C+ and Gurls

[Lizzie]

I've just written to Cyling Plus mag for a bit of a rant.
Since the new look magazine came out, women's cycling has all but disappeared from the radar.

This month there are, for men, tests on:

21 jerseys,

6 cycling caps

16 pairs of sunglasses

5 other items of men's clothing and shoes.
 
By contrast, there are, in total, 4 women's jerseys on test.

I am very cross 

Any other gurl readers similarly irritated?

[Charlotte]

One of the many reasons I don't bother buying C+ any more.

I prefer "Cycle" instead 

[Lizzie]

I'm certainly not going to be buying another subscription (also noting that the offer for new subscibers was a free jersey...men's only... )

Not heard of 'Cycle' Charlotte, ... off to do a little search 

[Polar Bear]

CTC mag ...

[Lizzie]

Ahhh...That 'Cycle'...better renew my subs to CTC instead of C+,  I think.

[Charlotte]

Shameless plug 

[JT]

The lack of female content in C+ could be down to a lack of contributors. Until recently most of it was by Cara Coolbaugh but she's gone home to the US.

[Lizzie]

 I'm not sure that would really be a credible excuse, JT, and, anyway I'd happily volunteer (I'd have to insist a body double for photos though )

[Polar Bear]

I volunteer.  I bet my body looks double that of yours     

[rogerzilla]

Did someone mention twins? 

[JT]

I'm not sure that would really be a credible excuse, JT, and, anyway I'd happily volunteer (I'd have to insist a body double for photos though )

It's not a credible excuse at all, I agree. But it could just be a temporary blip until they find a replacement.

There aren't that many people around (of either sex) that can test and review kit authoritatively and then write about it well afterwards. Throw in having to model clothing as well and I bet there aren't that many candidates.

[rogerzilla]

The simultaneous benefit and curse of DTP was that it suddenly became possible to produce a magazine with three or four people.  More magazines, yes.  More variety from one issue to the next, no.

C+ used to have Paul Vincent on the cover of practically every issue, then there's the lazy "awards" issue every year and the repetition of other articles.  I suppose it's OK if you're just getting into cycling and you only read it for a year or two, but it gets very same-y after that.

[Rollo]

Are cycling caps and sunglasses gender-specific?

[Dave]

Sunglasses are (well, sort of). A lot of companies have separate mens and womens ranges. Nothing stopping a woman wearing 'mens' glasses or vice versa (but you may have to deal with 'why are you wearing <the other gender's> design?' questions...

[FatBloke]

I reckon wimmin are over-represented!!

From the YACF stats page:-

Average registrations per day: 9.04
Average posts per day: 832.88
Average topics per day: 50.96
Total Boards: 57
Latest Member: Madcow
Average online per day: 98.96
Male to Female Ratio: 9.4:1

Nuff said!!   

[Paul]

There aren't that many people around (of either sex) that can test and review kit authoritatively and then write about it well afterwards. Throw in having to model clothing as well and I bet there aren't that many candidates.

I wonder how hard they look for such people. Has anyone seen an ad in, say, C+ for such a person?

[Malandro]

I think a lot of magazines today are more about selling advertising than anything else with middle of the road reporting therefore the norm.  This probably means having as many gender non-specific articles as they can get away with and the recycling of old content as standard.  They are most interested in new readers not existing ones.   

Its not just C+.  Runners World is very repetitive after a years reading.  Every issue blatantly has an air-brushed sexy model on the cover saying "Buy this mag and you too could look like me..."

 

[Lizzie]

Are cycling caps and sunglasses gender-specific?

I'm sure most women have much smaller heads than men (except me, that is, who has a head the size of a well inflated medicine ball )and, even if the caps are not perceived as gender specific, the photos were all of a man (quite a nice looking one, mind you  )

[Lizzie]

It does get very same-y, after a while, I agree - but I still like it 

Just had a reply from the editor:

"Liz

Thanks for your email, and you're quite right  - we have under-represented female cyclists in our last couple of tests. It's something that I've told the testing team to address, so future tests that require gender specific thought will be better balanced. I hope that this addresses your concerns.

All the best

Rob"

A quick response, I must admit.

[fred the great]

Ah yes C+. They lost my custom when they banned me from the Forum, never explained why, re-instated me, no apology and unofficially told me the Boss was too busy to apologise.

Strange but I was also too busy to take out any further subscriptions and never will again

[bobb]

Although I would like to see more women in cycling - isn't it a simple fact that many women are just not interested? Go on any ride and you'll always see many more men. To be honest, I would personally much prefer to ride with women rather than a bunch of sweaty blokes! But I can't change what people of whatever gender like to do.

My mother likes to go on quilting forums. And go and meet other people who like to make quilts. I would imagine 99.999999% of all the people she meets are middle aged women.

I say "More men for quilting!!!" 

[scott]

I suppose it's OK if you're just getting into cycling and you only read it for a year or two, but it gets very same-y after that.

Lots of magazines appear to cycle (sorry) through content like that--especially equipment-focused magazines for photography, cycling, etc. My guess is that they make more money off of beginners looking to buy their way into something than they do from experienced, knowledgeable people looking for a good read.

That's one of the reasons I was glad to get out of magazine work several years ago.* Not that I would quibble if handed an offer to work at someplace like the Atlantic Monthly (not gonna happen).

* Another was that I worked in travel/outdoor publications (a kind name, in some cases), and could foresee a long career in articles titled "30 Virgin Wildernesses" or "25 U nknown Trails." Well, not anymore, now that 100,000 more people know about them! 

[Really Ancien]

I was in Borders in Preston the other day, they had a wide variety of Cycling magazines, some from the USA. Triathlete caught my eye, that seemed to have a very high percentage of female content. It was the swimsuit issue, it was very heartening to see a magazine taking the issue of female specific athletic clothing so seriously and covering the subject in real depth.

Damon.

[scott]

covering the subject in real depth.

From recent experience with American outdoor/sports magazine with women on the cover, I'd say that the subject is often barely covered at all.

"Outside" got reamed for that--attracting readers with skimpily-clad models--by a bunch of readers several years ago, but appears to have returned to form. (I suppose now more of the cover models are actual athletes, but the fact that they're in bikinis tend to take away from the serious of the presentation.) Oh, well, I only ever bought it for the articles.

No, really--once David Quammen left, there was no point anymore.

[Jaded]

I used to buy C+ occasionally as my cycling magazine of choice. Similarly Amateur Photographer as my photography mag of choice.

The C+ forum stupidity led me to vow never to buy it again and the AP Forum mod cabal led me to vow never to buy AP again. There are other magazines out there that I'd rather have my money. Female swimsuit editions or not!