Vuelta Podium Girls Change

Vino'sGhost

inseine wrote:

Vino'sGhost wrote:

inseine wrote:

Pross wrote:

The interesting thing with the darts and F1 bans is no-one seems to have consulted the women who do the job and who, it seems, are upset at losing a well paid, exciting job (the words of one of those interviewed).

It's irrelevant what an individual thinks if it's undermining a whole sectors position in society. Take that approach and you'll end up with Italian tv.

So your position is that those individual womens opinon is irrelevant, you (a man) is deciding whats best for all women.

I suspect that most women are capable of thinking for themselves and possibly would like to have the choice about what they can and cannot do.

It's not a case of me being a man or them women.
You're OK with this? I'm sure the women weren't forced.

It doesnt matter if im ok with it or not, the point is that you are deciding for the good of the women what they can and cannot do. Thats different from stopping women being compelled to do something they may find demeaning which would be a positive. Your view caries forward the underlying notion that women cant do things for themselves. They need to have decisions made for their own good.

As an aside i think that pic is odd the bikkini girls by virtue of their clothing and shoes are quite limited to much beyond their job as an adornment.

Vino'sGhost

YorkshireRaw wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Salsiccia1 wrote:

Fine, let's have races use both men and women to do the job.

OK. Although I would suggest that it's a job women are better at. They tend be more personable.

I'd have thought that by definition of only recruiting women to the podium host / sponsor liaison etc role, ASO et all are breaking some European employment law?

Quite possibly though of course it is perfectly acceptable to hire women only (or men only) into roles where the gender is key to the role. eg female police officers to manage female detainees etc etc. Who nows next TDF we might have TG on the podium. I for one hope that some customs are not dispensed with for the benefit of PC liberalism.

inseine

It doesnt matter if im ok with it or not, the point is that you are deciding for the good of the women what they can and cannot do. Thats different from stopping women being compelled to do something they may find demeaning which would be a positive. Your view caries forward the underlying notion that women cant do things for themselves. They need to have decisions made for their own good.

The Daily Mail and Sun are completely in a agreement with you. I'm not, I'll leave it that. You're entitled to your views.

rick_chasey

What's the case FOR podium girls?

In which other sports and arenas would people be introducing them to, and why?

That's really what you ought to be thinking about.

The case for them not being great has been made. The case against that case has been made. But the overarching, why have them at all case, has not. I suspect I know why.

Vino'sGhost

Rick Chasey wrote:

So vino, let’s turn it the other way around.

What’s the case FOR podium ‘girls’, since you seem so keen on them?

You're right I am keen on them.

I like attractive women and them flanking the winner is part of the spectacle I enjoy.

I also discuss the quality of the tailoring that they wear. Sometimes the quality is questionable and sometimes a little too revealing for my own very modest taste. It's another aspect of the race that i enjoy. I also would have no interest in watching the presentation on the sponsor covered stage if the girls weren't there.

Equally when the girls have been replaced by children or competition winners I think thats great too but i wouldnt want it to be all I saw.

And after all else is said, the victor deserves his spoils.....

Vino'sGhost

inseine wrote:

It doesnt matter if im ok with it or not, the point is that you are deciding for the good of the women what they can and cannot do. Thats different from stopping women being compelled to do something they may find demeaning which would be a positive. Your view caries forward the underlying notion that women cant do things for themselves. They need to have decisions made for their own good.

The Daily Mail and Sun are completely in a agreement with you. I'm not, I'll leave it that. You're entitled to your views.

Thank you, i am entitled to my own view, I just dont think Im entitled to force it on other people.

rick_chasey

Vino'sGhost wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

So vino, let’s turn it the other way around.

What’s the case FOR podium ‘girls’, since you seem so keen on them?

You're right I am keen on them.

I like attractive women and them flanking the winner is part of the spectacle I enjoy.

I also discuss the quality of the tailoring that they wear. Sometimes the quality is questionable and sometimes a little too revealing for my own very modest taste. It's another aspect of the race that i enjoy. I also would have no interest in watching the presentation on the sponsor covered stage if the girls weren't there.

Equally when the girls have been replaced by children or competition winners I think thats great too but i wouldnt want it to be all I saw.

And after all else is said, the victor deserves his spoils.....

So your own titillation is the main reason?

Mate, there's a whole world of internet p0rn to cater to all tastes. Why bring it into bike racing?

RichN95.

Rick Chasey wrote:

What's the case FOR podium girls?

They're promoting the sponsors and they draw attention to them. And someone has to organize the podium presentations. And publications are more likely to use photos of attractive women presenting prizes than a regional manager in a brown suit.

rick_chasey

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

What's the case FOR podium girls?

