Forum home Road cycling forum Tours, routes, audaxes & organised rides Sportives/audaxes/training rides

Cycletta

Cycletta is a brand new series of women-only sportives and our great new website is now online!

You can also enter online for our Cycletta North and Cycletta South events in September and October this year.

www.cycletta.com

Posts

  • Ron StuartRon Stuart Posts: 1,242
    If this were blokes running men only events there would be an almighty outcry about sexism.

    I would like to think that this is just a means of getting more women to get on bikes and have a healthier life style.
    Apart from top flight racing no where I know here or especially abroad promotes the idea of separate sportive/grand fondo events for the genders.

    What is the problem with women cycling alongside men, what is so awful about us that there is a need for segregation?

    Hasn't this nation become insular enough?

    I have done the Nove Colli 4 times with over 10,000 taking part, it's the biggest Grand Fondo in Italy and there are plenty of women going a lot faster than a lot of the men. In fact the top women in the event have strong guys on the front pulling for them along the flatter parcours.

    I hope this isn't a trend that is going to see far less women in mixed gender pursuits as there are already enough sports that separate the two.
  • Jo DytchJo Dytch Posts: 1
    Hi Ron,

    You're right - the idea really is to get more women cycling. At the moment most events have 10-15% participation figures for women and we are on a mission to increase this. We have removed a few of the barriers which are said to be intimidating - traffic and speedy men in lycra. It is no way meant to be sexist, just accessible for women who may not have as much confidence on a bike as they would like. Following Cycletta, they can then get involved in all the events out there for both genders. Cycletta is aimed at women of all abilities from club girls wanting to experience closed roads, to those looking for a fun day out with friends.
  • davieseedaviesee Posts: 6,473
    Jo Dytch wrote:
    Hi Ron,

    You're right - the idea really is to get more women cycling. At the moment most events have 10-15% participation figures for women and we are on a mission to increase this.

    A rough guestimate tells me that the objective will be achieved. I reckon you should get approximately 100% women on a women only ride.

    Sorry but good intentions or not, it is still sexist.

    PS:- It is not women only cycling events that I obect to. What I find objectional is the double standards towards men only events.
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • cornerblockcornerblock Posts: 3,228
    £45.00? And this is supposed to encourage more women. Seems overpriced to me, even with the free entry to the zoo! I applaud the idea of getting more women into cycling, currently trying to help build up my wifes confidence, but that price is a turn off.
  • bobtbuilderbobtbuilder Posts: 2,058
    Ron Stuart wrote:
    If this were blokes running men only events there would be an almighty outcry about sexism.

    I would like to think that this is just a means of getting more women to get on bikes and have a healthier life style.
    Apart from top flight racing no where I know here or especially abroad promotes the idea of separate sportive/grand fondo events for the genders.

    What is the problem with women cycling alongside men, what is so awful about us that there is a need for segregation?

    Hasn't this nation become insular enough?

    I have done the Nove Colli 4 times with over 10,000 taking part, it's the biggest Grand Fondo in Italy and there are plenty of women going a lot faster than a lot of the men. In fact the top women in the event have strong guys on the front pulling for them along the flatter parcours.

    I hope this isn't a trend that is going to see far less women in mixed gender pursuits as there are already enough sports that separate the two.

    WHS^^^^^^^
  • Tom ButcherTom Butcher Posts: 7,137
    I wouldn't say it's necessarily sexist - if there is a demand from women for some women only events then I don't have a problem. Where I think these things can be sexist is when men who perhaps lack the confidence to head out on the nearest chain gang straight away don't have similar events laid on to provide a pathway into cycling.

    On the whole though anything that gets more people into cycling the better - if it is done in a way that favours women over men I can live with that for the greater good !

    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • mrushtonmrushton Posts: 5,182
    It is on closed roads tho' which pushes the cost up altho' they are private roads.
    M.Rushton
  • Ron StuartRon Stuart Posts: 1,242
    mrushton wrote:
    It is on closed roads tho' which pushes the cost up altho' they are private roads.

