cycling ethics

After reading this, I went looking for soft porn on road.cc. Purely for research purposes of course. Am I missing something? I cant see any.
I believe Movistar for one, are using biodegradable bottles.

'maths exercise' resulted in 'a large number'.

This guy will have a fit if he sees a Carry On movie.

And as to the "plastic bottles" - any cyclist knows they're water bottles and fans will scour the roadside for souvenirs after the race has gone.

This guy will have a fit if he sees a Carry On movie.

And as to the "plastic bottles" - any cyclist knows they're water bottles and fans will scour the roadside for souvenirs after the race has gone.

Quote:

by redrobot June 11 2019
28 Comments

are there any ethical questions to do with cycling? i dont mean road etiquette. i mean things like a bike's provenance etc. you seem quite happy to reproduce soft porn images to illustrate your articles on the porn peddlars for example.  when one considers the catastrophic effects of porn on society at large does a little charity work really offset that?

I agree, too many tits around here.

Well I suppose we could look on the bright side. Redrobot aside, we've all agreed that we all like the RoadCC website, and all for pretty much the same set of reasons.

There's been no squabbling about helmets and no squabbling about who has the most experience on two wheels.

Take this as a positive result.

Why can't you write proper sentences with capitals and spacing?
Does your algorithm need updating ?

Also, I prefer cycling Suthics.  It's easer to get to.

I do wonder if this person was making all these posts as part of a school project.

maybe your green crusade would be better directed at the Chinese government? https://unearthed.greenpeace.org/2019/03/28/china-new-coal-plants-2030-c...

And as for your niche view about porn being a social catastrophe, I’m not sure I see evidence to back that up. I am sat in a very public coffee shop and have been for the last hour or two and I haven’t seen anything really catastrophic either in here or outside that makes me think I agree with your viewpoint.

Or do you think that teenage girls wearing too short skirts for school is evidence? Because they were doing that well before the porn industry grew big - it’s just that ‘moral outrage’ on the part of teachers, churches etc had a stronger hold over society back then. However, we’ve all seen where the churches moral outrage should have been directed - in over at the behaviour of those in the positions of control and influence.

Oh and by the way, I’m not advocating porn, I’m just not as outraged as you at the news article about a cycling club which had been refused BC membership. I think you are seeing things to be outraged at to fit your viewpoint.

What is 'soft' porn exactly?

So you wish to suppress the free will of some people who are not asking you to join in, not asking you to look/watch, not asking for any money from you, not breaking any laws, have I got that right?

I see far more offensive things on the high street, I see more harm being done by people who don't give a stuff about other human beings, I see more harm from inept government and police. But you've got a beef with some people who indulge/sell something that most adults get involved in behind (and sometimes not behind) their own doors.

This isn't the Victorian era, don't look, don't let your kids have access, problem solved.

I remember an article or two on road.cc about the Porn Peddlars.

I'm struggling to see your problem - it was a reasonable article for an online cycling magazine to run (that their club had had its BC membership revoked).  There wasn't an excess of gratuitous pictures that one might unintentionally come across and if you didn't like the text then you didn't have to read it.

In your view, would it have been reasonable for any newspaper or magazine to run with the story?  Or is it better that news you don't want to read just isn't reported at all?

Won't somebody think of the children!?

Holding an unpopular point of view is not necessarily broad minded. Sometimes a point of view is unpopular and fringe because it is held by people who are exceptionally narrow minded, and as such, the majority of well adjusted people do not agree with it.

I think you missed my point as well. You hold an opinion on porn, a moral one, that it creates "social horror". This almost always goes back to conservative moral standards based on controlling the behaviour of other people to satisfy the holder's moral outrage. There is very little substance to it - porn can create addiction, as can video games. Neither are social horrors. An example of a social horror is the Tory party war on the disabled via benefit sanctions and reductions.

What I am trying to get across is that neither you nor I have the right to control legitimate and legal freedom of expression based on our moral outrage. You don't like seeing adult workers illustrated in a provocative way in an article of which they are the subject? It's too bad. I see things I don't like. And I don't try to force everyone else not to see them either.

This gentleman enlivened the first week of my early watchings of the TdF, this is not porn either, but there is a lot more flesh on display.