Women-only audaxes

[Cudzoziemiec]

Drivers are relatively nice to runners, they always stop when you're still several feet from the zebra. Of course you're only "holding them up" for a few seconds... Anyways, running is funning! You get to count the goats and then rest on a bench! (yeah, I'm as fast a runner as I am a cyclist)

[MsG]

I've been meaning to ask what the ratio is

About half the rides being offered currently on the website
https://www.fnrttc.org.uk/
Are led by women.
When i was chief steward i tried to have more women ride leaders but failed utterly. The current leadership has succeeded.
I'd also add, as a fat old man nearer 70 than to 60, that it's not only ladies who want to feel they're not going to be dropped and there is help at hand for mechanicals....

As a recent recruit to (a) cycling in general (5 years), (b) audax (2 years) and (c) FnRttC and one of the above mentioned leaders, I have been trying to encourage women to try one of the rides.  Mostly by posting in local groups, also the CUK women's FB group. And to most of the cyclists in general that I meet!
Many women (and men) are astonished at the riding that I do, it's nothing out of the ordinary in terms of audaxing context though.
The recent small ride I led had 4 women and 3 men riders.
I do most of my riding alone and TBH mostly it doesn't bother me. HoweverI don't ride at night on my own (apart from commutes and when split up from the main Friday group). One of my male friends has done longer audaxes in the past and described bivvying behind a bush by a bridge. I've read Emily Chappell and Juliana Buhring, the concept of going longer exploring appeals to me but I can't quite get past the vulnerability of having a kip.
Would a women-only audax encourage me to try longer audaxes? Possibly. I would want to know that it is definitely women only.

When I led my first overnighter last year, setting off to the meet point, it did suddenly occur to me that I was meeting several strange men to spend 12 hours riding with. I did know one of them already but it was an unsettling, passing thought. My partner was unaware of this and separately offered to come down to the meet point but I declined. Would any men worry about this?

[barakta]

I know a lot of women who run because you get more exercise done per hour of doing it which fits in with many women having less longer-chunks of free time around childcare etc.

To do the longer audaxy distances you do have to have a certain amount of fitness, especially if you don't have the biological benefits of testosterone which. Many women could do a one off 100 or 200 but don't have the free time before hand to do the regular cycling needed to get fit enough to do those things effectively.

Talking of which, our Charlotte who rarely posts here now, seems to be trying Running (with great hatred if her Strava posts are to go by - I've ditched FB so I don't see her hiliariously hating-running posts) due to time constraints. We know Charlotte was a confident audaxer in the past (although she'd almost certainly relate to much of the barriers raised here) but life changes... Priorities change... (And C is into motorbikes at the moment).

I think most men do have more capacity for leisure than most women. The research shows women still do the majority of childcare even when the men think they are doing equal amounts. It may not be overt, but covertly many women don't feel entitled to say to their childrens' father "righty, I'm gonna do all this cycling" and I know in some cases where men have got quite jealous when their female partner gets a hobby that takes time...

[Ruthie]

If anyone would like to hire the church building where I worship in Darlington as an Audax venue, the leadership team are more than happy to make it available. It’s £15 an hour to cover heating, lighting and use of the facility. It has the rear of the building turned over to chairs and tables, there’s a single toilet, a kitchen, water boiler, crockery and cutlery though in limited amounts. Someone from the leadership team would need to let you in and lick up when you’re finished.

*probably not Sundays!

[mattc]

No: I'm trying to politely tell another bloke (that's you, FYI) that he's talking bollocks.
I hope that's still allowed ...

Out of interest, what would you call it when a male poster on a thread about women's participation in cycling ignores all the posts by women countering his assertions with referenced sources, only participating to have a go at one of the other male posters?
I can't decide whether it's trolling or some subset of sexist behaviour or both.
Either way, it's not big and it's not clever, and its nowhere near shocking or edgy enough to give you edgelord status, so how about don't?

I've never heard of this crazy forum etiquette; you're saying that if several posts try to knock me down, I'm obliged to respond to them all? especially if there is a mix of genders, cos otherwise it's sexism? Nope, never heard of forums working like this. (reminds me of the ludicrous fora Paxmans we often see: "Answer the question!!!" "No, this isn't a court of law, sorry".) Equally I have no idea what "edgelord" status is - but I'm guessing it's not very positive?
This is a group discussion, yes? Hence no-one complained (rightly) when you attacked my response to another (male) poster e.g.https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=119307.msg2626878;topicseen#msg2626878 There isn't a strict call-response syntax we are all constrained to.
Anyway, I'm taking the time now to properly read your posts, and make some considered replies to them.

