The Bicycle Association has published the insights of its research into diversity in the cycling industry, releasing a report which says the senior leaders are “overwhelmingly white, heterosexual men”, as well as noting “widespread experience of unfair treatment, including harassment”.
The industry body’s work follows its Diversity Report, published in March, and has been released in collaboration with Cycle Industries Europe’s Women in Cycling programme and is supported by WORK180.
Commenting on the report, the Bicycle Association says it sheds light for the first time on critical insights and perspectives surrounding diversity and inclusivity within the cycling industry. It has been put together by surveying 1,123 people from a variety of backgrounds who work across the industry in companies and sectors of varying sizes.
Of the key findings, the report suggests that the industry is overwhelmingly led by straight white men, and that there is “widespread experience” of unfair treatment, including harassment.
Nearly half of those with disabilities hide them from their employer, while “women and those from minority groups are more likely to leave the industry”. The report also highlights how women want “concrete action” on leadership and pay.
On motivations to pursue working within the cycling industry, 63 per cent of men said they were inspired by a passion for cycling, while 45 per cent of women said the same.
In March, the Bicycle Association said the “male, white, cycling enthusiast niche has reached its natural limit” and urged the bike industry to change if it wants to grow and reach new customers.
The body notes that respondents overwhelmingly expressed a desire for greater inclusivity and representation, and called on employers to sign the BA’s ‘Diversity Pledge’ to prioritise seven “key actions to begin to address the findings”.
Lead an inclusive, anti-discriminatory culture
Implement bullying and harassment policy and communicate to all employees
Diversify leadership teams
Make pay equitable
Introduce flexible working and paid leave entitlements
Offer mentoring and career development to all
Give more visibility to women and marginalised groups
Sally Middlemiss of the Bicycle Association said the report “marks a significant step towards understanding the complex dynamics of inclusivity within all levels of the cycling industry”.
“We are dedicated to driving positive change by promoting dialogue, actionable recommendations, and an environment where every individual feels welcome and empowered to achieve their career goals,” she said.
Ian Beasant, managing director of Giant UK, added: “The core purpose of this BA perception survey was to understand the barriers and challenges people face in their company. The acknowledgement and commitment to supporting all equally is our industry’s duty. We must create the most welcoming, inclusive and prosperous environment for all, fostering innovation, representation, and growth.”
-1024x680.jpg "“Clear anti-cyclist bias”: Lawsuit filed against Toronto police after cop doored cyclist… before ticketing rider over incident")
98 thoughts on “White heterosexual men lead the cycling industry, report says amid calls for more inclusive approach”
Is the preponderance of white
Is the preponderance of white, heterosexual men a surprise, given that they make up the vast majority of regular cyclists?
Coming soon – a report headlining the overwhelming number of men involved in our infantry regiments. Send me £99 for your copy.
mike the bike wrote:
Or the local councils drive to get an equal representation of males and females in highways maintenance and dust bin
menpeopleThe gender neutral word for
The gender neutral word for such workers (in Dundee at least) is, “Scaffies”.
Next up, scientists to
Next up, scientists to release new report on ursine defecation habits in arboreal areas.
The question of the specific
The question of the specific nature and site of ursine mammalian excretory processes is one that has exercised the rhetorical skills of homo sapiens sarcasticus for a considerable period of time. Given the frequent reference to this conundrum in demotic speech, it is surprising that this topic of lively debate has not been examined systematically. Paleo-ontological excavation of coprolites would indicate persistence of this behavioural trait through geological epochs.
Men in charge of most stuff
Men in charge of most stuff shocker. Most men in charge of stuff in Europe are straight white men, exclusive reveals…
I suspect more diversity makes things better for everybody. Even the minority who are overpriveledged who’ll definitely feel a bit more equality as oppression – in the end could be better off.
However from where we are it’s obviously going to be (largely) The Man reporting on The Man trying to be less like The Man. Take a gander at the diversity of the staff of the Bicycle Association.
Ooooh! I yam so looking
Ooooh! I yam so looking forward to the probable many patriarchy rants here in response to a report of their excluding of the female (and other!) gender from what they feel is rightfully ( and tightfully) a man’s domain. I see we already have one or two stirrings. 🙂
I think that might be mainly
I think that might be mainly in your head but I also get the impression that you might be quite good at extrapolating peoples positions from a very vague and narrow viewpoint.
Somewhat unsurprisingly, in a world where the white man has run it for a long time, most of the senior positions are occupied by people in that image. Over time this will change but I’m not quite sure how we can expect it to change in just a few years without happily discriminating against anyone who fits that description. Something which we are seemingly happy to do in plenty of areas but which is fundamentally illegal.
