Specialized has found itself at the centre of a sexism row after a limited edition Playboy e-bike was unveiled at a Berlin bike show alongside women dressed in Playboy Bunny costumes.
Although the bike was intended for a German market some Brits in attendance at the Berlin Fahrradschau over the weekend expressed shock and disappointment at the association between Playboy and Specialized.
Some complained the marketing was outdated, and discordant with Specialized’s position as an aspirational brand for women, while others say the product’s marketing was lost in translation, and German clientele at the show – both male and female – enjoyed the bike, and the presence of the women.
Monika Zamojska, cycle clothing brand House of Astbury co-founder, spotted the “Playboy Bunnies” at the Berlin Fahrradschau over the weekend, and says she feels the marketing contributes to a gender imbalance in the cycling industry and in the sport.
Right, @iamspecialized are you joking?! Is this really happening? pic.twitter.com/BUxUdup3Ww
— Mon Zamojska (@monmon_zet) March 19, 2016
Zamojska told road.cc: “The reaction were mixed, some people did happily take photos with the models, but not many. A lot of them walked straight past the stand. People I spoke to at the show felt simply uncomfortable with that.
“These women were there to simply to look pretty next to the bike, and reducing women to just their appearance is what makes it so hard for female customers, athletes and women working in the industry to be treated seriously. We are not here to look pretty, we mean business.
“Women have the right to be represented by the industry in the same way as men do and not to be used as a tool to market products to the male audience.
“It might have been a product and a campaign targeted at the local market, but that does not justify it, especially that it only takes one tweet for the whole world to see it.”
The editor of Total Women’s Cycling was among those who expressed disappointment at the appearance of Playboy Bunnies.
@monmon_zet @iamspecialized @specializedwmn V disappointed. Looks like someone made bad decision & no one spoke up. Goes against brand ethos
— Michelle Arthurs (@RideWriteRepeat) March 19, 2016
@monmon_zet @iamspecialized good god almighty, I love my bike but it’ll be the last time I buy a Specialized
— Melissa Cole (@MelissaCole) March 19, 2016
In the UK Specialized positions itself as an aspirational brand for women.
The conditions were classical ‘Belgian’ for #CXWorlds2016! Congrats to @Nikkiharris86 & @C_Majerus! pic.twitter.com/rNZzCDCrMk
— Specialized Women (@specializedwmn) January 30, 2016
However, the bike is not for sale in the UK. Specialized produced 40 limited edition bikes in black with gold details and Playboy logos, and are marketing it just in Germany.
road.cc editor, Tony Farrelly, was at the show on Friday and most of Saturday, when the bike was unveiled. He said: “None of the Germans seemed to care; they loved it. You could have your photo taken with the bike and the bunny girls (and they were posting some of them on the wall) – the times I passed it it seemed mainly to be middle aged, middle class professional couples with the wife getting her husband to go and have his picture taken.”
“I do have a problem with us foisting…UK twitter morality on another nation which clearly doesn’t seem to share that outlook. I’ve got to say I was surprised at how uncontroversial it was given the diverse nature of the obviously sophisticated urban crowd – imagine Spin London 10 times bigger and if urban cycling was really mainstream, but still also really trendy.”
“I was surprised to see it, but then we often forget that European countries have differently nuanced cultural points of view on lots of things. For instance sexism aside, lots of Brits would probably regard Playboy as a bit naff.”
Specialized’s Dominik Geyer said in a press release: “When the opportunity to a product collaboration with Playboy showed we were immediately hooked! Two premium brands – a joint project. The Turbo S Edition combines Playboy lifestyle, innovative technology and pure joy of cycling. We are proud of the 40 unique bikes.”
What do you think? Is the Playboy bike sexist, or is it a case of lost in translation?
Specialized were contacted for comment.
56 thoughts on “Specialized’s “Playboy” e-bike sparks social media sexism row”
“just because you’re offended
“just because you’re offended doesn’t mean it’s offensive”
It is sexist.
It is sexist.
The question and arguments are around whether you care about that sexism or not.
Some people do, some people don’t.
