Author Topic: Women-only audaxes  (Read 26876 times)

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #75 on: 19 May, 2021, 03:00:12 pm »
Quote
I suspect it's more like nursing or primary teaching (with men a minority who are both regarded with suspicion and disproportionately rise to positions of authority) than sport.
It's not really a sport thing though? It's more that suspicion as you say (from those already doing and from the outside*) and the lack of a way in, the lack of seeing yourself there already. It applies to sport, hobbies, careers, even places to live.

*Which could be in mutually contradictory ways.
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

arabella

  • عربللا
  • onwendeð wyrda gesceaft weoruld under heofonum
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #76 on: 19 May, 2021, 03:34:44 pm »
That's just plain bad manners.  (Offering advice un-asked for.)  The sexism is in your mind.

No it isn't (in my mind).  It's yet another of the thousand cuts by which we women are all dying, as described earlier by QG.  I might be able to put a couple of occurrences of such things as bad manners, but when it's a regular stream then yes, it is sexism.  See the tech version explained over here: http://www.stemwomen.net/kristin-milton-death-by-thousand-cuts/

which is a good example of why there is, even now, a need to explain what life is like as a cycling woman "for the benefit of any men reading who don't have firsthand experience the cycling world as a woman"  [can't find original quote from above to attribute, sorry]
[also applies across other male dominated areas such as IT]


You personally might not be (I can't find a quote) but by telling people that if they "are not part of the solution they are part of the problem" or something along those lines, that accusation makes it at least partly about them.
If you are going to accuse people of being sexist when they haven't actually done anything sexist then it is about them because they are naturally going to take exception to that accusation.
are you familiar with the victim - bully - bystander  - defender model?  apply a modified version to the scenario we have here.  Ask yourself which of those 4 roles would be saying what you are saying etc.
Any fool can admire a mountain.  It takes real discernment to appreciate the fens.

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #77 on: 19 May, 2021, 04:01:27 pm »
Ben was one of the passers by in the Good Samaritan story. He’s currently suing the publisher for besmirching his good name.

Ben T

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #78 on: 19 May, 2021, 05:21:56 pm »
are you familiar with the victim - bully - bystander  - defender model?  apply a modified version to the scenario we have here.  Ask yourself which of those 4 roles would be saying what you are saying etc.

Not overly but I can imagine what it means. That if someone witnesses the victim of an ~ism that the right thing to do is to stick up for the victim not to just stand by and let it happen?
I detect an implication that anyone who isn't in the victim role can't possibly be in the defender role, or is automatically assumed not to be. If  I detect wrong then sorry. But that's how it sounds.

ravenbait

  • Someone's imaginary friend
  • No, RB3, you can't have more tupperware.
    • Someone's imaginary friend
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #79 on: 19 May, 2021, 05:38:00 pm »
are you familiar with the victim - bully - bystander  - defender model?  apply a modified version to the scenario we have here.  Ask yourself which of those 4 roles would be saying what you are saying etc.

Not overly but I can imagine what it means. That if someone witnesses the victim of an ~ism that the right thing to do is to stick up for the victim not to just stand by and let it happen?
I detect an implication that anyone who isn't in the victim role can't possibly be in the defender role, or is automatically assumed not to be. If  I detect wrong then sorry. But that's how it sounds.

I would genuinely like to know how you arrive at that conclusion.

Victim: someone who is being targeted by a bully.

Bully: someone who is being mean to another person, the victim.

Bystander: someone who observes the bully being mean to the victim, but does nothing about it.

Defender: someone who observes the bully being mean to the victim, and steps in to help the victim/stop the bully.

I am not familiar with the model but that is my inference about what these terms mean. "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem," means that if you are in a role other than the Victim, and it's not Defender, then you are part of the problem. In other words, not being a bully is not enough. Not exhibiting sexist behaviour is not enough. You also have to challenge sexist behaviour in others, because the kinds of men who exhibit sexist behaviours don't change when challenged by women.

If a woman is on a bike ride with 50 men, and all 50 of them are sexist/exhibit sexist behaviour, that is a huge problem.

If a women is on a bike ride with 50 men and only one of them is sexist/exhibits sexist behaviour, and the other 49 do nothing about it, therefore tacitly accepting that behaviour as appropriate for their peer group, that is also a problem.

I don't think I can be any clearer than that.