    I new a Mark Rushton from dingy sailing did a bit of Fireballing not bad as I recall. I had a couple of Fireballs and ended up coming 7th at the Endeavour Champs.
    There was a girly sailor Veronica Fallet from Lowestoft I think ended up in Flying Fifteens.
    I sailed at our club with Debbie Jarvis who didn't do anything much at the Seoul Olympics, but did quite well in 505's after.
    I used to sail a lot at the club against an Ian Barker he gold GB's first medal at the Sydney Olympics silver in the 49ers. He hated losing to people he new to well i.e. me and the likes. Wasn’t often but it was nice when it happened.

    I have obliviously got the wrong mrushton so I'll get my coat. :oops:

    Ciao.
  • davieseedaviesee Posts: 6,473
    I wouldn't say it's necessarily sexist

    Yes. It is. No men allowed makes it inherently sexist. But I am sure members of men only golf clubs would agree with you.

    Point being that the principle of single sex events is either okay, or it is not. You can't pick and choose.
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • Ron StuartRon Stuart Posts: 1,242
    Jo Dytch wrote:
    Hi Ron,

    You're right - the idea really is to get more women cycling. At the moment most events have 10-15% participation figures for women and we are on a mission to increase this. We have removed a few of the barriers which are said to be intimidating - traffic and speedy men in lycra. It is no way meant to be sexist, just accessible for women who may not have as much confidence on a bike as they would like. Following Cycletta, they can then get involved in all the events out there for both genders. Cycletta is aimed at women of all abilities from club girls wanting to experience closed roads, to those looking for a fun day out with friends.

    Excuse me :!: don't quote me as being in agreement with you, regards the general guest of this post in fact I am generally at odds with your approach which is revealing itself as being another money making exploitation of women by women or blokes using women.

    You are aven a larf with the entry fee so I know your not sincere, just doin the buz just like dem dere blokes right.

    Right on sister.
  • Tom ButcherTom Butcher Posts: 7,137
    daviesee wrote:
    I wouldn't say it's necessarily sexist

    Yes. It is. No men allowed makes it inherently sexist. But I am sure members of men only golf clubs would agree with you.

    Point being that the principle of single sex events is either okay, or it is not. You can't pick and choose.

    Hmm, you've been a bit selective with your quoting there. What I actually said is it's not necessarily sexist so long as similar events are laid on for men who want and may benefit from similar events. It's not inherently sexist to have single sex events - so long as single sex events exist for both sexes if there is a demand.

    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • rickyriderrickyrider Posts: 294
    Id suggest that some of the aggressive replies posted in here are exactly the reason why women feel the need to set up an all female event...
  • MarcBCMarcBC Posts: 333
    rickyrider wrote:
    Id suggest that some of the aggressive replies posted in here are exactly the reason why women feel the need to set up an all female event...

    Totally agree.
  • davieseedaviesee Posts: 6,473
    rickyrider wrote:
    Id suggest that some of the aggressive replies posted in here are exactly the reason why women feel the need to set up an all female event...

    Funny. I don't see any aggression . What I see is people (like me) objecting to the hypocrasy and double standards. Or the over pricing for the event, hitting the very target they want to support :? .

    I actually support the idea behind the event but think men should also be allowed to organise men only events/clubs. Scouts unisex, Brownies girls only. Why?

    We are all equal but most definintely not the same and I for one is thankful for it :wink:
    None of the above should be taken seriously, and certainly not personally.
  • Tom ButcherTom Butcher Posts: 7,137
    Men are allowed to organise unisex clubs - I don't think the scouts/cubs were forced to admit girls - whether there was pressure to do so from funders or something I don't know.

    I think with these single sex events - race for life is another - there are perfectly legitimate arguments for and against. In running I think some of the female only initiatives - womens running network for example - can perpetuate a myth that existing running clubs are largely male dominated or overly competitive - in fact the UK running scene is probably the least competitive and most inclusive sport there is. But on the whole I think these things do get people into sport and that can only be a good thing.

    If Cycletta see a gap in the market for female only events I say good luck to them. If others want to fill the gap and provide male only events then what is stopping them ?

    On a wider scale I think there is sometimes a danger that male perspectives can get lost. For example with rough playground games like bulldogs and playing football with a proper ball being banned in many primary schools now - I can't help but think those kind of rules are down to primarys being female dominated environments but that's another argument.

    it's a hard life if you don't weaken.
  • Hi Ron

    I've looked on the website and I don't think these events are aimed at females that frequent bike radar.