One camps is right. The other is holding women back.
(But then, by definition, they don’t care.)
Grow up…ffs
Grow up…ffs
its got it some press though, nice one ladies….lmfao
Yogic Cyclist wrote:
Yes, again Specialized have made themselves look like idiots. And just when all the dust had settled about them sending cease and desist letters for companies using the name ‘Roubaix’.
Im sure thats exactly the kind of press they wanted.
zanf wrote:
Yes, again Specialized have made themselves look like idiots. And just when all the dust had settled about them sending cease and desist letters for companies using the name ‘Roubaix’.
Im sure thats exactly the kind of press they wanted.— Yogic Cyclist
So some people are not going to buy an e-bike they couldn’t buy anyway even if they’d been in the market for an e-bike – which I’d go out on a limb and say that most of them are not.
Meanwhile in Germany Specialized will no doubt shfit a their e-bikes – unless that is they’ve offended the people they are trying to sell them too. I didn’t see much evidence of that on the ground – and I spent Friday and Saturday at the show. Of course the people attending weren’t a representative sample of the whole of Germany either so it could be that Specialized Germany (very much not the same as Specialized UK) have dropped a mighty ricket. They didn’t seem to think they had from what I could see though.
Tony Farrelly wrote:
Just because they manage to sell the bikes doesn’t stop them looking like idiots to everyone else as zanf suggested. There are all sort of things you can do to lower your reputation (be that homophobia, xenophobia, sexism and so on) and mostly it won’t be big enough to eliminate your entire customer base – indeed somethings might even encourage subsets of the public to support you – but it doesn’t stop the (hopefully) larger damage to the brand.
I think you are right that Specialized Germany can probably get away with this – Germany is hardly the most progressive society for gender equality (though it is very uneven and seems quite different to the UK) – but Specialized Germany aren’t independent of the Specialized group as a whole. Specialized probably have subsiduaries in all sorts of countries where society dictates less attention is needed to human rights but, as a customer, I still expect them to try and improve the situation and not, through their actions, make it worse.
cqexbesd wrote:
Just because they manage to sell the bikes doesn’t stop them looking like idiots to everyone else as zanf suggested. There are all sort of things you can do to lower your reputation (be that homophobia, xenophobia, sexism and so on) and mostly it won’t be big enough to eliminate your entire customer base – indeed somethings might even encourage subsets of the public to support you – but it doesn’t stop the (hopefully) larger damage to the brand.
I think you are right that Specialized Germany can probably get away with this – Germany is hardly the most progressive society for gender equality (though it is very uneven and seems quite different to the UK) – but Specialized Germany aren’t independent of the Specialized group as a whole. Specialized probably have subsiduaries in all sorts of countries where society dictates less attention is needed to human rights but, as a customer, I still expect them to try and improve the situation and not, through their actions, make it worse.
— Tony Farrelly
The logical conclusion of what you seem to be saying is that the Germans aren’t as morally evolved as us… well you? I’m sure that’s not your intention because that would be both massively culturally and morally condescending.
If the Germans, and German women in particular are offended then Specialized will pay a price and will deserve to. But if it turns out German women are not offended then it’s really none of our business to tell them they should be.
I think we’d be better off spending our time looking to do something about inequality over here, before we start lecturing anybody else about it – particularly a nation that is putting the rest of us to shame when it comes to opening its borders to the victims of societies that really do have a low regard for human rights.
Tony Farrelly wrote:
I think we’d be better off spending our time looking to do something about inequality over here, before we start lecturing anybody else about it— Tony FarrellyI am offended by a picture of Specialized, the brand on my bike, teaming up with Playboy. Nothing to do with German women. It became bigger than that for me, when you had the images posted to your UK website, Tony. I can do things about inequality in the UK too. It’s not either / or.
vbvb wrote:
It’s bigger than German women being offended, it’s about you being offended?
If you are offended then it seems to me the only thing you can do is to take a sledgehammer to your Specialized. Film it, and post the footage on social media.
Tony Farrelly wrote:
Again, Tony, you’re just being catty. I’m off to read about the Blackburn Wayside.