People should not be descriminated against or discouraged from any job or career path and that goes for every race, sex and gender…
mctrials23 wrote:
I have some AI that detects the patriarchy-in-posts. Its infallible, obviously. 🙂
Yes, in order to not discriminate agin’ the pink menfolk with all the power and big salaries by denying them this privilege-cum-right and letting “others” have similar positions, we should keep on keepin’ the non-pink/non-male sort down. Irrefutable logic, that, often used by Dr Pangloss and also Pollyanna (both great philosophers) to prove that we live in the best of all possible worlds and everything is nice.
Still in “a few” years it will change, you say, despite the poor pink males with the best jobs having to be made pariahs or even just 3 slides down the greasy poles. Or are we just waiting for their dead men shoes? I’ve a funny feeling that another pink bloke will be pushing those “others” aside to fill such shoes.
Just so …. and yet they are, still. Mind, it’s entirely possible that another culturally classified group will become high fashion, not only getting a chance to be top of those slippery poles but the means also to establish their own group-dominance. After all, humans will be humans. No CEO job for you, you, you … pink man!
Who feels they’ll be able to live in a matriarchy, should the Andrew Tate mission fail utterly and all the blokes have to push the hoovers and make the dinners whilst changing the bairn’s nappy? I can, I can! Did it for years and still do (not the nappies now, though). I quite like a bossy lady, me.
I keep getting the ‘in favour
I keep getting the ‘in favour of the principle of equality’ scene from Yes Minister stuck in my head while reading this comment section..
So you are the product of a
So you are the product of a bossy lady.. figures.
grOg wrote:
Bossy but loving. Try it; you’ll like it! 🙂
Getting to the million dollar
Getting to the million dollar question.
By which means do you define “gender”
Gender stereotyping?
Does it really matter what
Does it really matter what colour or sexual preferences the industry workers are? It is my thoughts that the best person for the job is ‘the best person’, regardless whether they are white, black, yellow, green and whether they like men, women, whatever. It really doesn’t matter, highlighting these issues is just making a point that non whites or gays are different, rather than being treated equally.
Biker Phil wrote:
No, it doesn’t matter – so long as everyone has a genuinely fair chance. And that’s the issue. Conscious discrimination and prejudice are much less overt than in the past but what you are (sex, race, etc.) and where you come from still has a major influence on your prospects in all sorts of areas.
Biases nowadays tend to be more unconscious, which makes them harder to challenge. And sometimes we’re limited by our own biases, and those of friends and family. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try to do better.
I tried to get a job at a
I tried to get a job at a Chinese restaurant, but I wasn’t hired because I was not Chinese.. horrendous discrimination, don’t you agree?
grOg wrote:
Yes.
Why look at this dual
Why look at this dual carriageway, only motor vehicles using it – clearly no interest from cyclists there.
Yes it does matter. Few would
Yes it does matter. Few would argue that we want more of the police in the Met to be black, and more to be women. And in this case we want more women in positions of power in cycling organisations to provide a different perspective, and encourage more diversity amongst cyclists.
Nobody is suggesting that white heterosexual men, including me, shouldn’t cycle though.
Putting aside the corporate
Putting aside the corporate people talking about corporate people, why are the majority of cyclists men, given that doesn’t represent the population as a whole?
Could it be that woman don’t accept that road danger is a reasonable risk to exercise the general right to use the public highways?
To achieve equally of opportunity the attitude of road users must change so that rather than the unacceptable Department of Transport Killed or Seriously Injured metric we ask appropriate questions about road use. Not just the outcome of road traffic incidents..
Once equality of opportunity has been realised and equality of use delivered there’s every chance that all roles within cycling will be open to women as they should be.
(I apologise if you are
(I apologise if you are female yourself but playing the odds) … what about asking some women?
I believe there are at least two women who post on road.cc semi-regularly.
Or, y’know, just nip 100 miles across the North Sea and stand outside a school or anywhere in town and do a quick survey – because in NL although everyone cycles apparently women ride slightly more than men. And while “danger” is an issue it may only be one facet of the reasons. Although again if you make cycling convenient people’s behaviour and outlook can change again.
So could it be “but women are risk averse” becomes one of those tropes that people seize on like “helmet hair” – or even “bike face” from bygone times?
Anyway – note that while you’re doing that survey those answers won’t be the whole story*. Because people happily go about their lives without needing to examine the “why” deeply. And especially not to compare themselves to some hypothetical people living elsewhere that they probably don’t know much about.
* Ask people in the UK why they’re driving and they’ll probably say “to do the shopping, then collect the kids” or “to get to work”. If you press them on why they chose to drive that trip, or chose to live so far from amenities or a bus stop they’ll probably look at you oddly. Doesn’t everyone have a car and if they have it they drive it, right?
chrisonatrike wrote:
Interesting observation. Why so few (assuming you are approx-correct)? It’s possible that there are also very few non-white posters.