They're promoting the sponsors and they draw attention to them. And someone has to organize the podium presentations. And publications are more likely to use photos of attractive women presenting prizes than a regional manager in a brown suit.

And you think that outweighs the costs?

Say, around role models for, say, children?

Young girl watches the Tour, notices the only women on the screen are there to be pretty. Young boy things women are only there to be pretty.

That's worth the trade off?

inseine

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

What's the case FOR podium girls?

They're promoting the sponsors and they draw attention to them. And someone has to organize the podium presentations. And publications are more likely to use photos of attractive women presenting prizes than a regional manager in a brown suit.

It's an interesting point. If I was being targeted by a company using women like this to promote their wares, they'd be losing a customer. Bike companies have a pretty shocking history of using women in a demeaning way. Some recently.

blazing_saddles

Removing podium girls maybe a start, but it is just a drop in the sexist ocean.
Attitudes towards how women are depicted in fashion, lifestyle magazines, cinema and tv etc, have to change.
Whether or not their target audience desire change is debatable.
When rewards are high, so too are aspirations.

Vino'sGhost

Rick Chasey wrote:

Vino'sGhost wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

So vino, let’s turn it the other way around.

What’s the case FOR podium ‘girls’, since you seem so keen on them?

You're right I am keen on them.

I like attractive women and them flanking the winner is part of the spectacle I enjoy.

I also discuss the quality of the tailoring that they wear. Sometimes the quality is questionable and sometimes a little too revealing for my own very modest taste. It's another aspect of the race that i enjoy. I also would have no interest in watching the presentation on the sponsor covered stage if the girls weren't there.

Equally when the girls have been replaced by children or competition winners I think thats great too but i wouldnt want it to be all I saw.

And after all else is said, the victor deserves his spoils.....

So your own titillation is the main reason?

Mate, there's a whole world of internet p0rn to cater to all tastes. Why bring it into bike racing?

I don't think I've mentioned titivation once. I certainly don't get aroused by podium girls, just a passing interest. I went for a walk yesterday and saw a water rail, a very pretty bird and i enjoyed seeing that too. I wasn't aroused or titivated then either but it added to the pleasure and I'll go back down there again some time.

As for bringing it into bike racing, Im not. It's already there and has been since before you were born. It is part of bike racing. half the articles on the bikeradar site are about bike porn and i imagine that in a world of so many tastes, some people might get off on that too.

kingstongraham

Does La Vuelta have an equivalent of Lupo Wolfie? He/she/it could do it.

yorkshireraw

Rick Chasey wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

Rick Chasey wrote:

What's the case FOR podium girls?

They're promoting the sponsors and they draw attention to them. And someone has to organize the podium presentations. And publications are more likely to use photos of attractive women presenting prizes than a regional manager in a brown suit.

And you think that outweighs the costs?

Say, around role models for, say, children?

Young girl watches the Tour, notices the only women on the screen are there to be pretty. Young boy things women are only there to be pretty.

That's worth the trade off?

Agree - the fact they're are universally referred to as 'Podium Girls' shows how outdated the idea is, no matter what their other duties. If we're going to have young attractive people in sponsor colours have 1 of each - 1 male & 1 female.

One minor point though - the Tour's head on course Doctor is female. She's a demon at hanging out the side of that white convertible.

lettingthedaysgoby

Vino'sGhost wrote:

You're right I am keen on them.

I like attractive women and them flanking the winner is part of the spectacle I enjoy.

I also discuss the quality of the tailoring that they wear. Sometimes the quality is questionable and sometimes a little too revealing for my own very modest taste. It's another aspect of the race that i enjoy. I also would have no interest in watching the presentation on the sponsor covered stage if the girls weren't there.

Equally when the girls have been replaced by children or competition winners I think thats great too but i wouldnt want it to be all I saw.

And after all else is said, the victor deserves his spoils.....

1972 called, it wants you back.

blazing_saddles

lettingthedaysgoby wrote:

1972 called, it wants you back.

It wants that joke back, too.

tangled_metal

RichN95 wrote:

Tangled Metal wrote:

Is the rights of the few women doing these anachronistic, gender / looks based, "exciting" jobs worth overriding the rights of the majority of women who suffers at the constant drip feeding of sexism, chauvinism and sexual assault/harassment at levels ranging from objectification through to Harvey Weinstein (according to the widely reported allegations if true)?

Simple question but I suspect supporters of bikini clad female objects at male sporting events don't understand or recognise the issues within that question. Keep on dragging your knuckles guys one day the modern world will drag you into it's reach!