[Matt's repy to Flatus:] First you try to associate the behaviour with sexual assault and violence against women.
Then - getting a bit desperate now, perhaps - you put it on a level with racism!

It's similar in the sense that people who deny black people are treated differently because of institutional racism also exist. "They're not racist, they're just twats."
Your argument seems to fall along the same lines, so I can see the similarity. "You're not being subjected to sexism, love, these are what we men call 'rude people.' Don't you worry your silly little head about it, I'm sure they are rude to everyone."

I am very sorry about calling you love, and about the silly little head comment. It is terrible that a male posted it here.
What is even worse is that I don't even remember writing it! Christ what kind of sexist twat I must be! Do feel free to chop my typing fingers off

No. They are not. The very definition of "mansplaining" is a man refusing to accept a women has equal or more knowledge than the man doing the explaining. Men don't tend to pull this particularly irritating trick on their fellow men.

So let's get back to the definition game; one thing this thread shows is how important language can be (e.g. when causing offence), so I'm happy to continue this exploration.
I think you and Citoyen are creating a Joseph Heller / Kafka-esque joke on me. Apparently it's forbidden to debate the concept of mansplaining (if you are a man); despite much of sociology being a hotly debated and evolving field. WHY? I ask. Because it's part of the definition!!!
Ha ha ha - very good!

Sorry, but I'm happy to stick with what I posted. Your ridiculous comparisons leave me unmoved (except for making me smirk, I admit to that.)

So you're just gaslighting now, is that it? Or being a troll, maybe? It's hard to tell the difference sometimes.
Sam

This is an interesting one: my quoted reply was to a male poster. So whom am I gaslighting? And don't you think your reply will fuel the distracting bickering between the men that you said is such bad behaviour?
And will calling me a gaslighting wannabe edgelord help calm down the bickering over one small word which you feel is distracting from the main point of the thread? I can think of better ways you could have achieved that

[mattc]

Just so you know, it's mattc and Citoyen involved in the dispute.
I'm an innocent bystander caught in the crossfire. 

Oh rarely? Let's review:

... The fact that you have misread this so badly underlines the likelihood that in your initial post you were doing a #notallmen. You don't realise it because you don't take women's concerns with any seriousness at all, which is at the nub of this entire thread.

Seems like you want to insult me like a big boy, AND be one of the good guys not derailing the thread. I admire your cunning!

[Gattopardo]

When I led my first overnighter last year, setting off to the meet point, it did suddenly occur to me that I was meeting several strange men to spend 12 hours riding with. I did know one of them already but it was an unsettling, passing thought. My partner was unaware of this and separately offered to come down to the meet point but I declined. Would any men worry about this?

I would worry/anxious about meeting that number of new people.


Great avatar by the way.
 

[quixoticgeek]

I think most men do have more capacity for leisure than most women. The research shows women still do the majority of childcare even when the men think they are doing equal amounts. It may not be overt, but covertly many women don't feel entitled to say to their childrens' father "righty, I'm gonna do all this cycling" and I know in some cases where men have got quite jealous when their female partner gets a hobby that takes time...

Second parent (if applicable) :p

Sorry, a lesbian couple I know has just managed to successfully conceive, which has made me acutely aware of the language around parenting, complicated by the fact of Dutch and English language idiosyncrasies.

I did suggest they use the same terms as my friend with lesbian parents use of "Mum" and "spare mum". I didn't go down well...

J

[Hot Flatus]

Just so you know, it's mattc and Citoyen involved in the dispute.
I'm an innocent bystander caught in the crossfire. 

Oh rarely? Let's review:

... The fact that you have misread this so badly underlines the likelihood that in your initial post you were doing a #notallmen. You don't realise it because you don't take women's concerns with any seriousness at all, which is at the nub of this entire thread.

Seems like you want to insult me like a big boy, AND be one of the good guys not derailing the thread. I admire your cunning!

Different argument, mattc. You ascribed something to me that was somebody else's objection to you. That's the problem with being an edgelord shitposter, matt. It's hard to keep track of all the objections that come your way. 🤣

To be honest, I don't think you are showing enough commitment to this thread, matt. It's almost as if you aren't really paying attention and not really defending yourself. There was a time when you wouldn't let people walk all over you...