Sam
https://ravenbait.com
"Created something? Hah! But that would be irresponsible! And unethical! I would never, ever make... more than one."

quixoticgeek

  • Mostly Harmless
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #80 on: 19 May, 2021, 06:20:34 pm »
The unpleasant bike shopping experience and non female friendly bike fit would affect female triathletes too but does not seem to deter them as much.


And it does, but generally you're on the bike for less time, so it's less of a problem if it doesn't fit so great.

Quote
I did think about what people have said about equality of events and media coverage. It is true professional triathlon events are on same day, same distance and equal tv coverage. The most exciting to watch is the mixed super sprint relay which hopefully GB should win at Tokyo, but I am not convinced many people see tri on tv.

I've never watched Triathlon on TV except for a couple of GCN documentaries.

^^^^ This (speaking as a non-female humanoid). Although there are also quite a few male cyclos for whom the most essential part of the repair kit is the mobile phone to ring the wife/partner to be rescued when they break down! (and quite a few ladies who are very competent fixing their bikes when they need to, even following instructions when it's the first time - three of them happen to be my daughters!)

Yep, there are a lot of people who rely on phoning someone if their bike breaks. And generally if you have someone willing to help, there's nothing intrinsically harmful in that. Unfortunately not everyone is lucky enough for that. If I have a problem on my bike, there is one person and only one person who is getting me out of that, Me. Largely because so few of my friends have cars.

This is going to sound really petty, but you may want to think about the "non-female humanoid" description. Within TERF's there's a dog whistle term used by many which is "Adult human female". When you see that in someone's Bio on social media, they are a TERF. I'm sure you are not one, and I'm sure you don't want to be accidentally tarred with the brush of such things. But I digress

Any men, or just men guilty of sexism?
Do I get to escape your scorn by not doing sexist behaviour, or am I always going to be a problem simply by being male?
I read through your list of sexist behaviours thinking "well I don't do that", "nor that", "I don't do that either".
I get that the idea behind a women only audax might be simply that the only way to eliminate sexist men might be to eliminate all men, with the well-meaning intention of having a sexism-free event, but I think the point that guilt should stem from "doing" not from "being" needs to be made. My hope is that you accept that.

So earlier I made a short reply to this post. It was flippant, and rushed, as I was working and didn't have time for a full essay. Now you can have the essay.

When ever there is a big media stink because some man has done something horrible (Sarah Everard being a recent case), women step forward to share their similar experiences. A collective mourning and sharing of trauma. And then the MRAs come forward. People start replying #NotAllMen. And yes, it is true. Not all men are rapists. Not all men are murders, not all men are sexist shitbags. But, you know what, there's a fucking huge number of them that are. It's so fucking common there's a wikipedia page for it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NotAllMen

I should probably declare at this point. I am not anti men. Hell some of my best friends are men*. I've even been engaged to a man. The problem is. You know all those micro aggressions and shit experiences I detailed up thread? All of them are from men. I don't want to tar a whole gender with a bloody great big brush, but when you get to my age, and you have spent your life on the receiving end of shit behaviour that is universally from one group, you get pretty fucking jaded.

How do I know that the men who turn up to an event are going to be nice? How do I know that they aren't going to be sexist? Cos right up to the moment it happens, they appear like normal nice people. So given the option of an event that is just women, I'll take it. I'll feel safer. I'll feel more relaxed.

The experiences I detailed above are just those I've had in the context of cycling. It's important to remember that women are getting just as much crap in their every day lives. I recommend every man here go have a long read of the every day sexism project. See what it is we have to put up with every fucking day.

https://everydaysexism.com/

When they try to tell you how to fix a mechanical, even tho you are a perfectly competent mechanic who built the bike you're riding, as well as doing the occasional shift in a bike shop.

That's just plain bad manners.  (Offering advice un-asked for.)  The sexism is in your mind.

Yes it is bad manners.

But you know what "It's all in your mind". There's a term for that. Gaslighting (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaslighting). Saying "You're imagining it", or "you're the one making it sexist". That doesn't reassure, that doesn't make women feel welcome. That pushes away. Cos when you hear it enough, you start to believe it. If it is all in my mind, maybe the solution is for me to remove myself from the public space. I'll just stay at home. Won't be a problem there.

I have a lot of respect for you as a person. I am really disappointed to see this comment from you.

