Vuelta Podium Girls Change

1356714

Posts

  • above_the_cowsabove_the_cows Posts: 10,890
    Broono83 wrote:
    Whats the logical end point of all this though?

    What about when your daughter asks why there are no women in Froome's group up the Galibier? Is it sexist to have separate men's and women's races? Is it sexist if we have single sex races and the men always win?

    Why are you comparing things that relate to physiology like cycling to things that don't like handing out a prize/being an ambassador/an engineer?

    Surely you can see the difference?
    Correlation is not causation.
  • Lanterne_RogueLanterne_Rogue Posts: 1,972
    apreading wrote:
    But surely by the same token, they will still wonder why women dont ride in the same races?

    We have those discussions, and we talk about why bodies are different, and we talk about why the most important thing about sport is that it should be interesting to watch, and why watching Lizzie Deignan get spat out the back on the first climb wouldn't make for compelling viewing - but watching her take on someone with broadly the same physiology is quite fun. We also talk about why women's sport across the board is chronically and disgracefully underfunded and under-reported.

    This is going to sound a bit quattro formaggi but your daughter is lucky to have a dad like you.

    I tell them that. They're not bloody having it.
    @canocola

    aka the poster formerly known as underlayunderlay
  • above_the_cowsabove_the_cows Posts: 10,890
    apreading wrote:
    But surely by the same token, they will still wonder why women dont ride in the same races?

    We have those discussions, and we talk about why bodies are different, and we talk about why the most important thing about sport is that it should be interesting to watch, and why watching Lizzie Deignan get spat out the back on the first climb wouldn't make for compelling viewing - but watching her take on someone with broadly the same physiology is quite fun. We also talk about why women's sport across the board is chronically and disgracefully underfunded and under-reported.

    This is going to sound a bit quattro formaggi but your daughter is lucky to have a dad like you.

    I tell them that. They're not bloody having it.

    Ha! They'll come to appreciate it in time I'm sure. :D
    Correlation is not causation.
  • Broono83Broono83 Posts: 75
    Broono83 wrote:
    Whats the logical end point of all this though?

    What about when your daughter asks why there are no women in Froome's group up the Galibier? Is it sexist to have separate men's and women's races? Is it sexist if we have single sex races and the men always win?

    Why are you comparing things that relate to physiology like cycling to things that don't like handing out a prize/being an ambassador/an engineer?

    Surely you can see the difference?

    Of course I'm playing Devil's advocate here. But who decides where the line is drawn is the point i was getting at?

    If there was a woman in any sport who was able to compete with the men why shouldn't she be allowed? Its the same point.

    I imagine the podium girls are there as that's what the sponsors who are in their company all day want, I'm sure if a sponsor demanded it then they would be guys. Now the situation will be the Vuelta PR team doing all the duties mentioned before minus any of the final presentation glamour.
  • above_the_cowsabove_the_cows Posts: 10,890
    Broono83 wrote:
    Broono83 wrote:
    Whats the logical end point of all this though?

    What about when your daughter asks why there are no women in Froome's group up the Galibier? Is it sexist to have separate men's and women's races? Is it sexist if we have single sex races and the men always win?

    Why are you comparing things that relate to physiology like cycling to things that don't like handing out a prize/being an ambassador/an engineer?

    Surely you can see the difference?

    Of course I'm playing Devil's advocate here. But who decides where the line is drawn is the point i was getting at?

    If there was a woman in any sport who was able to compete with the men why shouldn't she be allowed? Its the same point.

    I imagine the podium girls are there as that's what the sponsors who are in their company all day want, I'm sure if a sponsor demanded it then they would be guys. Now the situation will be the Vuelta PR team doing all the duties mentioned before minus any of the final presentation glamour.

    Handing out prizes and fixing an engine is not a competition. It's not sport that relies on physiology, that's the whole point. There is absolutely no reason why either have to be done by anyone of a particular sex or gender. There is no need to draw any line in this instance. Again if you can't see the difference well... Saying it's what the sponsors want just says that sponsors are sexist and of course makes the gendered assumption that the sponsors are male.
    Correlation is not causation.
  • Lanterne_RogueLanterne_Rogue Posts: 1,972
    There should be a public vote, with the profits from the calls going to charity. Imagine all the good they could do when we get the option to have the editor of Cycling News present Chris Froome with the Maillot Jaune?
    @canocola

    aka the poster formerly known as underlayunderlay
  • above_the_cowsabove_the_cows Posts: 10,890
    There should be a public vote, with the profits from the calls going to charity. Imagine all the good they could do when we get the option to have the editor of Cycling News present Chris Froome with the Maillot Jaune?