I suppose the simple answer is that the proportions online simply reflect those in the “real world”, which is shaped by discrimination.
But it still makes me wonder; why online – where so many of the mechanisms of discrimination are absent – is there not a better balance? You don’t have to brave a world of discrimination to participate here – you just need to want to participate.
Sriracha wrote:
(I only counted those who’ve I recalled had said they’re female). Like the Life of Brian beard gag it could be entirely women (of colour, queer, BAME etc.) posting here – but not wanting to draw attention.
Why would that be? I agree that in theory the internet should mean “you don’t have to brave a world of discrimination to participate”. I’m sure in parts it is. However there seems to be general agreement that the anonymity and distancing effects of the online world also permit it to be a swamp of misunderstanding, patronising attitudes and frank abuse. All the misogyny of “real life” writ large with additional lack of restraint.
Or in short – in most societies men are priveledged and pushy outside the internet. Why’s it gonna be different inside?
There’s a whole bunch of other interesting debateables like “to what extent does the design of a “tool” end up reflecting cultural biases of the designers (apparently unrelated to the technological questions)” but this is already over long.
Mostly because of comment
Mostly because of comment sections like this one, in my case.
ravenbait wrote:
So what do you propose?
Sriracha wrote:
For what? Getting more women into cycling or making the comments section of this website less favourable to men talking sh!te about how “girls” are just biologically indisposed towards cycling? I’m doing fine on the former in more women-friendly forums. Can’t help at all with the latter. As long as this forum tolerates misogynistic nonsense, purveyors of same will contine to post here and attract others of their ilk.
.
.
We’d best CANCEL CANCEL CANCEL then, just to be on the safe side! Neh?
.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
Gosh Flintshire (I’ve removed bollards), it’s a fair point, no? And … could there be another option maybe?
That’s the Guardian way..
That’s the Guardian way.. love a lefty echo chamber.
grOg wrote:
Try The Byline Times. You’ll “love” that albeit in Flintshire infant style. 🙂
ravenbait wrote:
Ok, I’ve seen references to “girls” and I understand that grates, but I missed the mentions of them being “biologically indisposed towards cycling”. I have seen many suggestions that sex differences in risk aversion in the face of road traffic might explain the imbalance between the sexes in cycling, so I googled “sex differences in risk aversion”, and the results seemed to agree that women are more risk averse.
Putting the context aside, my
Putting the context aside, my point is that Department of Transport Killed or Seriously Injured (KSI) metric is very wrong.
We must ask appropriate questions about road use. Not just the outcome of road traffic incidents.
Everyone has the right to travel safely.
Measuring the wrong data is how to get the wrong result.
#VisionZero
lonpfrb wrote:
Preaching to the choir – apart from we don’t want to lose all sight of the KSIs, because they’re so salient. (At least to those directly concerned – unfortunately the rest of us will quite happily forget others’ miseries if they’re sufficiently infrequent.)
But yes – there’s so much more to gain than just “safer roads”. IF we can remove some of the barriers AND make it so driving’s not the default.
Independent mobility for those who can’t / don’t drive. Levelling some structural inequities a little bit (which is where this thread all started IIRC) e.g. like this, or this. Supporting local social connections. Getting a modicum of exercise (all good for mental health also) “for free“. Much nicer places to live in and move around in.
I’m still not quite clear on what the various competing versions of #VisionZero (and similar) actually entail so I’m sticking with “let’s have something as close to ‘Sustainable Safety’ [1] [2] as we can”.
Also #VisionZero suggests to me campaigning against something negative as opposed to campaigning for something positive. Maybe just me though.
Seems a lot of people here
Seems a lot of people here are angry at the very fact the inequality is being pointed out, I wonder why?
I suppose because most people
I suppose because most people (and in this case, I think it’s white, straight men) don’t like being told they are doing things wrong, not least because most of us aren’t consciously doing it (I doubt most people think it’s OK to discriminate overtly these days).
I don’t think it’s helpful to anger too many people (aka voters), though, even if they are in the wrong. What matters is what makes things better – but much discourse seems to be about condemning ‘sinners’, rather than positively encouraging better behaviour.
The report seems to have
The report seems to have willfully excluded the evil ginger fat b@%tard community and their under representation in cycling … just saying
I wanted to posted private
I wanted to posted private moments of bears in the woods, but others did it better so I will skip this part.
The key stat here is that much more men in the industry work because they really like it. And whatever kind of job someone does because he/she likes it, the more likely to be good at it, getting paid better and both employer and employee be happy and keep this cooperation. And what people do something as a hobby/tool the more likely is to like it and try to do it as a job, because as the saying says, “turn your hobby into a profession and you will never work again”
With more interesting stats here, it was mentioned in comments, that Dutch girls cycle the same or even slightly more than men. Girls are not stupid, they were evolved to protect little fragile creatures with a lifetime of few hours if left without attention and that is what led us so strong enough as a species to be able to destroy this planet. So girls seriously think about safety and that is why they cycle in Netherlands, they have a safe infrastructure and also a legal framework and culture that is friendly to cycling.
