I think this is why recruiting and promotion doesn't seem to work. My observation is that the only people who really stick with it have pursued it on their own volition. In many cases the promotion and inordinate attention we pay to kids and beginner is *usually* ineffective or counterproductive. For girls/women it seems to be *far worse*, they immediately become everyone's new favorite cover girl and are essentially fawned over. Some people might like that or seek it out, but I think many more will be driven away.
Note that this is not just stunt, much of the "STEM Education" stuff I see (in theory and practice) is similar. I know a few women who have gone into engineering and pursued it as a career (and are very sharp) but they have had to deal with the fact that everywhere they went they stood out. They either put up with it to pursue it because they really enjoyed engineering, or that they liked being the center of attention.
For someone who just wants to learn to fly model airplanes, getting immediately anointed as the face of the event merely by being a woman, has got to be intimidating and is a tremendous amount of pressure to put on someone who is just learning. It's hard enough to learn the craft of being competitive even if you can do it as a pace and manner that suits you, having to live up to everyone else's expectations is extremely daunting.
Brett
Precisely. Those adults currently involved, that were competing as juniors (I've been essentially flying models since birth!), are still in it because of a genuine interest in the hobby.
Here's my observation, over the past twenty-something years of modeling as a teen and young adult:
-There are tons of kids that are introduced to modeling as a father-son activity, (with a few father-daughter teams who admittedly got their daughter involved because they weren't "gifted" with a son), with the intent of being something relaxing to do on a sunny sunday afternoon. Once they get into the contest circuit, they are deluged with praise (which isnt bad of course) and inundated with opinions of what they should build, what motor they should run, how much they need to practice, how they can improve their score, and so on. Kids with experienced modelers (like my dad was/is), can shield them from those issues and keep their kid on a guided program. Parents who aren't modelers, however, cannot, and can become just as overwhelmed with all of this well-intended advice, and be driven away.
-There are "soccer dads" out there, who flew as a kid themselves, but didn't reach the level of success that they wanted, and want their kid to get there so that they may live vicariously through them.
-Some kids do have a real interest in flying, but through the pressures of practice and building, many must forfeit their social life, which is important for teenagers. I've heard many folks talk about having to spend the weekends building on a model for the Nat's, or be out practicing, or spending weekends in the car traveling to and from contests, instead of hanging out with their friends. This compares to Olympic-level dedication and training, only there are no gold medals, media coverage, or Nike endorsements at the end of the road. Is this comparatively trite pastime REALLY worth that sacrifice in the long term?
-Then, little Johnny turns 19, and is now an open competitor. He's not getting nearly as much praise or attention as he was a junior or senior. He has to fly in either the PAMPA classes or Open at the Nats. He's not bringing home the "Highest Scoring Junior/Senior" trophies that many contests give out. The consequential vacuum can be psychologically damaging at that age.
Having said all of that, yes, some kids thrive on the pressure of competition, and soak up the attention. Some kids have a genuinely good time, grow up, begin demanding careers (I think Robbie Gruber went to law school and is working for a pretty big law firm, last I talked to him, many years ago), and just don't have the time. Some, and this is key, was something to do with dad, and would get back into the hobby when they have kids. However, I think we're losing alot of interest by the thing that makes this community great: willingness to help and watch fellow modelers learn, grow and succeed.
Kids view contests very differently from adults. When I was a kid, it was a very linier focus: make it to the awards podium. As an adult, I really couldn't care less at this point lol. I really enjoy building these days (I HATED building as a kid, as dad can attest to, having to almost tie me to a chair at the building table). The comradery and social aspect of contests is something that kids don't fully grasp as adults do, and a big reason I enjoy going to contests. Finally, there are the fond memories of going to contests with my dad, that are relived by going to contests now. We rarely make it to the same contests anymore, but I still think back to those days, and when we do make it to the same contest together its a blast. This needs to be parent's goals for kids, and is what is going to keep them involved in adulthood. Parent's need to make modeling FUN, not a job. If your kids doesn't like airplanes, then it is what it is. If he/she likes flying but not competitively, that's cool too, and it may not always be that way. Maybe compeditive interest will creep in once they get older. I first flew CL at 3 but didn't learn the pattern until 12.
We need to
STOP trying to breed the next 8 year Nat's champ or WC team member. 9 of 10 kids wont make it there at that age. What we
NEED to do for kids, is make it as fun as possible. Keep praising the kids , but stop telling them and their parents that they need an SV11/PA combo if they're going to be successful. Stop dragging them to the flying field if they don't want to go. If we, as a group, make it fun for the kids, it will plant that seed that, once they reach adulthood, increases the likelyhood of getting back into the hobby, once their adult life is established and they have the time/finances to do so.
THIS approach is what is going to keep the hobby alive.
Topic: Female set-asides in non-physical events. (Read 2323 times)