Quote
An all-female event (in a context such as this where segregation is not the norm) seems discriminatory to me, and, if it were an Audax UK event, would contravene the Regulations (8.2 "AUK events are open to all cyclists ...")

Yep. It's an interesting one within law too in many places. Cos ultimately positive discrimination is still discrimination. It's a really tough line to navigate.


So do you have a problem with that then? It is all men, then, as far as you're concerned? OK. As long as we know where we stand.  ::-)

Until proven that I can trust them. Yes. Because I can't tell, when the strange man walks up to me, is he just going to ask for directions? or is he about to want something more. Your hands form a fist. The fight or flight response is triggered. You're looking for the exits. Where is safe, what can I do. Because, YOU DO NOT KNOW. Hollywood and TV would have us believe that you can tell what a sexist shit looks like, you can spot them. But you know what. The only way you know that the person who is approaching you isn't going to attack you, is because you have walked away from the encounter unscathed.

https://www.upworthy.com/man-hitting-on-teen-shows-what-women-experience

This video did the rounds recently. She thought the guy wanted to take the chair away, he sits down, interrupts her life, and starts hitting on her. This is not a one off, many women experience it. I've had it, on trains, in cafes, in bars.

I am really sorry now that I started this thread. That is pretty rare.

Is it better to split the original announcement from the resulting discussion or lock it or delete it or what?

I'm sorry that women sharing their experiences makes you feel bad.

Perhaps we can split it off to POBI...

nah, sorry, don't need to bother from my perspective, sorry to drag it off line. Just fell into the trap as I often do of thinking I could get somewhere or get something across .... if QG replies and I feel the need to come back on it I'll do it via PM, was actually in two minds whether to anyway.

yeah, about that. Don't. It's fucking creepy. Don't PM. Either reply in the thread, or keep your thoughts to yourself.

I'd imagine some of the women most attracted to the idea of a women-only cycling event would be from conservative Muslim, Hindu or "similar" (this list is far from exhaustive) backgrounds, making it a good way to give a taste of long-distance cycling to people who feel excluded on a number of fronts.


Possibly, there is a women of colour cycling group, which is rather awesome. It was great to see that in Rapha's women's event thing a few months back they had a Hijab wearing woman in the mix. For a lot of people seeing someone who looks like them doing something can be all it takes to realise that maybe they can play too.

Quote
I also tried to imagine what would happen if, say, French Tandem, BenT and I wanted to start playing netball or maybe get into flower arranging.
Quote
the men's game is not recognised by the International Netball Federation (INF), and there is no England national seven-a-side team.

Time to start one... Sexism works both ways.

This reminds me a little of the Gymphobics women only gyms that have popped up in a number of places around here. My initial response was ‘is that actually legal?’ and the associated male bollox baggage, through to an understanding of why they exist. As a middle aged white educated male I gave up worrying about what others thought about my body a long time ago, but I can understand why women would want to avoid the letching and judgement of a gym full of testosteroned up blokes. I don’t think we’re nearly as discreet as we think we are in either behaviour. And that’s just the passive behaviours, there are far too many men who think it ok to show a ‘little lady’ how she should do something ‘properly’.

Yep, and it's even worse for fat women. I've seen and heard far to many people saying things like "Ugh, why are there fat people at the gym?"... If I actually used gym's, I would look at a women's only one.



My bold. What's stopping you? Amsterdam is not that far from Paris! If we are still restricted it will be postponed, not cancelled. You don't even have to be up to speed, the details (at least in french) say that the BRM delay is purely notional, if you take longer no-one will care provided you have a nice day out!

Simply: I don't have the spoons. My whole life right now is focused on a ride I'm doing in July from Brest to Greece. That is my focus.

Quote

For the rest of this post as a straight, white (relatively) able-bodied man (for which I have my parents to thank, not even my choice) and a father (of girls) so at the top of the sexist familial hierarchy I am left wondering what I am meant to do. Do I give up riding with women as "compagnons of fortune" on brevets montagnards (the men generally climb much too quick for me, most women ditto!)? Am I no longer permitted to stop and offer assistance to a cyclist if it's the wrong sex? Am I even banned from going into a cycle shop with one of my daughters in case she asks me for advice (or just an opinion)? Where does it all stop? I can't even ask my wife for advice, she thinks that the sofa and the internal combustion engine are God's gifts and the bicycle is the work of Stan and I know where to put it! Only thing left to do - go for a ride, alone!