Tony Farrelly wrote:
That was not what I was saying. Its quite possible to suggest that there are flaws in societies without in some way writing off an entire culture. I even mentioned in my original comment that the landscape of gender equality was very uneven in Germany suggesting, just maybe, that there some bits where things are looking a bit better.
If I criticise sexism in the UK as well then I guess we really are in a bind about who is more evolved.
I will also add, for the avoidence of doubt, that I don’t consider Specialized Germany’s marketing techniques in anyway represent every German any more than I expect your comments to represent every British person.
I’m not telling German women that they should be offended. Sexism demeans us all. Even men. And it is all our repsonsibility to call out discrimination when we see it – not just the victims of it. In fact those of us who are in effect more priveleged in society probably have a greater duty to do something about it.
Well I live in Germany so I am talking about inequality over here. Its great that Germany has taken so many refugees – its terrible that may are forced to queue outside for days in sub-zero temperatures to register so they become eligible for government assistance. See what I did there? I criticised something that happened here that I thought was bad whilst not writing off everything associated with the country. This nuance is wonderful stuff.
Just to be clear though – you aren’t suggesting that people from countries where some people have a lower access to human rights are less morally evolved just because some sections of the societies have problems?
cqexbesd wrote:
I agree we should call out real oppression and discrimination where we see it. The problem I have is that I don’t feel priviliged enough to tell anyone who doesn’t themselves feel oppressed or discriminated against how to live their lives just because what they do doesn’t fit in with my priviliged notion of what gender equality looks like. And that includes restricting the economic choices of young women who choose to make their living by dressing up in bunny outfits.
Well I live in Germany so I am talking about inequality over here. Its great that Germany has taken so many refugees – its terrible that may are forced to queue outside for days in sub-zero temperatures to register so they become eligible for government assistance. See what I did there? I criticised something that happened here that I thought was bad whilst not writing off everything associated with the country. This nuance is wonderful stuff.
Just to be clear though – you aren’t suggesting that people from countries where some people have a lower access to human rights are less morally evolved just because some sections of the societies have problems?
[/quote]
You’d have to be a master of nuance to get to there from my comments.
It’s terrible that refugees in Germany are being forced to queue in the cold – you can be sure no-one is doing that here.
Tony Farrelly wrote:
I am not telling the women what to do. I am complaining about what Specialized decided to do. We have no idea what the women themselves think of it. After all they aren’t paid to give their opinions. Maybe they find it sexist and demeaning but needed work. Maybe this has always been their life long ambition. None of us know but believe it or not its sexist regardless and Specialized shouldn’t have done it.
Your support of this, is, I have no doubt, based purely on widening economic opportunities for women.
Tony Farrelly wrote:
Oh dear, that’s ill-advised. You really feel that dislike of Playboy sexism is just “uk twitter morality”? That’s the morality under discussion.
The Specialized brand is very much international and brand damage obviously crosses borders as many would attest (Gary Glitter springs to mind).
vbvb wrote:
Oh dear, that’s ill-advised. You really feel that dislike of Playboy sexism is just “uk twitter morality”? That’s the morality under discussion.
The Specialized brand is very much international and brand damage obviously crosses borders as many would attest (Gary Glitter springs to mind).— Tony Farrelly
You’re equating Specialized Germany launching a Playboy bike in Germany – where it doesn’t seem to be particularly controversial with child sex abuse? Oh dear that’s ill advised and lacking in a sense of proportion.
Tony Farrelly wrote:
That’s a bit catty, Tony.
Just because you’re not
Just because you’re not offended doesn’t mean it’s inoffensive.
Yes its sexist. The fact that
Yes its sexist. The fact that Germany has quite high levels of certain sorts of sexism (e.g. larger gender pay gap than the UK, working mother still being an insult in places) isn’t an excuse to perpetuate it.
lol.
lol.
my grandmother, long passed
my grandmother, long passed on rest her soul, was a very close friend of Victor Lownes who ran Playboy in the UK for Hugh Heffner.
my grandmother’s property backed on “Stocks”, the Playboy country retreat in Aldbury, near Tring in Herts.