[mattc]

Silly me - I quoted your actual words. Who knew that you could find a way to misunderstand that?

[rafletcher]

I know a lot of women who run because you get more exercise done per hour of doing it which fits in with many women having less longer-chunks of free time around childcare etc.

To do the longer audaxy distances you do have to have a certain amount of fitness, especially if you don't have the biological benefits of testosterone which. Many women could do a one off 100 or 200 but don't have the free time before hand to do the regular cycling needed to get fit enough to do those things effectively.

Talking of which, our Charlotte who rarely posts here now, seems to be trying Running (with great hatred if her Strava posts are to go by - I've ditched FB so I don't see her hiliariously hating-running posts) due to time constraints. We know Charlotte was a confident audaxer in the past (although she'd almost certainly relate to much of the barriers raised here) but life changes... Priorities change... (And C is into motorbikes at the moment).

I think most men do have more capacity for leisure than most women. The research shows women still do the majority of childcare even when the men think they are doing equal amounts. It may not be overt, but covertly many women don't feel entitled to say to their childrens' father "righty, I'm gonna do all this cycling" and I know in some cases where men have got quite jealous when their female partner gets a hobby that takes time...

I also think (but being a man may be completely off-piste) that as well as being time-efficient, and less weather dependent (due mainly to shorter duration) running is more accessible equipment-wise. A decent pair of shoes, add some general fitness leggings and tops, and off you go. No mysteries around gearing, tyre sizes/types, saddles etc. etc.  And of course its self fulfilling that, as more women run, you’ll find more similar women to run with.

[quixoticgeek]

I also think (but being a man may be completely off-piste) that as well as being time-efficient, and less weather dependent (due mainly to shorter duration) running is more accessible equipment-wise. A decent pair of shoes, add some general fitness leggings and tops, and off you go. No mysteries around gearing, tyre sizes/types, saddles etc. etc.  And of course its self fulfilling that, as more women run, you’ll find more similar women to run with.

You've never brought a sports bra have you?

J

[grams]

People are scared of cars, and tend to think that a kerb will protect them.

That explains the popularity of segregated cycle infra.  I can't explain the popularity of running.   

Universal segregated running infras on most roads in built up areas and beyond.

[L CC]

I also think (but being a man may be completely off-piste) that as well as being time-efficient, and less weather dependent (due mainly to shorter duration) running is more accessible equipment-wise. A decent pair of shoes, add some general fitness leggings and tops, and off you go. No mysteries around gearing, tyre sizes/types, saddles etc. etc.  And of course its self fulfilling that, as more women run, you’ll find more similar women to run with.

You've never brought a sports bra have you?

J

It's cheaper to buy 6 sports bras that don't fit in the hope that one does, than 6 bicycles.

[Jasmine]

I know a lot of women who run because you get more exercise done per hour of doing it which fits in with many women having less longer-chunks of free time around childcare etc.

I also think (but being a man may be completely off-piste) that as well as being time-efficient, and less weather dependent (due mainly to shorter duration) running is more accessible equipment-wise. A decent pair of shoes, add some general fitness leggings and tops, and off you go. No mysteries around gearing, tyre sizes/types, saddles etc. etc.  And of course its self fulfilling that, as more women run, you’ll find more similar women to run with.

As a woman who has largely converted from being a cyclist to a runner, all of these things ring true for me. I don't have kids, but I find myself quite time constrained, so running is indeed more time efficient. It's less shit to run in the pissing rain (plus Welsh wind) than ride a bike. I can do it whilst exercising the dogs. You can't necessarily tell if people you see running are any good. It's totally acceptable to enter running races when you aren't very fast; generally people will be encouraging rather than disparaging. Interestingly, I'm more comfortable riding my bike in the dark than running (in the evening). I don't believe anyone will jump out of the bushes and push me off my bike as I ride past at 15mph*, whilst I do run in places after dark in the winter where the thought pops into my mind. 

Personally, I've found that the running community feels a lot more welcoming to women (and in general to be honest).


* I have had men lean out of a car window to slap me on the arse. More than once.

