Positive discrimination sounds contradictory but it provides some straightforward implications when it comes to French racing’s decision to give female jockeys a 2kg (4.5lb) weight allowance so as to even things up with their male counterparts.
The mostly middle-aged and presumably male mandarins of French racing's ruling body, France Galop, argue that in order to increase opportunities for female jockeys, and encourage trainers and owners to employ them more, allowances have to be made on the basis of their sex.
No other racing jurisdiction had a clue this was coming and it's about as politic a topic as taste and restraint in the White House.
The French are going ahead anyway and next month will become the first major racing jurisdiction to implement something that had been tentatively suggested before only to be swamped in outrage.
Australian rider Michelle Payne, who memorably described racing as "chauvinistic" after her 2015 Melbourne Cup victory and who invited those who doubt the ability of female jockeys to "get stuffed", initially gave the French move a cautious welcome.
Rachel Blackmore, currently just outside the top 10 National Hunt riders in Ireland, not unreasonably said if someone was willing to give her a weight advantage, she wouldn't say no.
But mostly the response was predictable.
America's greatest female jockey, the hall of famer Julie Krone, reckoned it a joke, describing it as a "backhanded insult" and sarcastically said: "I think they should also make a beautiful pink starting gate, should place it closer to the finish, like they do with the ladies' tees in golf."
Other riders around the world have labelled the French move “unfair”, “offensive” and “patronising”.
The racing authorities in Ireland and Britain quickly confirmed they did not have similar plans in the pipeline. Ireland’s jockeys association even argued the French move is discriminatory and legislatively dubious as a result.
Since gender politics are notoriously hair-trigger, plenty found themselves tip-toeing through the equality minefield like cautious chickens.
If there was unanimity on one thing, though, it was that everyone should be judged on their merits, which is as unarguable as wanting peace, love and understanding.
Tokenism
It’s easy in an overall context to portray France Galop’s move as a dubious cocktail of tokenism and paternalism, with a liberal sprinkle of sexism thrown in too. In a purely racing context, however, they’re on the money.
Racing is one of a tiny number of sports where men and women are expected to compete on an equal footing. Theoretically, that's very right-on. But in practice, for the vast majority of women attempting to carve out careers as riders in Europe, it makes racing a write-off.
Arguing on merit presumes a level playing-field which doesn’t exist. It may be a lazy stereotype but the perception that most women can’t compete on an equal footing simply because they’re not physically strong enough still persists despite the achievements of an exceptional few.
Nina Carberry is one of that few and once told me that it is physical fitness rather than muscle which constitutes strength in a rider. But it is naive to believe such strength just happens or can be built up in a gym: it requires race practice which so many women don't get in the first place.
It’s a catch-22 that effectively makes the merit argument a vote for the status quo, which is self-defeating all round. Adopting an ‘as you were’ attitude won’t cut it because the overall progress of female jockeys in this part of the world has stalled.
In France about one-third of stable staff are female but still only a sixth of jockeys are women. Almost half of the 2016 class from Irish racing’s apprentice school, RACE, were female. It’s a generalisation to say everyone who starts mucking out dreams of eventually becoming a jockey but as generalisations go it’s not a wild one.
Self-interest
It’s still a near-impossible dream but that doesn’t stop kids reaching for it: so where’s racing’s self-interest in making that dream seem even more impossible to so many?
The French move isn’t subtle and it doesn’t seem to take into account differing levels of individual ability. In terms of the optics, it will continue to make many wince.
However, if it is accepted that something may be holding back a lot of women riders – in this case a perception that they’re not strong enough – then considerations of merit should in principle require compensation be made for that.
Most other sports acknowledge that by simply dividing the sexes. By most rational criteria, Roger Federer will beat Serena Williams over a best of three-sets match. Over five-sets, there would be no betting. That doesn't make Williams less of a champion. It's simply an acknowledgement of reality.
Julie Krone’s indignation is rooted in North American flat racing where every track is a flat oval and where jockeyship is a test of finesse and pace judgment: like it or not, but riding a steeplechaser around Clonmel on heavy ground is a test of physical strength as well.
Refusing to acknowledge that, and to make allowances for that, ignores reality. Allowances are made for female horses but not for female jockeys. That may suit a broader feminist agenda but it does a disservice to women trying to compete on their merits in a brutally competitive sport.
There’s plenty wrong with the France Galop initiative. The 2kg allowance is too much. That’s two lengths in a sport where victory and defeat can be split by a millimetre. Neither will it be applied in the top races that really matter.
But it’s a dubious sounding discriminatory allowance with positive potential for change. It’s at least worth a trial, and not just in France because vive la difference!