As a child I visited Stocks on many occasions, and vividly remember the playboy bunnies, the heated open air swimming pool, the free arcade video games rooms, and trying all manner of strange buffet food. I was excited to see a Mr. Roger Moore filming in the jacuzzi for a James Bond film, and years later seeing the film with the painting of a horse and hounds chase on the back wall of that jacuzzi
Bear in mind that was 30 years ago…you’d think things would have moved on?
Shame on Specialized…
What’s next, the Black and
What’s next, the Black and White minstrel edition? The love thy neighbour edition? Massive lols from me.
Would it have made more of a
Would it have made more of a scandal if they just had a big Merida banner in the background?
The word ‘crass’ spring to
The word ‘crass’ springs to mind.
Finally I do realise why
Finally I do realise why Specis are so expensive
Are You aware how much it does cost to have a model posing with bikes?
Multiply this by two….( At ICM we can only afford one model per shot)
Certainly sexist. Does it
Certainly sexist. Does it matter? On a moral level, yes, for many, on a commercial level, yes for the company if audiences outside Germany are turned off. It’s a global brand rather than a German one, so perhaps they should have seen that coming.
Good luck next time Specialised – and please note the correct spelling 🙂
tomturcan wrote:
Weeelll it’s a brand name, so no – not correct – and personally I prefer the old English spelling these days, instead of that darn Gallicization of perfectly adaquate words… that way I can also justify not getting too riled by the bally colonials using it hither and thither by George.
Really? Haven’t you people
Really? Haven’t you people got anything better to worry about?
Really? Haven’t you people
Really? Haven’t you people got anything better to worry about?
It’s Playboy, the whole brand
It’s Playboy, the whole brand is based on sexy ladies dressed up as bunies.
Crass, maybe. Sexist? No.
I cant really be bothered to
I cant really be bothered to play the “im spartacus, no Im spartacus, no Im spartacus” offended game for stuff like this anymore, just get on your bikes and ride
Really offensive so as a mark
Really offensive so as a mark of solidarity if everyone who owns a specialised bike should give them to charity as riding them would be wrong and i am sure no one would sell this brand new or used! So why not give ur spec to charity maybe remove decals first. Anyone got the conviction to match their level of offence?
Beefy wrote:
Beefy, you’d be happy to know I am accepting all forms of donations, with or without decals.
Just had a quick scoot
Just had a quick scoot through the internet and so far i’ve found BMW, Honda, Fit Bike Co, Stradalli bikes, Hauck Bikes, Harley Davidson all using the playboy brand in their advertising and even the beloved Danny MacAskill at the playboy mansion on youtube.
Specialised aren’t the first and certainly wont be the last company to use Playboy.
Were the girls coerced into doing it – probably not
Were the girls paid to do it – probably yes.
Have Specialised gained massive publicity through it – yes
Therefore the advertising company have served their purpose.
I’ve shown my daughter and wife this article and neither are the slightest bit bothered by it stating its good publicity for Specialised. It doesn’t mean they are right or wrong just that everyone both male and female have a different view on things.
So which part of the photo is
So which part of the photo is sexist? I understand that playboy+bike might not be the best idea, but what wrong with women dressend like playboy bunnies? We see models being used to showcase clothes, accesories, utensils and so on. How is this different?
multifrag wrote:
Playboy bunnies are traditionally treated as sexual objects, so the ladies are clearly being objectified. You could claim that it wasn’t sexist if they also had scantily clad men in Playboy attire (maybe some gay and cross dressers as well) to balance it out , but that would still be tasteless and crass. I personally don’t find it offensive but it certainly makes me think that they’ve got no class and I wouldn’t want to associate with a brand that thinks that is acceptable.
They could do with growing up.
Big brands behave differently
Big brands behave differently in different countries. Spesh should take greater care to manage their reputation. The sexist promo becomes the story and nobody is talking about the bike. Nobody needs to be ‘offended’ by a ‘creative’ decision some middle manager took somewhere in Germany months before a trade show. Anyone can have an opinion and voice it.
