BBC accused of bias over helmet campaign on Crimewatch Roadshow; Tour de France BLM gesture "embarrassing", says Wiggins; Cargo bike "best thing we ever bought", says Jason Kenny; "I'm not dead", says baffled bike shop owner + more on the live blog

mdavidford wrote:

squired wrote:

In many ways cycling is one of the most inclusive sports there is.  You can succeed whether you are 5ft 2 and 50kg like Tom Pidcock (or similarly sized Colombian riders) or 6ft 3 and 80kg like Tim Declerq. Not many sports allow such a diverse physical range to compete at the top level.

That's only one way, though - bodily physique - not many.

And what about Colombian riders built more like Tim Declerq? The common assumption that South American riders will all be flyweight climbers is indicative of the kind of stereotyping that causes sports so many issues around race.

I don't think you are getting my point.  It doesn't matter where someone is from or what colour they are, or how big or small they are.  Cycling is one of the few sports where size really doesn't matter, or race, just physiology.  So in that sense it is the ultimate inclusive sport.  As for your Colombian comment, I don't think anyone is stereotyping apart from you. 

Colombian cycling has some non-featherweight riders who aren't climbers, but are also very successful.  Not that long ago Gaviria was seen as one of if not the best sprinter in the sport. Alvaro Hoedeg is still doing well too and I believe he is over 6ft tall.  George Hincape had Colombian heritage and he was 6ft 3.

If you are Pidcock's size there is no point doing football, or basketball, or trying to be a swimmer, etc.  Those sports are out of reach.  In fact, given his height I'm sure he has dealt with a huge amount of discrimination, but cycling is a sport where he can still be successful.  If Pidcock was black or asian he could still be successful.  If he turned up in races as exactly the same person, but with different skin colour teams would all be interested.  In many cases all they care about is whether you will win or not and even if you are a complete a-hole that doesn't matter.  Look at the comments Alex Dowsett apparently made along that line about Quintana.  He may have been nasty and unliked within his team, but he brought victories.  In his case his non-white skin didn't stop him getting rides.

I don't think you're getting my point. When people call out issues around race in cycling, they're not complaining that people are discriminated against on the grounds of their physique. Whether you can make it as a short, light rider or a big heavy one isn't really relevant to the questions people are asking when they talk about diversity or inclusivity.

squired wrote:

As for your Colombian comment, I don't think anyone is stereotyping apart from you.

Really?? Have you listened to any cycling commentary recently? They're always slipping into remarks about how 'the Colombians are suited to this type of terrain' [steep, high mountains], etc. And where exactly was I stereotyping?

The success of Gaviria & Hodeg isn't evidence that such prejudices don't exist. That's the equivalent of pointing to the 6%* of female CEOs in the FTSE100 and saying 'see - there can't be any sexism in the boardroom, because they made it'.

[* Don't know whether this stat is still current, by I don't imagine it's improved much.]

...but us in the 5'3", 70kg bracket are basically in no man's land in terms of success....especially when the bulk of that 70kg is around the midriff...lol

darnac wrote:

It's not the TdF's fault there aren't more black riders. Plenty of rich black footballers tho'...

It might not be the TdF's "fault" but I think it's fair to say that, as the highest profile cycling event in the world, the TdF has a great platform to make some kind of meaningful statement and, ideally, encourage the sponsors to put their hands in their pockets to start addressing some of the far wider societal issues that mean black and ethnic minorities are far less likely to end up as professional (or even recreational) cyclists than white people.

I find the scarcity of ordinary black people cycling difficult to understand. What makes a person feel that cycling is not for them on account of their race?

I can understand it at the level of organised sport or club activity, but as an individual choice I struggle. It's just personal choice, to go out for a cycle ride alone or with likeminded friends.

I don't see the barriers. I hear the argument that the lack of black TdF stars trickles down. The same can not be said for running, yet people out jogging seem to be mostly the same colour as cyclists. So I am sceptical that elite role models will inspire a groundswell of black leisure cyclists.

Bicycles are very much in evidence across the African continent, so there is no cultural taboo. I've heard it said that possibly the bicycle is seen as emblematic of the poor person's transport - but cycling's image extends equally to the other end of the spectrum.

Either I am missing something, some societal pressure constraining black people's latent wish to go cycling. Or, I wonder whether we are just pandering to our present sense of social justice, which will not be satisfied until its demand that all people cycle is realised - whether they want to or not.

I think in the UK at least, cycling is seen as a poor man's transport and it's considered a rite of passage to get your own car, so some communities will look down on adults old enough to drive that choose to cycle. On the flip side, some white middle-class adults choose to cycle as a lifestyle choice and that's seen as being an anti-establishment stance.