    By the way you might not know who MRushton is but I think I know who you are, I met you at the Belvedere Hotel in Italy about 8 years ago may be your first visit there with wife Viv. I was on a yellow Bianchi and Richard was on a Giant. Cycling with men has certainly pushed me to get better and now I'm often beating them.
    :)
  • mrushtonmrushton Posts: 5,182
    Hi Ron

    I've looked on the website and I don't think these events are aimed at females that frequent bike radar.

    By the way you might not know who MRushton is but I think I know who you are, I met you at the Belvedere Hotel in Italy about 8 years ago may be your first visit there with wife Viv. I was on a yellow Bianchi and Richard was on a Giant. Cycling with men has certainly pushed me to get better and now I'm often beating them.
    :)

    Glad you are out there doing it. Strangely I'm back at the Belvedere next week.
    M.Rushton
  • Ron StuartRon Stuart Posts: 1,242
    Hi Ron

    I've looked on the website and I don't think these events are aimed at females that frequent bike radar.

    By the way you might not know who MRushton is but I think I know who you are, I met you at the Belvedere Hotel in Italy about 8 years ago may be your first visit there with wife Viv. I was on a yellow Bianchi and Richard was on a Giant. Cycling with men has certainly pushed me to get better and now I'm often beating them.
    :)

    Glad to here you’re still riding the bike and pushing the men, I can't put your faces to the bikes at the moment though, sorry.
    I ended up doing the Belvedere about 10 times in all, but we enjoyed the Belvedere the most the first time before all the wellness and pool arrived. It was more about the social get together and the rides which was more important us than the hotel makeover. Since the hotel makeover the rides became shorter and it's too much about the wellness and superficial glitz, probably a bit like the Cycletta website. However we still made the most of it and it's still the best bike hotel, probably in the world.

    Cycletta could find themselves in big financial trouble describing the rides as ''cycling with no cars" and "safe traffic free roads" because if a car or tractor finds it's way on to the course and there is an accident the ambulance chasers will have a field day.
    Question, is it or is it not taking place on closed roads? As it isn't clear from the website that there is permission yet from the authorities to do so or how for that matter. Yet they are still taking money (£1.80 per mile) or just as a comparison with my car which does around 55 miles per gallon, that would equate to nearly £100 every gallon of fuel. Currently it's costing a little over £6 to fuel my car.
    Oh, and there are several other side shows to unload money on like "children’s play facilities*" who be a parent refusing them to play? Or you pay for the "helmet hair remedy centre*".
    Also they seem to be doing what quite a few sportives are doing that is using a charity slogan to give the impression that they are financially supporting an event when in practice none of the entry fee goes to any charity, they only encourage you to use their event to promote your own fund raising.
    Like the delightful young lady riding across that wonderful cycling nirvana docklands on that perfect sunset (website), it's just not real and not representative at all.
  • DaveMossDaveMoss Posts: 236
    It seems to me that this is just out to make money.
    Rather than encourage women into cycling, they seem to be emphasising all the myths that might put women off in order to to charge an exorbitant fee for the illusion that they have removed the problems, problems that don't really exist in the first place. For example, most roads are NOT dangerous for cycling on, with or without a few cars on them, and you do NOT need a "helmet hair remedy centre", no one actually cares what a helmet does to your hair, and anyway, you don't really need a helmet to cycle, that's another modern day myth.

    If they really want to get more woman (and men for that matter) on bikes, they would be better to target the behaviour of women drivers :twisted:
    Sportives and tours, 100% for charity, http://www.tearfundcycling.btck.co.uk
  • cornerblockcornerblock Posts: 3,228
    DaveMoss wrote:
    It seems to me that this is just out to make money.
    Rather than encourage women into cycling, they seem to be emphasising all the myths that might put women off in order to to charge an exorbitant fee for the illusion that they have removed the problems, problems that don't really exist in the first place. For example, most roads are NOT dangerous for cycling on, with or without a few cars on them, and you do NOT need a "helmet hair remedy centre", no one actually cares what a helmet does to your hair, and anyway, you don't really need a helmet to cycle, that's another modern day myth.
    If they really want to get more woman (and men for that matter) on bikes, they would be better to target the behaviour of women drivers :twisted:

    Why the behaviour of women drivers? In my experience most aggressive and dangerous driving is carried out by male drivers. Sounds like a very old fashioned view you have there.
Sign In or Register to comment.