(Unless your opinion is that anyone who comments needs to get a life, and then you voice it by taking the time to comment.)
As a woman living in Germany
As a woman living in Germany I am offended. And so offended by the apparent championing of this retrograde rubbish on this website – especially the comments by the editor of all people, that I’m finally commenting.
Compared to Britain and America, Germany may seem very open about sexuality – there is much more explicit advertising here for example. But being more direct about sex doesn’t need to be sexist – there is no German equivalent to the Playboy “objectification is empowering” brand. We certainly have a section of older men running companies who won’t hire women (we have some of the lowest participation of women in highly paid jobs and on company boards in the EU) except as prostitutes for their business parties. I can see why Playboy thought Germany might be a fit for their brand of exploitative misogyny. It doesn’t mean that all German women and men accept this.
I can also see why Playboy thinks that cycling, with its podium girls and barely funded womens teams, might be a great market for them. I’ve certainly realised that a certain section of the cycling world doesn’t want women in their clubhouse. But I thought we were all starting to get over that, and that Specialized was trying to be part of that shift. Clearly not. I have a Specialized bike – I won’t have another one, because I think Specialized here have distinguished themselves by going backwards after the tide had finally turned, and by the spectacular hypocrisy they have shown pretending to champion women’s cycling in the UK and US, while trying to make money out of sexism in Germany.
I’ve been to the Berlin Fahrradschau. Maybe its not the place to generate a blockade of the stall where sleazy middle aged men get to pose with cold young girls their daughter’s age. But I resent the suggestion that women in Germany are all OK with this, and all Ok with being told once again that cycling is really for men with us as the occasional decorative backdrop.
Oh yes, my husband gave me permission to post, which should relieve some of you who disapprove of “UK twitter moralism” – I’ve never been on twitter on the UK or here, but I can recognise a condescending euphemism for feminism when I see one.
It’s rather funny to see
It’s rather funny to see feminists all the shock about bunnies but apparently nothing about what happened in Koln at the eve of New Year … Different agenda maybe.
frogg wrote:
Dear Frogg: How dare you conflate registering disapproval at the clear objectification of women to sell bikes with apparent unwillingness to criticise organised sexual assault.
I could say “it’s rather funny to see mysoginistic asshats acting tough in faux-upset whilst not saying a thing about CoE child abuse”. But that is to conflate two utterly separate, non-mutually-exlusive types of inhumanity. Or in words of one syllable or less: to make like you a paedo cos you like T&A.
In closing, Just Fuck Off. Take your self-justified mysoginistic bigoted shit elsewhere, cos it ain’t welcome here.
Love,
Mike
KiwiMike wrote:
Actually Mike, if Frogg’s not breaking the rules – which he’s not – he can post what the hell he likes. YOU, on the other hand, are breaking the rules for commenting on this site. Something you might like to bear in mind for future reference
KiwiMike wrote:
Excuse me having hit a nerve with you; excuse me of reminding you of Koln when there’s talking about women, Germany and migrants … I agree, two bunnies with a bike is really really shocking.
frogg wrote:
You didn’t ‘hit a nerve’. You inferred people supporting the argument that this was an inappropriately sexist move by a global bike brand, of ignoring a completely unrelated serious criminal incident that happened to occur in the same country.
That is not only totally illogical but given the sexual and race/religion intimations, also deeply offensive. You suggested I and others as commentors or ‘feminists’, have ‘an agenda’ in not saying that this isn’t an issue because sexual assault is going on elsewhere. Sorry, but that’s totally out of line, putting it as politely as possible. I have a wife and two daughters. I can call out sexist BS any time I like. And no, I don’t have to first reference other crimes against women elsewhere to fit your world view.
You can’t expect the freedom to accuse others of perceived bias of the most distasteful sort without being openly and rigorously challenged on it, particularly when it is a direct go at many of the commentors.