What's needed is to build decent infrastructure (e.g. get cyclists to ratify the designs or just put Saint Chris in charge of them all) and then maybe we'll get our heads round cycling as cheap, effective transport that does scale well.

Interesting point hawkinspeter.  I was thinking back to when I got into cycling, which was when my uncle got my brother and I to cycle with him to a triathlon shop a few miles away, at the age of 14.  Soon after we were hooked on the sport and riding our bikes daily.  At 16 we were cycling to college, then at 18 to university in London.  However, looking at those same routes now traffic levels (and quality of roads) are such that I don't know if 16 year old me would be doing the same. 

A large percentage of ethnic minority kids live in city areas, so they will be impacted by this - busy, dangerous and unfriendly roads, along with parents not keen on the perceived risks.  This is something that will affect anyone living in those areas though, irrespective of race.

squired wrote:

Interesting point hawkinspeter.  I was thinking back to when I got into cycling, which was when my uncle got my brother and I to cycle with him to a triathlon shop a few miles away, at the age of 14.  Soon after we were hooked on the sport and riding our bikes daily.  At 16 we were cycling to college, then at 18 to university in London.  However, looking at those same routes now traffic levels (and quality of roads) are such that I don't know if 16 year old me would be doing the same. 

A large percentage of ethnic minority kids live in city areas, so they will be impacted by this - busy, dangerous and unfriendly roads, along with parents not keen on the perceived risks.  This is something that will affect anyone living in those areas though, irrespective of race.

I do find encouragement in the various knives-down/wheels-up gangs of youths making their presence felt on the roads as that seems to be a largely urban phenomenon. More wheelies in traffic is what we need to make cycling "cool" again.

I'm no expert, but I think you have some good points. It's easy for me, I can afford the equipment and rock up to a club where a lot of the riders look exactly like me, I'll easily fit in and we'll be sharing a laugh straight away. It would be so different if they were all 25 or 75 and I was in Aldi kit and riding a 14 speed Carrera. We naturally feel comfortable with people like us, so we have to make an effort to include others. There will be racism around and that's the society we have, and it'll only change if we make the effort.

Also, a sport where just one item of kit is seen as mid-price at £167 is going to be out of reach for many. To start cycle racing, or even training towards it, can you kit yourself out for less than £1500 unless you are well informed and can spot used bargains? And then where do you keep it all without the bike getting stolen? And as all your mates play football, which you can get into so much more cheaply, why wouldn't you?

Ours is a minority sport and we have to realise there are significant barriers to entry for many. We need to break down those we can, and the message that everyone is welcome and we want everyone to have a go is important.

ASO has a pretty poor record on all of this. They don't give a damn about having a proper womens' race so I suppose we shouldn't expect much. But when even F1 is doing more, you have to think this is embarrassing. I'm not saying that it's easy to get a diverse peloton. You can't suddenly magic up some top riders. But this year of all years it's been pretty easy to send the message that the issue is recognised at least.

Sriracha wrote:

I find the scarcity of ordinary black people cycling difficult to understand. What makes a person feel that cycling is not for them on account of their race?

There's this report from 2011 - http://content.tfl.gov.uk/barriers-to-cycling-for-ethnic-minorities-and-...

Which is interesting,but none of the factors they call out are particularly a BME only problem, the same lack of opportunity, safety concerns, status image of cycling,all of that stuff applies to people of any race or gender or sexual orientation wanting to get into cycling. Break down those barriers and treat it as something that impacts us all.

Tom_77 wrote:

Sriracha wrote:

I find the scarcity of ordinary black people cycling difficult to understand. What makes a person feel that cycling is not for them on account of their race?

There's this report from 2011 - http://content.tfl.gov.uk/barriers-to-cycling-for-ethnic-minorities-and-...

Thanks for that. Having read it, however, I am little closer to understanding.

Nothing in the document points to overt racism, of the sort we have seen in football.

There is a link made with poverty. 57% of BME are excluded from cycling by poverty. However those with money associate cycling with poverty and so do not wish to be associated with cycling. So it's heads, cars win, tails, bikes lose.

Some cultural factors are in play, such as dress codes inimical to cycling (saris), and demands on leisure time (mosque attendance) leaving not enough hours in the day for cycling. These relate mainly to Asian communities.

Overall the document seems to say that poverty is the main barrier, and it is the overlap between poverty with BME populations that leads to their exclusion from cycling. If that is so, then tackling poverty would seem to be the solution, rather than framing this as a racial issue directly.

Other factors are to do with cultural attitudes held by BME populations themselves, rather than the attitudes of others bearing upon them. I am not sure it is right to "correct" such cultural attitudes, that would smack of imperialism to me.