    Now for that I would make multiple international calls.
    Correlation is not causation.
  • ProssPross Posts: 21,077
    Oddly despite having four sisters and two daughters I've never heard them query why the can't do a particular job or hobby. As far as I'm aware my sisters all chose a career path they wanted and my daughters are like chalk and cheese with one being sporty, generally dressing in jeans and dark clothing and planning on joining the police or military police after finishing Uni. The other wants to get involved in fashion, is generally dressed in pink or sparkly clothing and loves drama / singing. They watch much the same TV programmes (many of which I'd rather they didn't) and have been subjected to the same upbringing and influences.

    I can't help thinking that the impact of things like podium girls on the world view up teenagers, male or female, is exaggerated and that it's an insult to their intelligence to suggest they can't work these things out for themselves. Is it not possible that 'gender stereotyping' is simply a case that the majority of people have likes based on their sex despite others telling them they can do other things?

    That said, I find podium girls slightly archaic but I don't see how it is sexist as they aren't being disadvantaged or manipulated on the grounds of gender. Probably a topic for Cake Stop though to be honest.
  • salsiccia1salsiccia1 Posts: 3,244
    There should be a public vote, with the profits from the calls going to charity. Imagine all the good they could do when we get the option to have the editor of Cycling News present Chris Froome with the Maillot Jaune?

    :lol:
    It's only a bit of sport, Mun. Relax and enjoy the racing.
  • Broono83 wrote:
    If there was a woman in any sport who was able to compete with the men why shouldn't she be allowed? Its the same point.

    I don't think it is the same point. The segregation within a sport is usually due to a variety of reasons, not least of which protecting the participants and the competition. When those things are not necessary then there is no segregation, as exampled above. The podium girls thing has no such necessity, and if the organisers feel it is something they want to maintain it should therefore be an 'equal opportunites' role.
    Broono83 wrote:
    I imagine the podium girls are there as that's what the sponsors who are in their company all day want, I'm sure if a sponsor demanded it then they would be guys. Now the situation will be the Vuelta PR team doing all the duties mentioned before minus any of the final presentation glamour.

    Which just exemplifies the inherent sexism - the sponsors demanding any particular gender is plain wrong, and it's great the Vuelta have given up on this. And, there's no reason the ceremonies can't be glamorous just because the participants have changed...
  • Broono83Broono83 Posts: 75
    Broono83 wrote:
    Broono83 wrote:
    Whats the logical end point of all this though?

    What about when your daughter asks why there are no women in Froome's group up the Galibier? Is it sexist to have separate men's and women's races? Is it sexist if we have single sex races and the men always win?

    Why are you comparing things that relate to physiology like cycling to things that don't like handing out a prize/being an ambassador/an engineer?

    Surely you can see the difference?

    Of course I'm playing Devil's advocate here. But who decides where the line is drawn is the point i was getting at?

    If there was a woman in any sport who was able to compete with the men why shouldn't she be allowed? Its the same point.

    I imagine the podium girls are there as that's what the sponsors who are in their company all day want, I'm sure if a sponsor demanded it then they would be guys. Now the situation will be the Vuelta PR team doing all the duties mentioned before minus any of the final presentation glamour.

    Handing out prizes and fixing an engine is not a competition. It's not sport that relies on physiology, that's the whole point. There is absolutely no reason why either have to be done by anyone of a particular sex or gender. There is no need to draw any line in this instance. Again if you can't see the difference well... Saying it's what the sponsors want just says that sponsors are sexist and of course makes the gendered assumption that the sponsors are male.

    I'm not assuming the sponsors are male, also there's no reason to assume male sponsors wouldn't want male PR either.

    The point I was trying to make and you missed is that the end point for absolute equality is no gender boundaries. As you pointed out its unfair in some sports based on genetic physiology. I made the point that if there was a woman capable of competing in the mens tour for eg, would she be prevented because you (or anyone) have made a distinction between jobs based on physiology and those not in the hypothetical gender neutral future? That wouldn't be fair.

    This is getting pretty off topic anyway. Hopefully they find a replacement setup that pleases everyone (ha!)
  • above_the_cowsabove_the_cows Posts: 10,890
    I'm afraid I don't see what point you're making.

    This isn't about whether women should be able to compete with men but whether women should continue to be objectified by professional cycling as eye candy. You are collapsing multiple issues into each other to try and argue for a continuation of the status-quo.

