Girls in... threads but a no swearing plicy, makes no sense.

clarkey cat

That is disgusting. I am reporting this to the mods.

velocestrapture

Summer cycling kit

sketchley

How long before lampre man appears....

velocestrapture

Sketchley wrote:

How long before lampre man appears....

Where? Linky please. I'm rather enjoying this!

First.Aspect

itboffin wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Girls in Rainwear is the most offensive - do none of them understand the concept of layering?

Layering ....? DDD perhaps you like to explain to the group

Seriously DDD. You are a father now. You look about 12 in that photo. Its just not right.

EKE_38BPM

velocestrapture wrote:

Sketchley wrote:

How long before lampre man appears....

Where? Linky please. I'm rather enjoying this!

Ask and ye shall recieve...














































Well, you did ask!

sketchley

velocestrapture wrote:

Sketchley wrote:

How long before lampre man appears....

Where? Linky please. I'm rather enjoying this!

Ok

EKE_38BPM

Sketchley's one is bigger than mine, but I was quicker.



Oh.



I'll get my coat.

jejv

When ~2million Brits are happy to pay for the Daily "Vagina Monologues", it seems a bit arsey to complain about even a single cunting.

We can report physical violence against us, but not report verbal abuse ?

Of course, Paul Dacre isn't a Cunt.

"A Cunt is a nice warm place."

velocestrapture

Bleugh! Thanks for that. I was going to be kind and let it drop, but I think we need one more to redress the balance. A proper cyclist too (well, until he got dropped for failing too many doping tests): Tom Boonen celebrating a win:

mybreakfastconsisted

jonny_trousers

velocestrapture wrote:

There is a difference between sites such as Cosmo that are specifically aimed at women, and this one, which is aimed at people interested in a particular sport, and which just happens to be male dominated.

Is there, though? This website is pretty vast and has its numerous sub sections for all types of people. All of the threads DDD refers to hale from the 'Cake Stop' forum, which, let's be honest, is not really aimed at those specifically interested in the sport of cycling (even if the shared interest is there). I visited the Cake Stop for the first time fairly recently, just to see what it was about and, despite ordinarily being a big fan of scantily clad lovelies, I decided the place didn't really appeal to me and so I moved on. Could you not do the same? Could you not decide that the Cake Stop felt hostile to you and your gender and simply not visit it, in the same way that you would probably avoid Men's Health? Or if you really do want to go to the Cake Stop, could you perhaps not just avoid opening any thread titled "Girls in..." if the idea of it offends you?

velocestrapture wrote:

You would only go on Cosmo expecting to see such threads, whereas I come on here to chat and learn about cycling.

Again, Cosmo is a huge web forum with many sub forums for a variety of differnt discussion themes. It's specifically aimed at women, but not women who specifically want to look at pictures of semi-naked men.

velocestrapture wrote:

Honestly, the number of threads objectifying women makes this site feel quite hostile to women. Typing this post, I have thoughts going through my mind along the lines of "Great, I know that many of the men on this site like posting pictures of semi-naked women to perve over in public, just how much of a hostile reaction am I going to get by pointing out that this makes women posters feel uncomfortable and disrespected?".

Really? I only visit this forum, Road Beginners and the Classifieds, but I'm not sure I've ever seen anything I would consider hostile towards women. And I'm afraid your perception of what the men think of you here is just that: your perception. It's a web forum, try not to worry too much about what fellow members may or may not think of you.

velocestrapture wrote:

Besides, my bet was not about threads with pictures of semi-naked men being posted, but the lack of hostility that a man would receive if he objected to it.

Okay.

sketchley

How big are those thighs on the Germans?

jonny_trousers

velocestrapture wrote:

Bleugh! Thanks for that. I was going to be kind and let it drop, but I think we need one more to redress the balance. A proper cyclist too (well, until he got dropped for failing too many doping tests): Tom Boonen celebrating a win:

This photo offends me. Not because I can see a little too much of Mr Boonen's wedding tackle, but because any time I wear lycra and am in the sadlle for more than ten minutes, my ordinarily perfectly respectful manhood has shrivelled to the size of a walnut. Not fair! Mind you, I'm sure winning is pretty exciting.

jejv

itboffin wrote:

Rolf F wrote:

Girls in Rainwear is the most offensive - do none of them understand the concept of layering?