So next time you want to inclusiveness in bike industry, don’t bust employer’s balls telling them to hire people they don’t really to work in the industry, but push in any way possible everyone possible to make cycling safer and more attractive to everyone, and then you will have a bigger pool of willing tallented people to work in the industry.
cyclisto wrote:
Wot a collection of juicy patriarchal nuggets! Ee, me sides. 🙂
One must here enquire about the women, as the girls may still be at school; or locked in the nursery with the babies you seem to think they all have, to the exclusion of any other interest.
Are there no women that really like cyling and possibly a potential job running a cycling industry org of some kind? Perhaps it’s just one of those female gender intrinsic traits identified by patriarchs using their superior intelligence (ha ha) …. that women are jes no good at them technical things, managing etc.? Alas, events have swept this notion aside. Women are even engineers …. using tools and maths! They are even better at such thing than the blokes!! My wife manages me!! (No easy task, let me tell you).
I’ve had a word with t’ladywife, by the way, explaining that she probably shouldn’t be going cycling as there’s no cycling infrastructure here so she should be afraid and staying somewhere where she can look after babies. Luckily I was ready for the bust she aimed at my balls.
When she was a girl, t’ladywife was in the TA, operating general purpose machine guns and learning how to disarm bullymen. Later she took up riding motorbikes and at one point worked for the local polis in, er “training” motorbike yobs they’d had-up for hooning – in how to grow up and be sensible on such a machine. But the polis probably only gave her the job ‘cos there was no man about to do it (they were all hooners).
PS Turn your hobby into a job and never play at it again. Instead, spend 16 miserable hours a day doing the VAT, marketing, dealing with castigating customers and several other soul-destroying tasks. Mind, women are generally better at handling them than are men, without a lot of shouting and sulking the top blokes seem to indulge in when stressed. Must be all that baby-mindin’.
Ok we get it, your wife is
Ok we get it, your wife is Rambo. But it doesn’t mean that because one is Rambo every girl is Rambo. This is where stats come.
How do you explain that women in bike industry are massively uninspired compared to men and why there are much less women cyclists on roads with no serious cycling infrastructure.
cyclisto wrote:
Who this “we”? The patriarchy? 🙂
Frankly, you seem to “get” very little. This may be due to a lack of opportunity to see things because o’ them man-blinkers you’ve got on. Tear ’em off, lad! There’s a whole new world out here full o’ women doing what you think of as man-only things, often better than the big-men.
“Girl”? T’ladywife is 59, man! Also, no Rambo but rather a fit & healthy 8st 10llb woman, admittedly rather uncompromising in her approach to wee patriarchs. Also an avid cyclist, as well as a swimmer and gym-goer. Somehow, despite being only a wee “girl” she’s brave enough to risk dealing with aggresive man-things, in cars or otherwise. She uses a virtual pin to prick their vast egos.
The effects of patriarchical culture that finds opportunity to denigrate and dissuade the female (and other non-male) genders from participating in a large range of what the big-men think of as “their” domains?
Now then, I must ask. Are you a-one o’ them Taters? If so, I recommend that you look up the meaning of the phrase: atavistic throwback.
I need a drink after wading
I need a drink after wading through that.. suffice to say, no-one is holding women back; that’s just lefty feminist nonsense; it’s up to women to make it in whatever endeavour they choose to engage and if they fail, that’s on them, not on the men that have long succeeded in those pursuits.
grOg wrote:
Ah, you favour The Thatcher Thing mode of success – swing your handbag, bellow intolerant hoo-hah louder than any softlads you come across and genereally try very hard to behave even worserer than the men-things all about you?
Me, I like the bossy-but-loving ladies, giving me a good nannying for me own good.
BTW, I can’t help feeling that you could do with a good nannying, before you hurt yersen as well as all the other infants. 🙂
“BTW, I can’t help feeling
“BTW, I can’t help feeling that you could do with a good nannying,”
Of course you can’t from your bubble.
“before you hurt yersen as well as all the other infants. ” . It’s the Patriarchy that’s making you write such insults, right?
I guess they aren’t very keen
I guess they aren’t very keen on equality and diversity courses in australia.
cyclisto wrote:
Errm, what? I mean… are they?
According to this road.cc
According to this road.cc article, yes
“On motivations to pursue working within the cycling industry, 63 per cent of men said they were inspired by a passion for cycling, while 45 per cent of women said the same.”