    And Alfonsina Strada did ride the Giro once being one of only a handful of finishers. She wasn't allowed to ride it again the following year because the sponsors didn't want it. Make of that what you will.
    Correlation is not causation.
  • LookyhereLookyhere Posts: 987
    apreading wrote:
    the lack of female engineers in F1 is not about sexism, its about girls their age not choosing to train to do the job for no earthly reason.
    It is entirely about sexism, and a world that tells little girls from a very early age that there are boys things and girls things. Walk into a toy shop or look at a shops childrens clothing section for a practical demonstration.

    This stuff permeates every part of our society and it's incredibly hard to shake free from.

    I dont agree with you, i have bought up a girl from 10 months of age on my own, with little female influence, despite me have an enduro m/c, cycling, doing diy, bicycle mechanics and her being involved, she likes pink colours and girly toys, fluffy animals and make up and is very very sporty!
    Girls can do more so called male orientated stuff but they should also be left to make their own path in life and not have to conform to some stereotype, be it a Podium girl OR an F1 mechanic.

    There are far greater fish to fry than the issue of Podium girls, so take a look at the disparity between the BBC's Evan's pay and Claudia's , about 1.6m for doing a similar job! why is that? because men make the rules in almost every walk of life and those rules are not there to enable women to get on even terms, let alone get ahead. Women that do, are the exception.
  • FocusZingFocusZing Posts: 4,416
    I would prefer they start will bull fighting.
  • above_the_cowsabove_the_cows Posts: 10,890
    No one is saying girls can't like pink, only that it is not a female only colour. Boys can also like pink. But we gender our world in such a way that is damaging for both sexes. No one is saying that women can't hand out prizes, only that is shouldn't only be for women. It really isn't that complicated. You really were not disagreeing with lettingthedaysgoby at all.

    And the argument that there are bigger issues is always a way of deflecting the issue and not addressing it. Why can't people challenge the objectification of women in pro-cycling AND the gender pay gap at the BBC at the same time? There are many other issues in the world that are tackled simultaneously, why can't these be? Or is it that only one 'women's issue' can be tackled at a time? If so that is sexist.
    Correlation is not causation.
  • RichN95.RichN95. Posts: 22,562
    edited July 2017
    Lookyhere wrote:
    There are far greater fish to fry than the issue of Podium girls, so take a look at the disparity between the BBC's Evan's pay and Claudia's , about 1.6m for doing a similar job! why is that? because men make the rules in almost every walk of life and those rules are not there to enable women to get on even terms, let alone get ahead. Women that do, are the exception.
    Going off-topic here. But Evans gets paid more because he has a stronger personal following built up over many years. His radio show is the most listened to on UK radio. People tune in for him. People don't tune in to Strictly to watch Claudia Winkleman - she's not the brand, the show is.
    The high end of entertainment isn't really a good place to look for equality arguments as much of it is down to personal brands (and good agents)
    Twitter: @RichN95
  • Lanterne_RogueLanterne_Rogue Posts: 1,972

    And the argument that there are bigger issues is always a way of deflecting the issue and not addressing it. Why can't people challenge the objectification of women in pro-cycling AND the gender pay gap at the BBC at the same time? There are many other issues in the world that are tackled simultaneously, why can't these be? Or is it that only one 'women's issue' can be tackled at a time? If so that is sexist.

    Amen to that.

    The fact we're having the argument is probably a sign of progress though. Hopefully. Maybe.
    @canocola

    aka the poster formerly known as underlayunderlay
  • smithy21smithy21 Posts: 2,197
    RichN95 wrote:
    Lookyhere wrote:
    There are far greater fish to fry than the issue of Podium girls, so take a look at the disparity between the BBC's Evan's pay and Claudia's , about 1.6m for doing a similar job! why is that? because men make the rules in almost every walk of life and those rules are not there to enable women to get on even terms, let alone get ahead. Women that do, are the exception.
    Going off-topic here. But Evans gets paid more because he has a stronger personal following built up over many years. His radio show is the most listened to on UK radio. People tune in for him. People don't tune in to Strictly to watch Claudia Winkleman - she's not the brand, the show is.

    Ahem, I beg to differ on the Strictly/ Claudia Winkelman point.

    Oh censored , did I just objectify her?
  • ProssPross Posts: 21,077
    RichN95 wrote:
    Lookyhere wrote:
    There are far greater fish to fry than the issue of Podium girls, so take a look at the disparity between the BBC's Evan's pay and Claudia's , about 1.6m for doing a similar job! why is that? because men make the rules in almost every walk of life and those rules are not there to enable women to get on even terms, let alone get ahead. Women that do, are the exception.
    Going off-topic here. But Evans gets paid more because he has a stronger personal following built up over many years. His radio show is the most listened to on UK radio. People tune in for him. People don't tune in to Strictly to watch Claudia Winkleman - she's not the brand, the show is.

