05-24-2016, 08:39 PM
Quote:Last spring, Wisconsin Representative Nick Milroy had the idea that "blaze pink" might also be an acceptable safety colour as well as a way to get some new blood into the sport.
Is recruiting new hunters a State Representative's job?
Quote:"The fastest growing segment in new recruits into hunting are females, and that's one of the big reasons that companies have been marketing things like pink camouflage, pink guns, pink knives," he says.
Participation in hunting in the US has been on the decline for decades, and the sport is overwhelmingly dominated by men.
But not everyone likes the concept. Not long after Milroy held a news conference with a bipartisan contingent of supporters wearing "Hunt Pink" shirts, a women's hunting group in Wisconsin made their own shirts with the phrase crossed out on a more traditional green camouflage print. The group felt that the blaze pink bill was sexist for suggesting women would take up hunting just because of the new colour choice.
"We felt like it was demeaning to us," said Sarah Ingle, president of the Women's Hunting and Sporting Association, to National Geographic.
"My response is nobody has to wear blaze pink, and everybody can wear blaze pink," Milroy said. "This isn't something that's specifically tailored for specific sexes or ages or whatever."
So the marketing is specifically directed at female customers, but this isn't specifically tailored for a specific sex? Really?