Layering ....? DDD perhaps you like to explain to the group

If that's DDD, he has a lot more hair than I have.

I think the pale blue-green dreads are quite original. Then I don't get down to London much.

cooldad

Obviously you take different drugs. Mix some viagra in the steroids and away you go.

velocestrapture

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

I visited the Cake Stop for the first time fairly recently, just to see what it was about and, despite ordinarily being a big fan of scantily clad lovelies, I decided the place didn't really appeal to me and so I moved on. Could you not do the same? Could you not decide that the Cake Stop felt hostile to you and your gender and simply not visit it, in the same way that you would probably avoid Men's Health? Or if you really do want to go to the Cake Stop, could you perhaps not just avoid opening any thread titled "Girls in..." if the idea of it offends you?

It is rather artificial to say that you can just visit specific parts of the website and ignore others. I find it hard to believe that anyone could regularly use this forum and not notice the threads about 'Girls ...'

Jonny_Trousers wrote:

velocestrapture wrote:

Honestly, the number of threads objectifying women makes this site feel quite hostile to women. Typing this post, I have thoughts going through my mind along the lines of "Great, I know that many of the men on this site like posting pictures of semi-naked women to perve over in public, just how much of a hostile reaction am I going to get by pointing out that this makes women posters feel uncomfortable and disrespected?".

Really? I only visit this forum, Road Beginners and the Classifieds, but I'm not sure I've ever seen anything I would consider hostile towards women. And I'm afraid your perception of what the men think of you here is just that: your perception. It's a web forum, try not to worry too much about what fellow members may or may not think of you.

If you went into Crudcatcher you might feel differently.

I do agree that this particular board is actually the most friendly. However, I think there are very few posters who only post on this section and have nothing to do with the rest of the forum, and apart from this thread I haven't seen anyone querying whether the 'Girls' threads are a good idea. Which must mean that every bloke on here must think that it is perfectly acceptable to have thread after thread of pictures of women in what amounts to or closely approaches soft porn poses, right? Because if any man did think that it was perhaps not appropriate for a mixed gender sports site they would speak up about it, wouldn't they?

rick_chasey

Guy on the pro race side of things once posted a link to bangable dudes in pro cycling.

Seems as much writing as pictures - go figure.

jamesco

velocestrapture wrote:

It is rather artificial to say that you can just visit specific parts of the website and ignore others. I find it hard to believe that anyone could regularly use this forum and not notice the threads about 'Girls ...'

In 3 years or so I haven't looked outside the commuting forums ('cause I ride a bike to commute, y'know) and had no idea these threads existed, until now. Still haven't bothered to look at them, though.

velocestrapture wrote:

I do agree that this particular board is actually the most friendly. However, I think there are very few posters who only post on this section and have nothing to do with the rest of the forum, and apart from this thread I haven't seen anyone querying whether the 'Girls' threads are a good idea. Which must mean that every bloke on here must think that it is perfectly acceptable to have thread after thread of pictures of women in what amounts to or closely approaches soft porn poses, right? Because if any man did think that it was perhaps not appropriate for a mixed gender sports site they would speak up about it, wouldn't they?

Nah, this bloke thinks these 'girl threads' should be somewhere like reddit. An occasional bit of objectification (both ways) is fine for a laugh, but going on about it is creepy. Everything has its place, everything in its place. That's what the BR moderators are for, right? Not just saving us from what may offend, but from what's stupid.

jejv

DonDaddyD wrote:

Powers that Be and Mawds, please explain

Why should they ? This is a business.

It does seem odd that describing physical violence is OK, but verbal abuse would not be.

Particularly in a country - nearly an oops there - where about 2 Million people pay for the daily "Vagina Monologues".

Eh ?

jejv

jejv wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Powers that Be and Mawds, please explain

Why should they ? This is a business.

It does seem odd that describing physical violence is OK, but verbal abuse would not be.

Particularly in a country - nearly an oops there - where about 2 Million people pay for the daily "Vagina Monologues".

Eh ?

Personally, I find actual or threatened violence rather more disturbing than any taboo words.

rjsterry

velocestrapture wrote:

If you went into Crudcatcher you might feel differently.

Wouldn't touch it with a bargepole - who knows what the tractor riders get up to.

I do agree that this particular board is actually the most friendly.