    The most logical comparison on that list would be Alex Jones and Matt Baker as they present the same show together. I believe Baker was in the £450-£500k bracket and Jones £400-450k you can't compare them exactly as both do other things (it feels like Baker does more with Countryfile but I'm not sure on that). The list is also slightly misleading as it excludes pay for programmes made by external companies and BBC World. There's lots of apparent anomalies on the list though, Claire Balding's pay appears to be very low in comparison to not only men but also the likes of Gabby Logan.

    It's difficult to do a meaningful comparison on pay in entertainment industries whether that's TV & radio or sport, the only way you can show pay discrimination is to compare people with the same experience and qualifications doing exactly the same job in the same branch of the same company.
  • bm5bm5 Posts: 130
    Mr Voeckler may be free to do it next July.
  • effilloeffillo Posts: 257
    And here's the thing - in F1 (and countless other areas) it's not just one of those things and the opportunities aren't equal. Your daughters reaction was entirely correct.

    Thing is the opportunities are equal. I work at a top F1 team and there are many females working in aero, design and other technical areas. Sure it is male dominated but that is down to the level of the applicant for the role, which flows back to choices made during education etc, if the best person for the job is female then they get the job, simple. I wouldn't say it's the fault of f1 that young women don't choose engineering when starting their educational path. There is actually quite a big swing in this at the moment with a big push for women to get involved in engineering from a young age.

    The fact remains that there will always be roles that rightly or wrongly are dominated by one sex or the other and whilst the world is changing to try and put a stop to this it will never truly change. As for podium girls, I don't know the answer to this one, F1 did actually try grid boys in F1 a few years ago in Monaco and it was dismissed as nothing but a PR stunt by the world's media which further highlights the problem I guess.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,856 Lives Here
    effillo wrote:
    And here's the thing - in F1 (and countless other areas) it's not just one of those things and the opportunities aren't equal. Your daughters reaction was entirely correct.

    Thing is the opportunities are equal. I work at a top F1 team and there are many females working in aero, design and other technical areas. Sure it is male dominated but that is down to the level of the applicant for the role, which flows back to choices made during education etc, if the best person for the job is female then they get the job, simple. I wouldn't say it's the fault of f1 that young women don't choose engineering when starting their educational path. There is actually quite a big swing in this at the moment with a big push for women to get involved in engineering from a young age.

    The fact remains that there will always be roles that rightly or wrongly are dominated by one sex or the other and whilst the world is changing to try and put a stop to this it will never truly change. As for podium girls, I don't know the answer to this one, F1 did actually try grid boys in F1 a few years ago in Monaco and it was dismissed as nothing but a PR stunt by the world's media which further highlights the problem I guess.

    Sidebar of shame is one of the most visited websites in the UK, and the 2nd most visited website at work.

    Doesn't mean sidebar of shame is anything but f*cking awful.
  • slowbikeslowbike Posts: 8,353
    Sidebar of shame is one of the most visited websites in the UK, and the 2nd most visited website at work.

    Doesn't mean sidebar of shame is anything but f*cking awful.

    Why is it one of the most visited sites?

    suggestions - blokes visit because they think they might catch a glimpse of something "naughty". women visit because they want to see how they measure up against the competition ... ??

    If the SoS contained just blokes then the viewing would drop considerably because (on the whole) blokes just don't care what other blokes get up too - and certainly don't want to view suggestions of other blokes naughty bits - unless they're that way inclined - women? Well - I guess they might still be interested ...
  • mfinmfin Posts: 6,635

    Sidebar of shame is one of the most visited websites in the UK, and the 2nd most visited website at work.

    Doesn't mean sidebar of shame is anything but f*cking awful.

    I think it's fair to say that objectification and ogling is completely common, but mainstream media like the Daily Mail and mainstream sports (for the small contribution they make in examples like this) should not be allowed to contribute content that fuels it.

    Most intelligent people who think about the effects tend to agree.

    To anyone defending the podium girls thing, let's say Wimbledon this year had just introduced the equivalent for the men's final and two models passed the trophy to Federer and did the presentation and staged double kiss thing for a couple of minutes before Sue Barker broke the silence. People would be complaining, because it would be strange, wrong and weird to see that objectification. Therefore cut this stuff out of all sports where it is still there due to nothing really but tradition, times are changing on this, and it's a good thing.

    The more inertia that can be got behind more and more of these changes rapidly happening the better.
  • rick_chaseyrick_chasey Posts: 43,856 Lives Here
    People so misunderstand this.