Tony, hopefully all of the above is within the Road.CC rules on commenting, and I accept going a bit Mr Stevenson. FYI I can’t find the rules anywhere having searched about, so maybe it’s time for a link somewhere.
frogg wrote:
Actually, there have been several feminist organised demonstrations in Koln, against sexism and racism, as a direct result of the New Year events. Women can hold more than one thought in their heads after all, and so we can hold opinions on multiple events.
Or do you expect a disclaimer of all past activities every time a woman has an opinion on something? In which case I can see why you might support Playboy bunnies, who after all are paid to shut up and look pretty and pretend not to have any opinions at all least it intimidate the men who are paying for their company. This is not a complaint against the women – I’ve been a broke young woman and worked in bar jobs where I’ve been paid to shut my mouth and smile politely while ignorant sleazes patronised me. But I’d rather it wasn’t assumed that just being a young female employee made it ok to ogle me, and I’d rather Specialized had decided to hire presenters to talk about cycling and the technical quality of their bikes, rather than to stroke male customers egos by giving them permission to stare at young women’s bodies.
frogg wrote:
No, just completely different topics. This is a cycling website. Have you tried Kolnfeministscommentingonbikesandsexassaults.com?
frogg wrote:
Well done for taking the time to research the crossover between those protesting about the Koln assaults and this Specialized faux pas and establishing that the overlap on the Venn diagram was small to non-existent. It’s really very impressive. How did you carry out your research? Surveys? Interviews? Did you go door to door? Ask people on the street? Did you harvest data from web forums and look for common user names or the lack thereof? Did you monitor web traffic, phone calls, etc? Or did you just pull it out of your arse?
Goodness, what a lot of too
Goodness, what a lot of too’ing and fro’ing about a couple of models on a stand in Germany.
I think you’ll find scantily clad young ladies, being letched over by all manner of people at most exhibition based events, sex sells, fact. Maybe I’m too ‘conditioned’ by this, but I don’t find what I see in the article offensive. It is sexist and I want to see and support women fighting for equality, but not here, this isn’t a fight which will be won on the continent.
Whether it’s overtley or covertly used male, female or gender independant, it is used and it does work.
Regardless of the intellectual or moral arguments of either side, I also have a problem with the views of some being forced on others, if the German market wants scantily clad girls let them have them, those who don’t like it just need to vote with their wallet.
Capitalism is what capitalism does.
… and for another viewpoint…I’m just going to leave this here – http://www.mcipollini.com/en/adv
Makes Specialized look as
Makes Specialized look as current as Peter Stringfellow. Probably organised and approved by the company ‘sex pest’.
Makes perfect sense that an e
Makes perfect sense that an e-bike manufacturer wants to align itself with overweight men lacking any prowess between their legs.
Funny thing is that
Funny thing is that Specalized is a US company, and that shit wouldn’t fly here. Them trying to put it off as some specialized local marketing campaign in Germany only to be seen and appreciated by the locals is complete BS. Terrible brand management, ATMO.
Another reason I want nothing
Another reason I want nothing to do with this brand, I dont find it offensive, its just naff.
When we’ve all calmed down
When we’ve all calmed down perhaps have a read of this:
http://fredrikdeboer.com/2016/03/17/the-sublime-narcissism-of-getting-offended-on-other-peoples-behalf/
I quote:
“We need to remember that we are not the cosmos, that the world is full of other people making their own adult decisions. To forget that isn’t progressive. It’s, well, a kind of imperialism.”
As already commented, I sit
As already commented, I sit in the not offended, just not ‘feeling’ it corner.
What is the main cause of offence… is it Specialized partnering with the Playboy brand? Or is it more the use of playboy bunnies to promote this partnership?
I’ve never really got playboy, so don’t align to the brand, and it’s key identifier, the playboy bunny. However, if I did align, then I would naturally assume that such a partnership would require the utilisation of a bunny somewhere.
By its very definition, the playboy bunny is a sexist image/connotation, but not one that is generally held up as an bastion of sexism and anti feminism. So… I fail to see the level of offence here.