Firstly good looking women doing PR jobs is not the reason for Harvey Weinstein etc, Harvey Weinstein is. The blame for pervy men is 100% on the pervy men.

I highlighted the rest of the comment referring to Weinstein in bold to clarify the point that it's a drip feed of objectification of women on day to day life that's the issue. It's a range of behaviours that start at the sexism / chauvinism end such as the wolf whistle and ends at the Weinstein end. The podium girls only a part of this issue. It is a part that could readily be ended.

I'm not equating use of podium girls to the types of abuse Weinstein it's accused of. I'm just saying it is all part of the same problem. At should be tackling all ends of the spectrum.

RichN95.

Tangled Metal wrote:

I highlighted the rest of the comment referring to Weinstein in bold to clarify the point that it's a drip feed of objectification of women on day to day life that's the issue. It's a range of behaviours that start at the sexism / chauvinism end such as the wolf whistle and ends at the Weinstein end. The podium girls only a part of this issue. It is a part that could readily be ended.

But who is objectifying them? If they are wearing bikinis or hotpants - then that's objectification and unacceptable. But at the Tour they are wearing appropriate attire and going about doing a proper job, which somebody has to do, and work hard at it. And if you are representing a company whoever it is needs to present a positive image so looking right is important.

It seems to me that those most opposed to their presence are those that are most likely to demean and belittle the job that they do.

inseine

And if you are representing a company whoever it is needs to present a positive image so looking right is important.

So not 'looking right' includes not being over 30, being short, being overweight, being a man, being disabled? Next thing you know it's having small breasts or being the wrong colour or whatever the peccadilloes of the person who decides. Thin end of the wedge.

RichN95.

inseine wrote:

So not 'looking right' includes not being over 30, being short, being overweight, being a man,

Well, I'm all of these things and I should be the public face of anything. I'm a pretty lousy public face of me. And look at TV - how many overweight, bald men are there presenting TV? Image matters.

And as for being over 30, the two yellow jersey hostesses in 2017 are in their thirties

DeVlaeminck

I would prefer it if we had podium people rather than restricting it to women. Being considered attractive is a big part of the job, being female is a requirement, it does give the message that a woman's role is to stand there and look pretty.

I'm not in the taliban, I'm not going to pretend nobody should look at another person purely in terms of how attractive they are but why not have mixed sex pairs working together, that way there is something for everybody.

kingstongraham

RichN95 wrote:

inseine wrote:

So not 'looking right' includes not being over 30, being short, being overweight, being a man,

Well, I'm all of these things and I should be the public face of anything. I'm a pretty lousy public face of me. And look at TV - how many overweight, bald men are there presenting TV? Image matters.

And as for being over 30, the two yellow jersey hostesses in 2017 are in their thirties

Gregg Wallace, Dr Phil and Hank Kingsley. Tom Kerridge has let himself down lately

dish_dash

RichN95 wrote:

inseine wrote:

So not 'looking right' includes not being over 30, being short, being overweight, being a man,

Well, I'm all of these things and I should be the public face of anything. I'm a pretty lousy public face of me. And look at TV - how many overweight, bald men are there presenting TV? Image matters.

And as for being over 30, the two yellow jersey hostesses in 2017 are in their thirties

RichN95.

He's neither fat not bald

tangled_metal

If there's no issue with sexism and chauvinism with the TdF podium presenting staff then why are they always women?

If there was never even a little hint of chauvinism and objectivisation then there would sooner or later be a man doing it. I've yet to see any man so that role at the TdF. Why are women the best for the job?

blazing_saddles

RichN95 wrote:

He's neither fat not bald

But he is smartly attired.

kingstongraham

RichN95 wrote:

He's neither fat not bald

You said overweight. He's also doesn't present a TV show any more, though.

I missed out Andrew Neil.

rick_chasey

Dr Phil

blazing_saddles

KingstonGraham wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

He's neither fat not bald

You said overweight. He's also doesn't present a TV show any more, though.

I missed out Andrew Neil.

Further to the tv presenter theme, I noticed the other day that 'Rip off Britain' is presented by three, very mature women.
Do folks think this also constitute both sexism and ageism, or is that OK?

kingstongraham

Blazing Saddles wrote:

KingstonGraham wrote:

RichN95 wrote:

He's neither fat not bald

You said overweight. He's also doesn't present a TV show any more, though.

I missed out Andrew Neil.

Further to the tv presenter theme, I noticed the other day that 'Rip off Britain' is presented by three, very mature women.
Do folks think this also constitute both sexism and ageism, or is that OK?

Dominic Littlewood.