@Cugel Ok we get it, patriarchal culture.
cyclisto wrote:
Like lots of surveys on its own that seems a bit odd (for both men and women – I mean, the cycling industry isn’t like working for Natwest or Tescos). Of course this one was a “multiple answers” question. But of note.
However:
But why could that be? Are they just not as into gear ratio chat?
Now that’s not limited to the world of cycling, but perhaps (for cultural / historic reasons) it’s more marked here? Given women gave a different profile of motivations – not just “I love bikes, me” – perhaps the following is relevant also:
I mean – even 1/5 of your employees not being sure they’re fairly paid… I can’t think of many jobs I’ve done where people didn’t pay keen attention to their take home and how that compared with others doing the same job.
cyclisto wrote:
Without a breakdown of the job roles it’s hard to make a fair comparison there. How many women being interviewed are in HR, accounts, marketing and other roles that are completely unconnected with cycling itself and require little to no cycling specific knowledge or experience? If anything I’d take that stat as circumstantial evidence that women are even more underrepresented in the cycling side of the cycling industry than the headline stats indicate.
Plus, stating the obvious, it’s more difficult to stay inspired when you’re more likely to be harassed and discriminated against.
Girls think about safety?
Girls think about safety? tell that to my daughter who rode like a loony as a child and now as an adult fails to comprehend the danger of tram tracks, leading to an off that smashed her knee up..
grOg wrote:
Perhaps she’s just trying desperately to get away from her Da?
Your first ramblings had some
Your first ramblings had some content in them. Now what’s left is spitefullness and hate. Take your own advice, and go get some nannying. If not, I hope Road.cc mods are up to their task.
Don’t agree with the
Don’t agree with the knockabout aspect but the problem is – as best we have the statistics currently – Cugel is likely to have a point. Abuse of all kinds begins at home and and is shockingly common. Or should be shocking as we also know it doesn’t help creating psychologically healthy adults.
https://refuge.org.uk/what-is-domestic-abuse/the-facts/
Which might eventually filter into women’s behaviour in industries dominated by men.
Anyway, per the apparently female poster this kinda men-chat is a turn off, excluding and more an indication of where the issue lies.
Havin difficulties in
Chrisonatrike, I am having difficulties in understanding you points – mainly because English is not my native language. But if you are suggesting that Cugel’s comment about girl riding away from her dad amounts to anything more than a prejudiced slur I believe you are giving way too much credit to the person. I am not trying to argue against the facts you linked – I am challenging the foundations of Cugel’s writing: connections between facts and comments should hinge on more than “might”.
I really struggle with undertanding you last argument, for example what is “this kinda men-chat”? But from what i gather it does indicate some sort of broad-sweeping accusation that I myself tend to find problematic, off puting and probably disagreeing with it to some extent.
Destroyer666 wrote:
Destroyer!? 666!!?
Now then, old harbinger of the divil ……
You mistake mockery of the Groggy one’s pokes and jibes for spitefulness. Also, you mistake the teasing about his huffpuffery remarks for hate.
Of course, I do realise that all you tighty-righty fast-asleep-and-still-dreamin-of-unicorns’ folk like to employ extreme hyperbole when whining about those who dare to disagree with your far-rightful postures and remarks, not to mention your freedumb to cast nasty, er, spites and hates when doubted in the slightest degree concerning your many dogmas but ….. if Groggy wants to play at skoolyard yelling, I’m his skoolboy!
Anyway, try to calm down a bit. If there’s no nanny to stroke you, try doing it to yourself. What’s that, you already do? 🙂
Your statements went and go
Your statements went and go beyond mockery and teasing. All the language tricks and other efforts to be quirky or whatever do not mask or do anything beneficial to the nastyness and prejudice that ooze from the many labels and know-it-all comments that are all over your texts. You seem to be playing an endless record about your own dogma. No doubt you like the sound and believe in it, but I am tuning out.
Your English is getting
Your English is getting better.
Even a child knows this…
A fast learner! Even a child knows this…
Destroyer666 wrote:
Well, I am a blatherskite, undeniably. On and on and on and on …..
Tuning out, are ‘ee? Were you ever tuned in, though? Perhaps you were twiddling your dial in an attempt to find Rush Limbaugh progs and landed here by accident? Ole Rush would likely be more to your taste, as he bites and spits at imaginary libtards (whatever they are).
Alas, he died of a particularly bilious vent o’ his spleen about someone who laughed at wot he sed.
There’s always Truth Social, you know …… ?
Destroyer666 wrote:
Well, I am a blatherskite, undeniably.— Destroyer666
Sounds like you’ve made an impression on someone.
Cycling “like most other
Cycling “like most other sports” shock.
Wasn’t sure where to post
Wasn’t sure where to post this story – nothing to do with cycling, but it did make me laugh out loud (scornfully).
