- News
- Reviews
- Bikes
- Accessories
- Accessories - misc
- Computer mounts
- Bags
- Bar ends
- Bike bags & cases
- Bottle cages
- Bottles
- Cameras
- Car racks
- Child seats
- Computers
- Glasses
- GPS units
- Helmets
- Lights - front
- Lights - rear
- Lights - sets
- Locks
- Mirrors
- Mudguards
- Racks
- Pumps & CO2 inflators
- Puncture kits
- Reflectives
- Smart watches
- Stands and racks
- Trailers
- Clothing
- Components
- Bar tape & grips
- Bottom brackets
- Brake & gear cables
- Brake & STI levers
- Brake pads & spares
- Brakes
- Cassettes & freewheels
- Chains
- Chainsets & chainrings
- Derailleurs - front
- Derailleurs - rear
- Forks
- Gear levers & shifters
- Groupsets
- Handlebars & extensions
- Headsets
- Hubs
- Inner tubes
- Pedals
- Quick releases & skewers
- Saddles
- Seatposts
- Stems
- Wheels
- Tyres
- Health, fitness and nutrition
- Tools and workshop
- Miscellaneous
- Buyers Guides
- Features
- Forum
- Recommends
- Podcast
E3 Harelbeke advert 2015.pngE3 Harelbeke organisers slammed over "sexist" poster
It’s fair to say the organisers of Belgian UCI WorldTour race the E3 Harelbeke have a bit of form when it comes to courting controversy with promotional posters for the event, which traditionally kicks off Flanders week – and this year is no exception, leading to accusations on social media of sexism.
Roughly translated, it says “Who’ll 'squeeze' in Harelbeke?” and references Peter Sagan’s infamous pinching of a podium hostess’s bottom after he finished second to Fabian Cancellara in the 2012 Tour of Flanders – indeed, a picture of that incident appears beneath the 2015 poster on the race’s Facebook page.
Despite featuring on the UCI WorldTour calendar, the race lacks the status of the previous week’s Milan-San Remo, or those which immediately follow it, Gent-Wevelgem and the Tour of Flanders.
That’s led some to suggest that by publicising the race with posters that are guaranteed to provoke controversy, organisers are ensuring the race gets talked about, and it’s not the first time that such adverts have been labelled sexist and demeaning to women.
Here’s a selection of responses to this year’s poster on Twitter.
E3 Harelbeke goes for the poster publicity stunt every year. A pity they distract from what's become a very good race with a tough course.
— the Inner Ring (@inrng) February 23, 2015
Wonder what posters @E3Harelbeke will use for the womens race? Oh, no womens race.
— The Broom Wagon (@broomwagonblog) February 23, 2015
@E3Harelbeke This isn’t acceptable in 2015. As a World Tour race standards should be better @UCI_cycling
— M2 Sports Management (@M2_Sports) February 23, 2015
Sorry for being late to the party but that #E3 ad is awesome! If you wear flares, drive a Ford Capri and live in the ’70’s.
— John Galloway (@wjohngalloway) February 23, 2015
We all want to see some leadership from @UCI_cycling ProTour teams and voicing their concerns with the @E3Harelbeke sexist advertising.
— Mark Legg (@MrKatieCompton) February 23, 2015
Simon joined road.cc as news editor in 2009 and is now the site’s community editor, acting as a link between the team producing the content and our readers. A law and languages graduate, published translator and former retail analyst, he has reported on issues as diverse as cycling-related court cases, anti-doping investigations, the latest developments in the bike industry and the sport’s biggest races. Now back in London full-time after 15 years living in Oxford and Cambridge, he loves cycling along the Thames but misses having his former riding buddy, Elodie the miniature schnauzer, in the basket in front of him.
Latest Comments
- Mr Hoopdriver 1 sec ago
The big worry for a cycle MOT is that it's very likely to be supported (and lobbied for) by the the likes of the cycling industry, Halfords and...
- wycombewheeler 1 min 46 sec ago
what no entry road? dead end roads or cul de sacs are never no entry, they can't be.
- mctrials23 6 min 17 sec ago
They would also have had years of that extra income and perhaps spent that money on delivering more value to their customers or sorting out their...
- ChrisA 10 min 27 sec ago
It can be, but as I said, there are many people who can't afford (or who choose not to have) any kind of insurance.
- dubwise 28 min 35 sec ago
Further to this, out for a bike ride this morning, in one of a number of crap passes I was overtaken on a bend into on coming traffic, solid white...
- chrisonabike 1 hour 46 min ago
Hmm, pretty sure mine has? I'll put my glasses on and go check once it comes back out of the stable.
