more work to do.

 

[MarkS]

Inclusivity
noun
"the quality of trying to include many different types of people and treat them all fairly and equally"

Clearly inclusivity is not:
- ensuring people living miles from any limestone can access caves as easily as people who live on a big lump of karst
- modifying caves to the nth degree such that the ability required to enter them is minimised as much as possible
- trying to make people go in caves who are not interested in caving

It is ultimately about being fair to people. That's all. 

I can kind of see how you might be in a situation where you're pretty indifferent about how the BCA goes about ensuring inclusivity, but being actively against its efforts...?

 

[mikem]

Ask your average man (person) on the street (Clapham omnibus) & all they know about caving is either heroic derring-do (three counties traverse) or major rescues (The Rescue). Best selling point always has been, and always will be, word of mouth / knowing someone who does it already. Otherwise you're just playing with words (taking the meaning of inclusivity to either extreme).

 

[ChrisJC]

Surely the crux of the matter is about opportunity rather than outcome.

Caving should be available to all, but the outcome might not be that all go caving.

A distinction mostly lost in debates on equality.

Chris.

 

[kay]

Is someone really going to be put of from standing for a position based on the ending of a title?

It?s not about that, though, is it? In this age, when most large organisations have moved away from terms like ?chairman?, continuing to use it is a bit of a flag, of an organisation that is so used to things being run by men that it may not have occurred to them that women may have anything to contribute. And some women may be up for the challenge, others may feel ?I don?t have time for that; I?ll find another hobby?

Yes, on it?s own it?s trivial and will not effect change. But it needs to be done, as part of the package, and is easy to do, so why not?

 

[NewStuff]

In this age, when most large organisations have moved away from terms like ?chairman?, continuing to use it is a *huge red flag*, of an organisation that is so used to things being run by men that it may not have occurred to them that women may have anything to contribute.

Emphasis mine.

If people can't get heads around how a tiny, simple change makes a metric fuckton of difference, they're part of the problem. You may not see the issue, You may be indfferent, but a lot of people see the issue and the fix is sodding trivial, lets be honest, so why on earth is it controversial?

 

[droid]

I get the idea that the 'fix' might be trivial but the amount of faff to get it done...isn't.

That's the controversy.

 

[2xw]

I get the idea that the 'fix' might be trivial but the amount of faff to get it done...isn't.

That's the controversy.

???????

An inch of web page space? Do you object to the energy required to click a button?

 

[droid]

Absolutely not.

If that was what was done. But it wasn't was it? The Committee Types got involved and it all got rather more complicated 

 

[2xw]

The only faff I see is folks moaning on the forum - which is a process involved in every single thing the BCA does anyway 🤣

 

[droid]

So the need for a ballot on a word that's merely a descriptor isn't a faff?

 

[JoshW]

So the need for a ballot on a word that's merely a descriptor isn't a faff?

I can guarantee more time has been spent by 4 people arguing the change on here than rostam took to write the proposal, Allan took to write it into the AGM agenda and ari took to program it into the ballot.