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2023/aug/17/trans-women-banned-from-world-chess-events-while-review-takes-place
I found it weird, but didn’t
I found it weird, but didn’t read the story. I assume it’s the advantage of all that testosterone before transition…
ktache wrote:
Storm in a cultural teacup. It’s all those AIs identifying as a human you really need to worry about, or so I’ve heard…
chrisonatrike wrote:
On the contrary – it’s all those humans identifying as AIs. (Mind, many of them are artificial, constucted by the bro factories of certain universities). Significant numbers of them technocrats believe themselves to be infallible processors of the logicals, employing incontrovertible “facts” derived from a reading of Ayn Rand novels and the findings of business-sponsored laborarories as feedstock in their production of “the right” rational outcomes, which will generally be proliferated about the planet and down the throats of you and me, whether we like it or not.
Strangely, these plans often turn out to be mad totalitarian adventures of a somewhat destructive kind. The bro-cum-AIs explain this away as “evolution” and “just business”, something they’re in favour of, especially if various technological red teeth and claws can do away with any opposition. The teeth and claws seem big enough, though, to do away with everybody and everything.
*******
Some of the techno-bro current doings about the planet are likely rather more pressing in their potential for an apocolyptic future than are other current concerns, making issues such as gender hierarchies seem lesser matters. One’s gender and its associated rights or lack of them will suddenly become irrelevant when we’re all dead of Muskrat or some other tech billionaire adventure that pollutes or weathers or “evolves” us all to death.
Are men and women unequally
Are men and women unequally matched in open competition? I’m assuming that is why they are classified separately.
Sriracha wrote:
Yes, obviously the debate on the social and cultural reasons for it is huge and complex but the current best rated woman player in the world, Yifan Hou, is 127th in the open rankings. Judit Polgar did get as high as eighth in the open rankings though and won games against many of the best men of all time including Carlsen, Kasparov, Karpov and Spassky.
Sriracha wrote:
Absolutely, mens bigger stronger muscles are able to move the pieces and trip the game clock quicker giving them milliseconds more actual thinking time!
Backladder wrote:
Absolutely, mens bigger stronger muscles are able to move the pieces and trip the game clock quicker giving them milliseconds more actual thinking time!— Sriracha
I was looking for an empirical answer rather than any underlying reasons. You managed neither.
David9694 wrote:
Isn’t that part of the problem? Cycling surely should be an attractive, accessible transport option more than it’s a sport but is often seen as being for sporty, competitive, relatively well-off men who are into the performance and tech side of cycling – whether they work in the industry or are just its customers.
Wouldn’t it be better for everyone if the cycle industry workforce looked a bit more like the breadth of society we’d like it to serve?
This is a severely
This is a severely disappointing thread – “that’s the way it is, mate” seems to be the main theme. so yes, yes it would.
Cabbies “Lycra’s are all middle aged white men and never seen in winter”* would love all this. Let’s be better, the example often set by Cycling UK, than those other train-wreck major sports managements, from everyday ultilty riding to taking gold at the Olympics.
“Treat everyone equally and never discriminate” is 1970s stuff – a proper equality delivery system looks at where inequality occurs and takes action to address it. If your response is “oh, but look at the RAF” then you’re no better than a driver with their “cyclists want to send us back to the Stone Age” Schtick.
We need more Carla Francombes who have found a way to navigate the often appalling insults and threats on social media and that all too often translate into the real world with it feeling like “who will win at fisticuffs” when it comes to who had right of way past that parked car.
* actually – your point, guys?
David9694 wrote:
Their point: The having of a little power, however petty and meanly employed, over others in the traditional class, racialist and sexist system hierarchies of our fine British tradition, originating from the long depths of human history, with a special mention to the monotheistic artifice of The Great Chain of Being.
Someone has to be the king with a divine right and someone the wormy things in the muck! If you can belt your lass (and the kids) ‘rund the ear to keep her in her place (the worm-muck) that’s just as it should be!
********
When I were a lad, I noticed that many of my childhood friends were condemned to live in a household containing a monster, called “dad” but actually more a-one o’ them devil-torturers you see in paintings by Hieronymus. They all had a point, oh yes; and they used it all the time, on everyone they could poke and pierce with it.
Even worse, kids that endure
Even worse, kids that endure living in a single mother household, known to lead to poor scholastic results and adult life outcomes.
grOg wrote:
”Ere, ‘ere – must I show you my PhD in Thinking Rather Than Reading The Dictator and my fine pension that’s 10% more than sufficient, even for a tool-wielding constructor of all sorts albeit with an addiction to the very shiniest of tools!?
And don’t forget my excellent bossy-loving ladywife. Betcha haven’t got such a lady, you. No. Some lads just can’t be bossed, eh? Or loved. 🙂
What if… women don’t want
What if… women don’t want to cycle?