- chrisonabike 2 hours 49 sec ago
Things like "but cars can stop quicker": given "mass motoring" (and indeed open-access cycling and walking) presumably there's good reason to have...
- Sniffer 2 hours 10 min ago
A couple of years ago I had similar problems on my commuter. Cheap factory made rim brake wheels. A succession of front wheel punctures. Checked...
- Gary101056 3 hours 49 min ago
I ordered 4 Tubolito tubes, fitted 2, no problem at all. The issue I had was air escaping when attempting to inflate with SKS track pump, also used...
- quiff 4 hours 16 min ago
Well aware this is comparing apples with wellington boots, but 10 years ago I got SRAM Force for not much more than this. And it came with a Canyon...
Add new comment
68 comments
I'll take you up on that bet. Want to put any kind of sum on me watching this race (or any of the semi-classics)? Let me know and I'll send you my bank details for the debit.
I'm not sure that one has to actively campaign against things to find them morally repugnant. If you're not actively campaigning against infant genocide in Rwanda, for instance (show us yer banners?) I'm guessing you're all for it?
Yeah, you'll watch them and you know you will.
As you can probably imagine, I'm not "all for" infant genocide. However, I don't go spouting my outrage on the internet then back it up with absolutely nothing. If you were THAT outraged by it, you'd be using a bigger platform than a road bike website to decry it.
Is it okay if I am not particularly "outraged" or "offended" by it - but just think it is a bit crap, not particularly helpful and not something I'd want to be associated with.
Am I allowed to comment then or do I still need a Facebook campaign?
If that's what you want to do then be my guest.
You'd probably get a more meaningful reaction by starting a Facebook petition in all fairness!
a) how do you know I will watch them?? I have no intention of watching them, I no longer subscribe to Eurosport Player, and I'd rather spend my weekends riding or coaching than watching cycling on TV. You must have amazing psychic insight. Either that, or you're completely full of shit.
b) I wouldn't presume to imagine what you are or aren't for. Or what you will or will not watch. That would be *really* twattish.
Anyway. what have I backed up with absolutely nothing? I am outraged by it, and have used a bigger platform than a road bike website. Twitter is bigger than Road.cc, I believe.
But you're asuming that I haven't. Again, I suspect you're completely full of shit.
There's a pattern emerging here...
Definitely a psychic as I knew you were an utter cunt before you started typing your reply.
so where is the outrage about podium girls in most sports?
Which is worse a poster about an incident that happened a couple of years ago, or having eye candy on the podium?
Indeed. I think the eye candy on the podium can only be considered acceptable if the women's races have the same thing going on and get their prizes presented by male models in revealing outfits.
Actually, that still wouldn't be all that acceptable, but at least it would be a bit more balanced.
What exactly is sexism? All i can see is what appears to be a woman with an elite level of physical appearance. I think that can apply to both sexes.
There are some miserable gits here. A lot worse things happen if life. In Islam women have to wear tents and if they so much think about a man in an impure way they are stoned. They are not permitted to meet with men alone and if they do they risk being beheaded. Young girls are denied an education, denied the opportunity to ride a bike let alone drive and if they do drive they are imprisoned on spurious terrorism charges. So the miserable gits might want to consider this. Anyway I am sure the woman was paid a small fortune. It's firmly tongue in cheek.
I for one am outraged at this.
I'm never going watch cycling again and I'm also going to ban my children from watching cycling, actually I'm going to ban them from riding bikes.
THAT'S HOW OUTRAGED I AM!!!!!
alternatively I just dont give a snizzle
'Long story short, you're now talking about Harelbeke, so it's working'
Oh, that old chestnut. People are talking about our product, so the advertising works. They're talking about you because they think you're wankers and won't buy your product. The advertising is working if the brief was 'design an advert which will maximise the 'shoot ourselves in the foot' envelope'.
It's like a nursery advertising their facilities with a picture of Jimmy Savile. Look, he's not *actually* kiddie fiddling in the picture, so it's OK. And everyone is talking about this nursery so - hey! well done Nathan Barley.
Were you thinking of Harelbeke before you saw the poster/headline?
Are you thinking of it now?
Then think about what the poster actually asks you and reply with 'hopefully, no-one'.
Go on about your day/enjoy your life/etc.
I'm sure you're aware your example is somewhat hyperbolic.
Thanks for your blessing. Hopefully I won't come across any victims of sexual assault, that could put a bit of a damper on things. Or not, depending on your viewpoint.
And yes, I am aware that my example is somewhat hyperbolic. As is the claim that advertising works if someone is talking about it. That all depends on the *aim* of the advertising.
Think most of you are confusing the outrage of the incident with the advertising aspect. It references an event in the race's history and they're clearly geared up for creating slightly controversial posters which offend those who are easily offendable.