[MsG]

I also think (but being a man may be completely off-piste) that as well as being time-efficient, and less weather dependent (due mainly to shorter duration) running is more accessible equipment-wise. A decent pair of shoes, add some general fitness leggings and tops, and off you go. No mysteries around gearing, tyre sizes/types, saddles etc. etc.  And of course its self fulfilling that, as more women run, you’ll find more similar women to run with.

You've never brought a sports bra have you?

J

Ha! Another frustrating, expensive experience.
Also chafing is a thing so general fitness leggings not necessarily an easy one either.

Shall we add in 'cheeky' appraisals from men whilst running and just downright abuse. And is it safe to run alone if you're female? 🤔

Anyway I thought this thread was about getting more women in to audax via the possibility of women only events?

[quixoticgeek]

]It's cheaper to buy 6 sports bras that don't fit in the hope that one does, than 6 bicycles.

Upto a point. My last sports bra was €108. And while it fit ok in the shop. On a long bike ride doesn't. (Ingot it for Pave).

Once you get over a D, sports bras cease to be clothing they become engineering. When it comes to fitting a 38G rack into an item that will hold them in place when bouncing over cobbles, or running up the road, it is non trivial.

I went to a specialist sports bra seller. They have 98 different designs. 4 went big enough for me.

Sure it's cheaper than a bike, but actually the cost of my sports bra box equals my cheap bike in the basement.

J

[Kim]

I also think (but being a man may be completely off-piste) that as well as being time-efficient, and less weather dependent (due mainly to shorter duration) running is more accessible equipment-wise. A decent pair of shoes, add some general fitness leggings and tops, and off you go. No mysteries around gearing, tyre sizes/types, saddles etc. etc.  And of course its self fulfilling that, as more women run, you’ll find more similar women to run with.

You've never brought a sports bra have you?

J

It's cheaper to buy 6 sports bras that don't fit in the hope that one does, than 6 bicycles.

Of course, you have to do both...

[Kim]

Shall we add in 'cheeky' appraisals from men whilst running and just downright abuse. And is it safe to run alone if you're female? 🤔

As a lifelong follower of Rule 42 (I can't run because Knee) I'm almost as poorly qualified to judge as all those women who've hardly touched a bike since they were 10, but IME I generally feel safer on a bike than I do on foot.  (And vastly safer than on/waiting for public transport, but we're talking about sporty things, here, not transport.)

[Lightning Phil]

One of my male friends has done longer audaxes in the past and described bivvying behind a bush by a bridge. I've read Emily Chappell and Juliana Buhring, the concept of going longer exploring appeals to me but I can't quite get past the vulnerability of having a kip.

There’s nobody hanging around in quiet lanes overnight.   I’d feel vulnerable taking a kip in a town but not out somewhere quiet in the countryside.  On an Irish audax I did get lots of drivers stopping to check I’m ok, when trying to grab a kip during the day.

Back to kipping overnight.  Mostly try and get out of sight when having a kip. Just so you don’t get disturbed.  It is pretty easy to get out of sight and unless you are at side of road on verge you won’t be noticed. In villages, church porches, are usually unlocked, and can often be places to get a kip out of sight (and out of any weather)

Where I’ve not been able to sleep but also need time off the bike with eyes closed. Nearly every time no one comes by apart from fellow audaxers. Other rare times the odd car has passed without stopping.

[nikki]

Anyway I thought this thread was about getting more women in to audax via the possibility of women only events?

Wellllll, yes and no.
(And welcome into the fray btw! Congrats on your outreach work for the FNRTtC rides - sounds like it's working well. I hope to eventually take part in one when circumstances permit.)




Context and recap for any recent arrivals:

This thread's original original post was a simple notification of a 200km event in France for women, but the first post in response to that required some responding to itself:

I'm not sure what is the exact motivation for this sort of things. Do women feel oppressed/discriminated/segregated during regular ACP or AUK events? My question is really a genuine question.
[...]
My feeling is that women only audax events are on the line of the recent fashion for black only / gay only / women only, etc., events of all kinds. To remain polite, I will just say that this is not my cup of tea.
[...]