A simple straw pole of my team in the office (8 women, 5 men), and all the women think that cycling isn’t for them.
Not because its male dominated, but because they don’t feel safe.
Too many loonies driving cars.
Too many big trucks
Cycle? And get treated like shit by everyone?
Where am I gonna clean up before work?
How am I gonna carry my stuff?
And my personal favourite of “Look what happened to you…” [got hit while cycling home, life changing injuries]
At no point did any of my colleagues mention anything at all about feeling excluded because of male domination.
But then … that’s just 8 women in a non-cycling office.
“What if… women don’t want
“What if… women don’t want to cycle?”
Yet when cycling is made safer and better infrastructure is provided, more women cycle.
If you make the environment intimidating for those who aren’t as strong/confident/foolhardy (all of which are aided by testosterone), it’s not surprising that relatively few women want to cycle.
In my bit of London, I’d say half the cyclists I see are women. Most of my female friends cycle, although few are “sporty” types. Despite my frequent complaints, we have excellent infrastructure and routes with little/no motor traffic. When I get on the main roads, or even into Not London, it’s very much male-dominated.
It’s fairly well-accepted that diversity at senior levels improves outcomes, due to the increased range of viewpoints. I can very well imagine bad infra being stopped if women in senior positions were there to say “you lot might feel safe riding on that, we wouldn’t”.
On that – for better or worse
On that – for better or worse women even in the UK do more of the childcare (and care in general e.g. with older folks etc.). For those with children – if it doesn’t feel safe to do with your kids, you’re much less likely to do it at all.
Meanwhile in “Unicorn land”:
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2013/12/05/arriving-at-school-by-bicycle/
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/cycling-with-babies-and-toddlers/
https://bicycledutch.wordpress.com/2011/10/13/safe-cycling-for-8-to-80-year-olds/
Oldfatgit wrote:
Props for actually asking women! (I should just stop there – but … maybe it’s because I’m a rambling man)
But what about the men? Or perhaps your company specialises in hunting mammoths with spears, professional wrestling or is full of stock traders on commissions in which case … (currently, Cugel) nevermind!
When people say they don’t want to then yes – that is how they feel, but I immediately want to ask “why not?” (after all cycling is more efficient than walking). If we *did* level the playing field so that e.g. cycling on the roads didn’t feel like an extreme sport practiced by oddballs how would they feel then? (e.g. it’s not “oh, well women just don’t want to cycle full stop”).
Three different things: women in a particular industry, women in sport / “recreational” cycling and women cycling as just another transport mode.
On the last – I think “safety” is a “necessary but not sufficient” thing. After all the UK the roads are “very safe” (by numbers) and yet effectively nobody cycles. Humans also need convenience (around the kind of lives they’re living – women may have different responsibilities) and we want to do things socially.
All I know is that in the country which has done the most to make cycling at least as convenient as driving for many trips* women do a bit more cycling than men.
* Where cycling is something which feels really safe and something normal for normal people to do wearing normal clothes, together with any family and friends (just like they’d walk somewhere).
“But what about the men?”
“But what about the men?”
I asked them as well, but as this was about woment, decided that reporting their answers was somewhat less important.
They pretty much came back with esstially the same answers – safety from othe road users – with the addition of “because I’m not fucking mad like you are”
———
Cycling seems to be like being a football supporter:
Many people that are not rabid about football can understand why people would be attracted to it.
Many people who are football supporters can’t understand why someone doesn’t like the game.
People are entitled *not* to like cycling, and *not* to want to cycle, as much as we are entitled *to* like it.
Oldfatgit wrote:
That was exactly my point. I appreciate this has now wandered quite a ways from “straight white men run the cycling industry”.
Specifically on “cycling as transport / everyday cycling” then: on “diversity of take-up of cycling” the headline should be “People don’t like or want to cycle on roads in the UK” rather than “Women don’t like cycling”.
I completely agree. And conditions in the UK are what they are so I don’t expect or want people to like cycling on roads in the UK as they are now. I’m not saying “I can so why can’t you?” (though it’s statistically very safe…)
As you suggest I do have selfish reasons. Obviously I’m an enthusiast and like to share the joy – but I’d like change. People don’t realise it could be very different – and it’s actually possible to achieve. So they don’t express an interest. And thus politicians and media and local authorities see it as “no one’s asking to swim the crocodile-infested river, so building a bridge / reducing the crocodile population is a waste of money”.
I’m always slightly disturbed
I’m always slightly disturbed by the implicit assumption, that whatever the women are doing whilst the blokes are out cycling, they ought to sacrifice that to make more time for cycling, all in the name of diversity (which paradoxically sets homogeneity as its yardstick). It says that the cycling is more valuable than whatever they were up to, moreover that it is more valuable precisely because it finds favour with men.