It doesn't advocate 'squeezing' which would be an issue, just makes a glib reference to what Sagan did and we see about the same amount of skin as that well known tennis poster.
Long story short, you're now talking about Harelbeke, so it's working - you're better off not talking about it if you are offended instead of adding to the publicity you disagree with.
The woman in question *was* outraged.
The race organisers seem not to give a shit.
One of these two is unacceptable.
Who was the comedian who said that the formula for good comedy was simply;
Tragedy + time = funny
I don't get the outrage... I really don't.
I get that its a bit of a shit ad really... a bit obvious... and really rather disconnected from the race itself... but outrage?
I also have to wonder if many women spend as much time being 'outraged' by men being objectified on adverts?
The brutal reality is that sex sells... everywhere... using it to sell a bike race is taking that mantle to the extreme I'll admit, but its a route they've followed so they will live or die by how that is received.
A couple of questions come to mind...
Is it really the race's problem that their demographic responds to 'sexist' imagery?
If the ads are so despicable, how are they allowed to exist? There are advertising standards after all, and if they fell foul of advertising rules, then surely they'd be banned?
How about the concept of the sexy kiss-miss in the first place? That's not sexist?
Dear god, there's some of you are defending this? Really? Have you just crawled out of the 1970s, or do you work for tabloid newspapers (pretty much the same thing)? Whilst it's hardly the worst thing in the world, it is totally unacceptable. The organisers to grow up. Oh, and add a women's race.
Not defending it, just not subscribing to the endless tide of outrage that seems to pass for discussion.
The means may be different but the message is the same - one says "Look at me, I can be outrageous" the other says "Look at me, I can be outraged." It's all just attention-seeking.
All too often the outraged demand complete and utter agreement to their world view, whether that is right or left, car or anti-car, feminine or masculine, black or white.
As Albert Maysles said, "tyranny is the removal of nuance". Before people get outraged about posters, twitter comments or whatever the latest casus belli is I think they should ask if they are contributing to or detracting from nuance.
You might have an argument IF this was about nuance. There is nothing nuanced about that poster or the place of women implied in it...ie women are bits of meat there for decoration, certainly not to be participants in the events themselves.
So there is no equivalence between the poster and peoples objection to it. Your argument is just the usual blahblahblah,diminishing the efforts that are made to stop the kind of crap the poster perpetuates.
But there IS nuance in the place of sexualised posters in cycling/society as a whole.
I have little interest in defending what seems rather old-fashioned, and probably a case of punching down, but hysteria does not endear me to the cause of attacking it.
This too. I really do have some sympathy and as I said, I'm not defending the poster.
As you can tell from my username I'm in the middle east where such things are not seen in public.
I was having a discussion literally yesterday with a friend of mine, also a father of young girls, about how grating and vulgar we found a lot of public imagery and behaviour when we were in the UK in my case or Australia in his.
On the other hand most countries here are hereditary monarchies where I can live for 20 years and have no rights, and it's a criminal offence to criticise the government.
How do you find a middle ground between imposing values and allowing free-for-all.
I'm just not sure that mob-rule by internet is the answer.
It was 2 years ago. Not that that matters. At all.
Dear God ,was that butt pinch 3 years ago?
Beautiful things make for a better day. If you've got it flaunt it I say and if you haven't then just admire. Chapeau
But at the same time bringing disrepute to the race? Maybe not such a great score. I'm not sure all publicity really IS good publicity. In this case, I'm really not sure (I mean that literally; I am actually not sure).
Either way, I'm not a great fan of the ''it's in someone's interests, therefore it's fine' - and leave it at that' logic. There's a reason for almost anything. I wouldn't feel satisfied with an explanation like; 'you can see WHY Nigel was beaten up, can't you? It was so that Stephen could take his lunch money'.
The promoters MIGHT profit from the whole thing, but the promoters aren't the only people affected. Not that anyone is likely to get beaten up as a result of this; the analogy dies right there, but the posters still effectively present Sagan's act of sexual assault as a jolly old joke that we can expect to see rolling around to have a laugh at again ("who’ll 'squeeze' in Harelbeke" implies someone is going to). Imagery aside, that alone is pretty gross theme to base an official promotion on.
Tacky, but the promotors are in the business of getting their event noticed. So on that front, score!
Not just bad. But wrong. Makes a joke of sexual assault. Sexist. Childish. Prurient. Small minded old git twattery.
It keeps women's cycling in the dark ages.
But usefully makes the organisers look like inadequate, beige mac wearing Benny Hill soupy-moustache pervs who've never seen a lady's bottom before or ever actually touched a girlie without running away crying or chopping her up in their basement.
Pages