We were about half a dozen pages in when the thread got split and the "Women-only audaxes" title was applied to this section of it. At that stage it could equally have been titled:

"Women describe, with examples from firsthand experience, why audaxes can be an unpleasant experience."
"Women explain how unpleasant experiences in audax are a subset of wider systems produced and maintained by cis-het normative patriarchal societies."
"Societal status quo produces barriers to women taking part in audaxes (so we need to act for change outside of audax too.)"
"Some men on audax board perfectly illustrate why audax-related environments might not be seen (by people of all genders) as being very welcoming."
"Classic trolling behaviour on audax board doesn't prompt a moderator response, but the trolls burning their accounts does."
"White women are not the only people less likely to participate in audax events and perhaps we should improve things to make it more appealing/accessible to groups that are more marginalised too."
"Resources to help (current and potential) organisers and participants understand barriers to participation in audax events."

etc, etc

In the lulls between ego-related bun fights we're never-the-less-persisting and making progress on a few fronts:

* A group of men are doing sterling work listening to what's being shared, being reflective on what they have habitually done in the past and thinking about what they can do moving forwards. Thanks chaps. 

* Women are continuing to share their experiences relating to cycling, audaxing and generally moving about in public space. Thank you too - I appreciate all the time and emotional labour going into this thread.

* We're collectively improving our understanding around ideas of being allies and accomplices and the things we can do when we see sexist/racist/ableist things happening.

* People are sharing examples of events that have successfully broadened participation.

* We're generating a few ideas about what could be done differently in audax as it is now, as well as thinking through the potentials for women-only audaxes. I think we're also starting to identify that the situation could be improved by women-only activities upstream of 200km audaxes.

* Under the original original post, fboab and others are looking to organise inclusive women-only events  in the near future https://yacf.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=119266.msg2625232#msg2625232


Probably there's more, but my eyes are going a bit squiffy and I need to step away from the laptop screen for a bit.

Thanks again to all those who have genuinely put effort into thinking about how we can change things.

[mmmmartin]

I have been trying to encourage women to try one of the rides.  Mostly by posting in local groups, also the CUK women's FB group.

The Fridays also pay to advertise on Facebook and often do so aimed specifically at women who are interested in cycling and have friends who are interested in cycling.

When I led my first overnighter last year, setting off to the meet point, it did suddenly occur to me that I was meeting several strange men to spend 12 hours riding with.

Yebbut you knew if anyone was rude or out of order they would really really regret it for a very long time indeed.

[Hot Flatus]

Silly me - I quoted your actual words. Who knew that you could find a way to misunderstand that?

Wrong quote, Matt. You need to go back further.

Like I said, no commitment. Shadow of former self.

[ravenbait]

* We're generating a few ideas about what could be done differently in audax as it is now, as well as thinking through the potentials for women-only audaxes. I think we're also starting to identify that the situation could be improved by women-only activities upstream of 200km audaxes.

Thanks for that sterling effort!

I think this part is maybe where we're coming to the nub of the issue. We've got two things to achieve:

1. Get women who don't currently do audax interested in doing audax.

2. Try not to make audax contain experiences that are specifically unpleasant for women.

Number one is probably where we need to do the upstream women-only or women-targeted things that aren't actually audax but might resemble it in some ways.

I think number two would likely be improved by more women were participating, but that's where men shutting down other men who are indulging in dodgy behaviour becomes more important.

I should note that I read Lightning Phil's comment about kipping not being a problem and my first thought was, "but would that be true if you were a woman?"[1]  I think potential audaxers who do not identify as men need that kind of reassurance from someone who also does not identify as a man, and that's where we'd need advice from women who already participate on how they manage.

Maybe that would help? A women's resource for all things audax that talks about things like risk assessment, risk management, the quotidian details of how to handle being on a bike for long periods by yourself (what do you do if you need to find a hidden spot to pee and there's no one to watch your bike?), what you need to know, written by and for women? I googled women in audax and found a couple of fairly superficial articles about "my first audax" (did it with friends, had a blast), but nothing that goes into detail.

Sam
^{[1] Would that also be true for someone who was a POC?}
_{P.S. Found the ignore option. This is much better.}

[TimC]

Sam, my friend Katie Butler has produced several videos about Audaxing and general long-distance riding from a woman's perspective, and that includes technical stuff like where to pee, vegan recipes for on-bike snacks, and all sorts of helpful stuff. She's on YouTube as Katie Kookaburra, and on Instagram as @katiekookaburra1. She started from being an overweight (100kg) total beginner about 6 years ago. She now is very much lighter, and has tried pretty much every type of cycling, and she's a brand ambassador for several cycling products. She's also very approachable if you want to get a face-to-face chat going. Tell her I sent you!