I agree, but we do tend to get quite worked up over politics

However, I think there are very few posters who only post on this section and have nothing to do with the rest of the forum, and apart from this thread I haven't seen anyone querying whether the 'Girls' threads are a good idea. Which must mean that every bloke on here must think that it is perfectly acceptable to have thread after thread of pictures of women in what amounts to or closely approaches soft porn poses, right? Because if any man did think that it was perhaps not appropriate for a mixed gender sports site they would speak up about it, wouldn't they?

That's a bit of a sweeping statement. Do you speak up about *everything* that you consider to be questionable or inappropriate? Personally, my few ventures over to Crudcatcher have indicated that the Girls... threads are of a piece with the general feel of that board - pretty juvenile - and it's put me off going back (not that I even own an MTB). I'm not sure what good me complaining on this board would do, and complaining on Crudcatcher would be like telling teenagers to keep the noise down. I'm surprised it's not moderated more closely, but I don't set the guidance for the mods.

velocestrapture

rjsterry wrote:

That's a bit of a sweeping statement. Do you speak up about *everything* that you consider to be questionable or inappropriate? Personally, my few ventures over to Crudcatcher have indicated that the Girls... threads are of a piece with the general feel of that board - pretty juvenile - and it's put me off going back (not that I even own an MTB). I'm not sure what good me complaining on this board would do, and complaining on Crudcatcher would be like telling teenagers to keep the noise down. I'm surprised it's not moderated more closely, but I don't set the guidance for the mods.

Most of the 'Girls ...' threads are in Cake Stop, which I do read as I cycle for fun/ do sportives etc as well as commute.

Actually, I do speak up about most things that I consider to be questionable or inappropriate. Certainly I try to make sure that I do speak up about questionable or inappropriate things that I think are important to tackle, but then being opinionated and making a fuss is kind of what I do for a living (on behalf of other people). I do wonder (and it is a genuine question, not a dig) why many men who profess to wish that the world were a safer, less sexist place for their wives/girlfriends/daughters/sisters don't do more to speak up against attitudes to women that are inappropriate or questionable. Is it because they don't really see it as important? Or that it doesn't directly affect them? Or they are worried that if they do it will affect their standing in the view of other men?

msmancunia

At the risk of opening a huge catering size can of worms, and being of the female persuasion, I have to admit that I avoid Cake Stop because of all the "Girls in..." threads. I'm not a burn your bra, woman in sensible shoes feminist - but I do find it a bit, um, letchy and juvenile, to be honest. I'm not saying that there's a time and a place for all that kind of stuff, but maybe on an FHM website, not a cycling one. There's probably some interesting/funny/pertinent stuff in there, but I just avoid it, which is a shame.

And women tend not to go for the whole beefcake photos thing so that's why there isn't really the demand for one of those threads - that's why the "page nine fella" (or whatever it was) never caught on. Could explain the massive female demand for everything from Mills and Boone to the erotic bookshelf at Waterstones - women tend to be more fantasist I think (and yes, I'm generalising here as there will always be exceptions to the rule), where men seem to go for what they see - so a picture of a girl with her boobs out.

So a picture of David Beckham in his pants pretty much leaves me cold, (and that's not even counting the fact that I'm a MCFC fan!) as does a photo of pretty much any cyclist in lycra. But when one whizzes past on my commute, I do admit to copping a quick look at his calves....

jonny_trousers

velocestrapture wrote:

I do wonder (and it is a genuine question, not a dig) why many men who profess to wish that the world were a safer, less sexist place for their wives/girlfriends/daughters/sisters don't do more to speak up against attitudes to women that are inappropriate or questionable. Is it because they don't really see it as important? Or that it doesn't directly affect them? Or they are worried that if they do it will affect their standing in the view of other men?

I'm sure many of us do, but it all comes down to what we individually feel is inappropriate or questionable, and speaking for myself, I think it's perfectly reasonable for men to find attractive women attractive - and for them to enjoy looking at pictures of them, as well as for attractive women to make a living out of their good-looks - just as it is for women to enjoy looking and talking about handsome men. Perhaps if the guys who post on those threads were saying, "Look at that dirty, little slut, she's just dying to feel my blah, blah, blah, then I might find it inappropriate, but as it is, meh...

lost_in_thought

I don't find myself aghast or offended at the "Girls in..." threads, I mean, women ARE more attractive than men in general, and men far more visual in their feelings of attraction as msmancunia says. What's not so nice is the rather unkind dissection of some of the girls, and the lecherous writing that surrounds the threads.