I believe it's been said else where, but put simply: Just don't be a dick. If you see someone being a dick, call it out. Men get away with being shits because men let them get away with it. Men aren't scared that I'll tell them to fuck off when they direct a micro aggression at me. But if the man next to me calls them out, that puts the fear in them.

There's such a thing as being a good ally. And the best thing every man can do, is be a good ally. If men are unsure what to do, Julie S Lalonde is doing free online bystander intervention courses at the moment. They take an hour, maybe something can be learned.

I am left wondering what I am meant to do.

Don't be a dick.

Yep, That's pretty much it.


You personally might not be (I can't find a quote) but by telling people that if they "are not part of the solution they are part of the problem" or something along those lines, that accusation makes it at least partly about them.
If you are going to accuse people of being sexist when they haven't actually done anything sexist then it is about them because they are naturally going to take exception to that accusation.

Then perhaps try to do something about the men it is about... Be a good ally, don't be a dick. The bar is low.


That does not surprise me at all. Flower arranging, like make up and clothes design, is precisely the kind of thing which is mostly done by women at an amateur level but where the professionals would be men. Cooking is no longer quite the cannonical example of this, as it seems less and less uncommon for men to cook at home.

There's a strong history of this sort of thing. Traditionally weaving was a woman's job, it was slow, and laborious and done on a warp weighted loom. Then the horizontal two bar loom was invented, and productivity increased, at this point it became possible for one person to make enough cloth to support a whole family, and thus weaving changed from being a woman's job, to being a mans.


I am not familiar with the model but that is my inference about what these terms mean. "If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem," means that if you are in a role other than the Victim, and it's not Defender, then you are part of the problem. In other words, not being a bully is not enough. Not exhibiting sexist behaviour is not enough. You also have to challenge sexist behaviour in others, because the kinds of men who exhibit sexist behaviours don't change when challenged by women.

If a woman is on a bike ride with 50 men, and all 50 of them are sexist/exhibit sexist behaviour, that is a huge problem.

If a women is on a bike ride with 50 men and only one of them is sexist/exhibits sexist behaviour, and the other 49 do nothing about it, therefore tacitly accepting that behaviour as appropriate for their peer group, that is also a problem.

I don't think I can be any clearer than that.

That's it. That's the message. What Ravenbait says. Every word of it. Nail. Head.

J



*Sorry, I had to say it...
--
Beer, bikes, and backpacking
http://b.42q.eu/

LittleWheelsandBig

  • Whimsy Rider
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #81 on: 19 May, 2021, 06:31:43 pm »
“I'm sorry that women sharing their experiences makes you feel bad.”

That isn’t the problem. I would have preferred that the announcement of something positive, the brevet itself, wasn’t drowned out by all the back and forth of people laying out and defending their positions and getting pissed off.
Wheel meet again, don't know where, don't know when...

Davef

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #82 on: 19 May, 2021, 06:39:56 pm »
If a women is on a bike ride with 50 men and only one of them is sexist/exhibits sexist behaviour, and the other 49 do nothing about it, therefore tacitly accepting that behaviour as appropriate for their peer group, that is also a problem.
One of the 49 other men steps up end expels the errant male. In assuming the woman needed a man to fight her battles he has been rather sexist.

A woman is now on a bike ride with 49 men and one of them has exhibited sexist behaviour...

Cudzoziemiec

  • Ride adventurously and stop for a brew.
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #83 on: 19 May, 2021, 06:45:29 pm »
I'd imagine some of the women most attracted to the idea of a women-only cycling event would be from conservative Muslim, Hindu or "similar" (this list is far from exhaustive) backgrounds, making it a good way to give a taste of long-distance cycling to people who feel excluded on a number of fronts.


Possibly, there is a women of colour cycling group, which is rather awesome. It was great to see that in Rapha's women's event thing a few months back they had a Hijab wearing woman in the mix. For a lot of people seeing someone who looks like them doing something can be all it takes to realise that maybe they can play too.
I don't know that group* but I do know of Cycle Sisters, which AIUI was formed as the women's counterpart to Brothers on Bikes. But whereas BoB is quite sporty (I vaguely know their SW organiser, he's a keen audaxer as it happens) Cycle Sisters seems to be about getting women on bikes in the first place. Which I think kind of makes the point (again) of why this thread exists (and yeah they could've called it Sisters on Bikes but thank goodness they didn't!)