    There's nothing wrong with thinking someone is a smoking hot babe. Bloke or woman or anywhere in between.

    I'm not gonna sit here and say I don't like seeing good looking people dressed nicely on my telly.

    The point is, that's not a good reason to have podium girls all the time, in light of the reasons addressed above.


    Nor is the fact that joe public likes a perv and doesn't give two sh!ta about gender equality. That's not a good reason either.
  • Dolan DriverDolan Driver Posts: 836
    Hold the frickin' phone. If we make 50% of the podium girls redundant to appease "the outraged on behalf of others", we will be reducing the number of women employed on the Tour de France and other races. That, in turn, will be seen to be discriminating against women, so "the outraged on behalf of others" will demand that the newly-installed podium dudes be sent packing and the full complement of podium girls be re-installed. But hang on, we are now objectifying women again and are also discriminating against men so we will have fire 50% of the podium ladies again and put the guys back in. But no, we can't do that because we are discriminating against.............Arghhh!!!!!

    We will then have a situation where 50% of "the outraged on behalf of others" will be outraged by the demands of the other 50% of "the outraged on behalf of others". Unable to strictly apply the essential laws of Political Correctness that we obviously cannot live without, modern civilisation will struggle to exist. Nuclear war is likely to ensue in short order and it will be the end of man's (and women's, of course) existence on Planet Earth. All because we got rid of the full complement of podium girls. We are finished I tells ya, finished!!!!! :D

    DD.

    This post is obviously a joke. Or is it.......
  • fat daddyfat daddy Posts: 2,632
    Hold the frickin' phone. If we make 50% of the podium girls redundant to appease

    it will make it worse.

    As soon as you get 1x podium woman and 1x podium man, then the call of Racism will come up so you will to employ more podium staff

    1x white man
    1x white woman
    1x Black man
    etc
    etc

    after you have your four major races subdivided into 30 subgroups there will be 68 people giving out the jersey. Which should stop anyone feeling offended at race or sex.

    It would be a lot easier if we kept the podium girls for Mens racing and made sure that womens racing was equally covered, organised, televised, paid for and had a compliment of male hostesses with rippling abs
  • tangled_metaltangled_metal Posts: 3,954
    What if you watch men and women's cycling and are gay or straight. Having rippling abs presenting women's prizes offends my prejudiced self. I want fit women presenting jerseys to other very fit women.

    If I was gay, shallow and only watching men's cycling for the fit guys I'd want fit guys giving out the jerseys too.

    I say cut it all out and just have the boss of the organisers hand them out perhaps with an older dignitary from cycling past/governing bodies/etc. Are there not any greats from cycling's past that aren't tarnished by cheating that could be called upon to walk up to the tour leader, carrying the jersey and put it on him? Sorry but eye candy of any variety won't suit all so ditch the 70s and make it a celebration of cycling. By that I mean say have a previous stage winner (retired) present the prizes.

    Imagine a truly great Pyrenees or alpine stage ending on one of the great climbs. Then at the ceremony afterwards you have two past competitors hand the jerseys out. Ones who also had a real fight of a stage ending on the same summit of a climb. That would be epic IMHO. A celebration of racing past and present. There isn't a dolly bird alive I'd rather see than that!

    PS I know vuelta doesn't go to.The Pyrenees. I was.thinking of the TdF with that comment. Same applies with great vuelta stages too.
  • fat daddyfat daddy Posts: 2,632
    What if you watch men and women's cycling and are gay or straight. Having rippling abs presenting women's prizes offends my prejudiced self. !


    Ahhh, this is the genius of offense .... you cant really offend anyone as nothing in itself is offensive (ie wearing shoes in a house, offensive to some cultures, not to others) ....... so ...... it comes down to the "victim" to take offence at what they see.

    so ultimately ..... you taking offence is your issue, not anyone elses. and secondly perhaps we should be teaching our children that some people are considered pretty and there will always be a market to use them to advertise a product as it glamourises that product, and they don't need to be offended by it in the same way they don't need to be offended that only really fit athletes are competing at the top of there sport and its not really open to the ones without talent or that are fat


    edit: oh and this post is said in a light hearted slightly joking way, just incase anyone else wants to take offence .... bnecause you know what happens if you are offended by something don't you ?? ...... no its not nothing .... its you get cancer, aids, heap C AND marmit on toast for the rest of your life ! ...... or is it nothing ?
  • inseineinseine Posts: 5,655
    Sometimes it feels like the 1970s on here. I hope the people posting nonsense are really old, otherwise I feel quite sad.
Sign In or Register to comment.