I definitely, definitely think they contribute to the male-dominated-ness of these forums. A lot of women cycle, and a lot of women commute on bikes, yet there are, what, 3 or 4 regular female posters on here? It has a big boys club, willy waving feel, not helped by such things. However, on this specific forum, there have been several threads that have contributed just as much to that sense of unwelcome-ness as the 'Girls in...' threads.

velocestrapture

msmancunia wrote:

At the risk of opening a huge catering size can of worms, and being of the female persuasion, I have to admit that I avoid Cake Stop because of all the "Girls in..." threads. I'm not a burn your bra, woman in sensible shoes feminist - but I do find it a bit, um, letchy and juvenile, to be honest.

I agree, msmancunia, but can't help noticing the slightly tentative, apologetic tone of your post. This goes back to what I said earlier about women facing accusations of being spoil-sports if they speak up and say that certain behaviour actually makes them feel quite uncomfortable.

I wonder if any male posters (other than jamesco who gets a gold star* , and possibly jejv although I can't really work out what s/he is on about) will come forward to agree?

I have previously asked the mods if they would amend their posting guidance to include a prohibition on sexist and disabilist comments as well as racist and homophobic, but got no response. I suppose they have to do a balancing act in terms of attracting advertising revenue between making this site more female-friendly, and keeping the rather more juvenile posters who can't have fun on a cycling forum without looking at semi-naked women every day.

*Yes, women can be patronising too in the name of funny.

greg66_tri_v2.0

lost_in_thought wrote:

I don't find myself aghast or offended at the "Girls in..." threads, I mean, women ARE more attractive than men in general

Uh-huh. Just aesthetically, right? I mean, I'm not asking whether you've ever been curious or anything, because that would be rude. Really hot-rude. But as I was saying, you know, if you've been curious, that's cool. Really cool actually. Especially if you've ever wondered about, well, you know, scratching an itch 'n' all. Because, well, you see, you might want a record of it. For posterity. Or your grandchildren. And, see, I've got an iPhone that can shoot video and everything. It's really cool.

Yeah, it would be *so* cool. You get that, right?

So, some day soon? This weekend maybe? I can make some available at short notice I reckon. Give me about 20 minutes notice. Tops.

Call me!

lost_in_thought

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

I don't find myself aghast or offended at the "Girls in..." threads, I mean, women ARE more attractive than men in general

Uh-huh. Just aesthetically, right? I mean, I'm not asking whether you've ever been curious or anything, because that would be rude. Really hot-rude. But as I was saying, you know, if you've been curious, that's cool. Really cool actually. Especially if you've ever wondered about, well, you know, scratching an itch 'n' all. Because, well, you see, you might want a record of it. For posterity. Or your grandchildren. And, see, I've got an iPhone that can shoot video and everything. It's really cool.

Yeah, it would be *so* cool. You get that, right?

So, some day soon? This weekend maybe? I can make some available at short notice I reckon. Give me about 20 minutes notice. Tops.

Call me!

IRL lols



For some reason, despite what I just said, slightly lecherous posts are fine as long as they're also funny.

greg66_tri_v2.0

lost_in_thought wrote:

Greg66 wrote:

lost_in_thought wrote:

I don't find myself aghast or offended at the "Girls in..." threads, I mean, women ARE more attractive than men in general

Uh-huh. Just aesthetically, right? I mean, I'm not asking whether you've ever been curious or anything, because that would be rude. Really hot-rude. But as I was saying, you know, if you've been curious, that's cool. Really cool actually. Especially if you've ever wondered about, well, you know, scratching an itch 'n' all. Because, well, you see, you might want a record of it. For posterity. Or your grandchildren. And, see, I've got an iPhone that can shoot video and everything. It's really cool.

Yeah, it would be *so* cool. You get that, right?

So, some day soon? This weekend maybe? I can make some available at short notice I reckon. Give me about 20 minutes notice. Tops.

Call me!

IRL lols



For some reason, despite what I just said, slightly lecherous posts are fine as long as they're also funny.

You wrote other stuff too?

I didn't really see that. It got kind of eclipsed.

Sorry..