Quote
Quote
I also tried to imagine what would happen if, say, French Tandem, BenT and I wanted to start playing netball or maybe get into flower arranging.
Quote
the men's game is not recognised by the International Netball Federation (INF), and there is no England national seven-a-side team.

Time to start one... Sexism works both ways.
Precisely. It would have to be in the style of "Netball Brothers" rather than "Brothers play Netball" cos...

*Ed: Presumably you're thinking of Black Cyclists Network?
Riding a concrete path through the nebulous and chaotic future.

Davef

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #84 on: 19 May, 2021, 07:27:24 pm »
Would it have to be 100% female to work ? If it was 90% or 95% that would surely work too. You are going to encounter males in cafe stops etc.it might be an experience for the minority non female entrants too.

A very high percentage (even 100%) could be achieved by just picking an event and grabbing lots of places. This would not breach rule 27.4b on the international convention on audax discrimination.

Such an approach would also be far less effort than organising a specific event and now would be the time to do it as there is a cap on rider numbers.

arabella

  • عربللا
  • onwendeð wyrda gesceaft weoruld under heofonum
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #85 on: 19 May, 2021, 07:54:30 pm »
If a women is on a bike ride with 50 men and only one of them is sexist/exhibits sexist behaviour, and the other 49 do nothing about it, therefore tacitly accepting that behaviour as appropriate for their peer group, that is also a problem.
One of the 49 other men steps up end expels the errant male. In assuming the woman needed a man to fight her battles he has been rather sexist.

A woman is now on a bike ride with 49 men and one of them has exhibited sexist behaviour...
My added bold

You seem to be assuming that the woman hasn't said anything.  Supposing your assumption is correct - why might that be?  (Clue: no-one ever listens)
But perhaps she has said something, how seriously is the sexist going to take her do you think? (Clue: see: sexist) So note:

Men aren't scared that I'll tell them to fuck off when they direct a micro aggression at me. But if the man next to me calls them out, that puts the fear in them.

There are far too many examples of women not being listened to/taken seriously.  It would be nice if that wasn't the case.  Until then, we need our allies to reinforce our message with a "not cool bro" type of thing.
Any fool can admire a mountain.  It takes real discernment to appreciate the fens.

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #86 on: 19 May, 2021, 08:31:44 pm »


Men aren't scared that I'll tell them to fuck off when they direct a micro aggression at me. But if the man next to me calls them out, that puts the fear in them.

I hate to have to disillusion you but I could call anyone out, they probably pay less attention to me than to you. I'm just too polite and soft (and I don't particularly want that to change, I don't care for the alternative!)

Davef

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #87 on: 19 May, 2021, 10:53:24 pm »
If a women is on a bike ride with 50 men and only one of them is sexist/exhibits sexist behaviour, and the other 49 do nothing about it, therefore tacitly accepting that behaviour as appropriate for their peer group, that is also a problem.
One of the 49 other men steps up end expels the errant male. In assuming the woman needed a man to fight her battles he has been rather sexist.

A woman is now on a bike ride with 49 men and one of them has exhibited sexist behaviour...
My added bold

You seem to be assuming that the woman hasn't said anything.  Supposing your assumption is correct - why might that be?  (Clue: no-one ever listens)
But perhaps she has said something, how seriously is the sexist going to take her do you think? (Clue: see: sexist)

I am making no such assumption. Whether or not the victim has decided to take no action or has done something the second offender has decided to step up.

I shall christen* this the “bystander dilemma”. If you do nothing you are tacitly condoning the initial crime, if you come to the aid of the victim you are victimising them** further by assuming they need help.

I feel this is sufficient proof that all men are necessarily sexist, but the corollary is all women are sexist too. Finally some equality.

* other religions are available.
** other pronouns are available

Ben T

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #88 on: 19 May, 2021, 11:32:19 pm »
.
Quote
Don't [pm]. It's fucking creepy. Don't PM. Either reply in the thread, or keep your thoughts to yourself.

It’s only in a probably futile effort to have a discussion that isn’t polluted by the incessant virtue signalling.

Had a think and still cant work out why it’s “creepy”. You only want to have a discussion in an open forum so if it gets nasty the others can “save” you? Save you from .... what.... being spammed? its the internet you tool you can just block  ::-)

Quote
I should probably declare at this point. I am not anti men.