I guess what I’m saying here is that to me, women dressing as playboy bunnies does not represent the front line of the equality war…
Finally, am I alone in questioning the need to totally desexualise society in the name of equality. I am perfectly capable of appreciating the female form as a thing of sexual beauty without thinking that I have any automatic right over that form, or any superiority overy women because I find books pretty.
Where is the war here… is it not looking at boobs, or is ensuring women get the same opportunity and rights as men?
Jimmy Ray Will wrote:
I can’t speak for every woman, but the reason I consider this sexist is not because its supposed to be sexy. Its because women are reduced to decorative objects – as happens far to often in a sport that seems to spend as much money on metaphorically rewarding male cyclists with podium girls as it does on actual female cycling as a sport.
The history of Playboy is a history of clubs for businessman where women were excluded – apart from those women paid to look pretty, flirt daintily and placate men. Ie. where women with opinions and the right to speak freely as people were deliberately removed, and the fantasy of a young submissive, pretty and powerless bunny girl provided for male pleasure instead. Because women having to be considered as people was seen as something that men dislike, which is pretty offensive to men as well as women.
When cycling catalogues sell their wares with pictures of young attractive people riding bikes, people with muscles won by actual cycling, they are often using sex as at least an adjunct to their marketing techniques, but it doesn’t usually provoke outrage. But when, as peted76 provided “… and for another viewpoint…I’m just going to leave this here – http://www.mcipollini.com/en/adv -” we have catalogues with young muscular men riding bikes and young thin but unmuscled women portrayed in lingerie beside them, then women are not being portrayed as active participants or even consumers but as pretty background objects for consumption. Nobody expects anyone to ride a bike, even an e-bike, in a bunny suit. What they are selling, apparently to old german men*, is nostalgia for a time when you could openly treat women like objects.
So thats where the war is.
*Their german-language marketing material talks about the Gentlemen Rider and is clearly marketed towards older men.
I went to the show, saw the
I went to the show, saw the Spez stand and told the marketing guy that I find it offensive and sexist. He gave some lame explanations and when I asked him what he would if his daughter were objectified, he was done.
I also wrote an email to Spez. US to express my disgust.
Btw, I’m a male German, so Tony, what you’ve written : “None of the Germans seemed to care; they loved it.” is somewhat biased.
BFD get the F over it.
BFD get the F over it. Jeezus christ.
Interesting how brands are
Interesting how brands are damaged. I think a bit less of Specialized for such crappy, 70s era sexism. It’s got nothing to do with the actual bikes, but it taints the brand. It’s just dopey marketing. For every middle-aged German guy who thinks that it’s OK, I’d bet that there’s a lot more people across the rest of the world who think it’s crass at best, and plain sexist at worst. It’s as if they haven’t heard of the internet, isn’t it?
And it’s even more stupid because of all the work Specialized has done to appeal to female cyclists. The more you try to build a set of credentials, the more damaging it is when you do something to totally undermine it. It’s not only as if they haven’t heard of the internet, but it’s also as if they think that you can use one marketing approach for one product, and somehow isolate that from the other products you sell. When you use bunny girls to advertise an e-bike to middle-aged German men, you’re also changing the way that all those potential Amira, Dolce and Ruby buyers see the brand.
It’s just really dopey.
It’s also really, really dopey for a site like road.cc to wheel out an editor to justify Specialized’s approach. It’s one thing to report a story like this, but it’s another thing when editorial staff are using the site as a platform for opinions that have got absolutely nothing to do with cycling, and that are instead just gender politics.
Specialized’s brand can be tainted by lazy, stupid sexism. Why risk doing the same for your brand? I’m not saying that you shouldn’t risk offending anyone. But do it on something that’s got something to do with what you’re good at. Why do it when it’s on a subject that’s so far from what your site is actually about?
You’re on a hiding to nothing. I’m now not going to be able to see reviews from Tony Farelly without some part of me thinking “Oh… yeah… that’s that guy who made the really stupid comment about not being able to call out sexism because apparently it’d be ‘foisting UK Twitter mentality’ on another nation”. Obviously, it’s not going to stop anyone from reading the reviews – but it still seems stupid to get bike reviewers to editorialise about cross-cultural gender politics.