Well you could have fooled me.




Quote
...You know all those micro aggressions and shit experiences I detailed up thread? All of them are from men. I don't want to tar a whole gender with a bloody great big brush, but when you get to my age, and you have spent your life on the receiving end of shit behaviour that is universally from one group, you get pretty fucking jaded.

I think you’re far, far, far too angry for me to even know where to begin

Forgetting about men for a minute, have you stopped to think what percentage of women do you think are more angry than you?  ???

Ben T

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #89 on: 19 May, 2021, 11:42:10 pm »

If a women is on a bike ride with 50 men and only one of them is sexist/exhibits sexist behaviour, and the other 49 do nothing about it, therefore tacitly accepting that behaviour as appropriate for their peer group, that is also a problem.


yes but at least 47 or 48 are probably either at least a km ahead or a km behind, so they’re not going to necessarily see it.   ::-)


Precisely. It would have to be in the style of "Netball Brothers" rather than "Brothers play Netball" cos...

I thought the term for “netball for men” was “basketball”?




 
If a women is on a bike ride with 50 men and only one of them is sexist/exhibits sexist behaviour, and the other 49 do nothing about it, therefore tacitly accepting that behaviour as appropriate for their peer group, that is also a problem.
One of the 49 other men steps up end expels the errant male. In assuming the woman needed a man to fight her battles he has been rather sexist.

A woman is now on a bike ride with 49 men and one of them has exhibited sexist behaviour...

total minefield  :D

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #90 on: 20 May, 2021, 12:08:59 am »
Does the panel think there's any hope of 'ordinary' audaxe(r)s learning from what women say they don't like about them and then changing accordingly? Because maybe it's not just the women that need to learn new skills and find out what more they're capable of...

As an occasional organiser, I would be interested to read about what women want from audaxes, and am open to learning.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #91 on: 20 May, 2021, 12:21:23 am »
You only want to have a discussion in an open forum so if it gets nasty the others can “save” you? Save you from .... what.... being spammed? its the internet you tool you can just block  ::-)

Maybe it’s so the bullying and patronising behaviour is out in the open for everyone to see.

Stop it, Ben, it’s really not on.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Karla

  • car(e) free
    • Lost Byway - around the world by bike
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #92 on: 20 May, 2021, 01:09:02 am »
If a women is on a bike ride with 50 men and only one of them is sexist/exhibits sexist behaviour, and the other 49 do nothing about it, therefore tacitly accepting that behaviour as appropriate for their peer group, that is also a problem.
One of the 49 other men steps up end expels the errant male. In assuming the woman needed a man to fight her battles he has been rather sexist.

A woman is now on a bike ride with 49 men and one of them has exhibited sexist behaviour...
My added bold

You seem to be assuming that the woman hasn't said anything.  Supposing your assumption is correct - why might that be?  (Clue: no-one ever listens)
But perhaps she has said something, how seriously is the sexist going to take her do you think? (Clue: see: sexist)

I am making no such assumption. Whether or not the victim has decided to take no action or has done something the second offender has decided to step up.

I shall christen* this the “bystander dilemma”. If you do nothing you are tacitly condoning the initial crime, if you come to the aid of the victim you are victimising them** further by assuming they need help.

It's already got a name: White Knight Syndrome.  If you try to help, you're a chauvanist white knight who wants to show how big his dick is by rescuing damsels in distress, but hey, at least you aren't a bad ally. 

I also love how the only person to have actively insulted women on this thread is QG ranting about TERFs.  With friends like these eh?

I hope ACP have a successful ride!

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #93 on: 20 May, 2021, 05:55:45 am »
About 6 years ago I was on an audax which had reached a huge climb in the Malverns. I stopped half way up to wait for my riding partner who was some way back. Some obese cunt on a £6k bike and fully testing the stretching capacities of his  full pro team lycra strip shouted "Dig in!" at me as he sweated and panted his way past. 6 years later and I still feel annoyance when I think about it.*

I would have thought the likelihood for a woman encountering  an annoying twat on an audax was high enough for it to happen 6 times a ride, rather than once in 6 years.

Similarly, I can fully understand why black people may want to hang out with other black people. They just don't want to have to listen to your shit whilst trying to enjoy themselves.

*Unfortunately for Mr Blobby  I was on a superlight carbon fixed gear (hence being further up the hill from riding partner). I took Blobby's advice and dug in 😈.


Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #94 on: 20 May, 2021, 06:44:42 am »
.
Quote
Don't [pm]. It's fucking creepy. Don't PM. Either reply in the thread, or keep your thoughts to yourself.

It’s only in a probably futile effort to have a discussion that isn’t polluted by the incessant virtue signalling.

Had a think and still cant work out why it’s “creepy”. You only want to have a discussion in an open forum so if it gets nasty the others can “save” you? Save you from .... what.... being spammed? its the internet you tool you can just block  ::-)

Quote
I should probably declare at this point. I am not anti men.

Well you could have fooled me.




Quote
...You know all those micro aggressions and shit experiences I detailed up thread? All of them are from men. I don't want to tar a whole gender with a bloody great big brush, but when you get to my age, and you have spent your life on the receiving end of shit behaviour that is universally from one group, you get pretty fucking jaded.

I think you’re far, far, far too angry for me to even know where to begin

Forgetting about men for a minute, have you stopped to think what percentage of women do you think are more angry than you?  ???

I'm sure there is a syndrome where people have an almost complete inability to empathise with other people's life experience, a total lack of ability to listen to and put themselves in the shoes of someone who isn't them. In extreme cases a denial that  if others experiences are different to their own, that they can even be true.

I guess if you are afflicted by that syndrome then you would be unable to comprehend those who are able to transcend their own lived experience into that of another group, and acknowledge them. You would just regard concern, empathy and understanding as "virtue signalling".

Jaded

  • The Codfather
  • Formerly known as Jaded
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #95 on: 20 May, 2021, 06:59:06 am »
There’s being bonjed, and there’s being bonjed...
It is simpler than it looks.

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #96 on: 20 May, 2021, 07:42:59 am »
I'm sure there is a syndrome where people have an almost complete inability to empathise with other people's life experience, a total lack of ability to listen to and put themselves in the shoes of someone who isn't them. In extreme cases a denial that  if others experiences are different to their own, that they can even be true.

I guess if you are afflicted by that syndrome then you would be unable to comprehend those who are able to transcend their own lived experience into that of another group, and acknowledge them. You would just regard concern, empathy and understanding as "virtue signalling".

Another aspect of this syndrome appears to be denying that you are that kind of person while clearly exhibiting that kind of behaviour, and not even realise you're doing it.

That thing of denying and dismissing other people's lived experience is, I guess, very much part of the problem.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Ben T

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #97 on: 20 May, 2021, 08:08:23 am »
You only want to have a discussion in an open forum so if it gets nasty the others can “save” you? Save you from .... what.... being spammed? its the internet you tool you can just block  ::-)

Maybe it’s so the bullying and patronising behaviour is out in the open for everyone to see.

Stop it, Ben, it’s really not on.

Oh come on the woke bingo card’s nearly full now you only need somebody to squeeze in “you don’t get to” and “my truth” then it’ll be a full house  ::-)

citoyen

  • Occasionally rides a bike
Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #98 on: 20 May, 2021, 09:04:13 am »
Ben, to go back to the point where you blundered into this discussion:

This post is mostly for the benefit of any men reading.

Any men, or just men guilty of sexism?
Do I get to escape your scorn by not doing sexist behaviour, or am I always going to be a problem simply by being male?

Have you worked out yet why this is totally missing the point? It's not about accusing you personally of anything, it's about making all men more aware of the kind of problems women face every day, which aren't visible to you from your position of privilege.

Despite this being explained to you several times over, you're continuing with this aggressive, condescending posturing. If you're really not the kind of person this is about, I don't know why you feel so threatened by it. It's not a good look.
"The future's all yours, you lousy bicycles."

Re: Women-only audaxes
« Reply #99 on: 20 May, 2021, 10:38:18 am »
You only want to have a discussion in an open forum so if it gets nasty the others can “save” you? Save you from .... what.... being spammed? its the internet you tool you can just block  ::-)

Maybe it’s so the bullying and patronising behaviour is out in the open for everyone to see.

Stop it, Ben, it’s really not on.

Oh come on the woke bingo card’s nearly full now you only need somebody to squeeze in “you don’t get to” and “my truth” then it’ll be a full house  ::-)

Racism, sexism, disablism, ageism, or indeed any other form of discrimination (ie. anything that doesn't affect, Ben) doesn't actually exist, does it Ben.

It's just woke nonsense.