Case in point, I went cycling today, she went visiting girl friends. She can’t spend the same hours twice, cycling took the hit. You could argue that I was discriminated against in that I was only ever going to feel like a spare part if I chose to go along with the girls-together outing, so I just had to seek solace cycling, a poor second to her socially enriching experience.
Bloody hell, what a load of
Bloody hell, what a load of gibberish. I pity your partner…
TempleOrion wrote:
That’s prime man-logic you’re dismissing there! It may be difficult to parse and may turn out to be a logic that has meaning only in the private universe of ubermen but shouldn’t be condemned just for being mad, daft and besides any point in the matter under discussion!
Everyone should have the freedum to regurgiatate as many daft notions as they can swallow, digest and reorder into a forum post. I do it all the time. 🙂
Perhaps the partner you pity enjoys the entertaining comedy of such stuff? A lot of modern women (assuming the partner is one-such) enjoy a titter, or even an outright guffaw, at such manly mutterings. Sometimes they get together at the WI and have a reet good laugh as they swap tales of the latest male misogyny mash-ups emitted by their “masters”.
Sriracha wrote:
With apologies for repeating myself from earlier posts, I think your implicit assumption that cycling is a discretionary pastime is the more disturbing.
For most people, cycling shouldn’t be about sacrificing other interests – it’s just a sensible way of getting from A to B. That it’s often seen as an exclusive sport (not just financially but in the knowledge and culture around it) is part of the problem.
You are right, I was only
You are right, I was only looking at leisure cycling. Not organised sport, not utility cycling. I suspect the main arena for discrimination would be in organised cycling, which I assume means mainly sport.
I don’t see EDI as uniformity
I don’t see EDI as uniformity. Different genders, races, cultural groups etc will have variable (and overlapping) distributions of attributes. This should be celebrated and is the foundation of evolutionary resilience (we might need this as ‘environments’ change). The problem is the way different attributes are valued and rewarded within a dangerously flawed human enterprise not based in the real biophysical world.
Do people really have nothing
Do people really have nothing more important to worry about ? Attempting to give toss. Toss not given.
White, male, British, heterosexual, not pretending to be a woman, and proud of it.
michophull wrote:
I’ll tell you an amazing thing about human beings, they’re actually capable of caring about more than one thing at once. Well some are, anyway, probably evolution’s way of maintaining a balance with those who don’t care about anything but themselves. Perhaps you’d give a toss if you were, or one of your loved ones was, a woman who wanted to make a career in the bicycle industry?
I too am white, male, British and heterosexual by the way. I’m neither proud nor ashamed of being any of those things, why would I be proud or ashamed of things that are purely an accident of birth over which I had no influence?
michophull wrote:
Pride, as can be seen everywhere, comes before a fall. Yes. Pink no-toss uber-lads waving union jacks go falling down black holes full of daft-think all the time and everywhere, these days.
If they’re lucky, a Toryspiv spotter will recruit them in some scheme or other to vandalise things useful to others but about which the Toryspiv doesn’t give a toss. They will have a new identity they can attach their pride to: Toryspiv not-awake vandal with a pocket full of freedumb. Huzzah!
If they’re unlucky, a bigger no-tosser uses them as a plaything, despite their calls for someone who gives a toss to rescue them.
‘Twas ever thus.
It’s interesting how many
…
I’m thinking about making a
I’m thinking about making a black hole in a bottle full of daft-think a bit later. Probably end up a Pink no-toss uber-lad (at least in my bobble-heater) as a result.
(Apologies for playing the same game as with the “contrarians” but the language was fruitier than ripe durian…)
.
.
Hey, I love Road.cc threads, me!!
.
Were you dropped on your head
Were you dropped on your head as a baby ?
Hirsute wrote:
As it happens, I was. Well – catapulted from one o’ them big prams they had when I was a bairn, 481 years ago. The pram was being raced by a 5 year-old who thought me and my carriage was better than the dolly in a home-made boogey they give ‘er, the gender-totalitarians!
The local grocer rushed from his shop to rub butter on me bonce, as a small egg arose there. This was the moment that made me who I yam, of course – a sort of opposite to little boys from Flintshire.
Flintshire Boy wrote:
Can’t picture you lovin’ anything, somehow. Are you sure?
Yawn. Again?
Yawn. Again?
Is there nothing better to fill the web site.
No context into what the
No context into what the overall demographics of cyclists are. I strongly suspect that it is largely white heterosexual men who are cyclists – especially in a danger rich environment like British roads. The challenge is not to whine about it, it’s to engage the right people to balance both the demographics and the leadership. Because if you elevate even ecxcellent leaders from outside the dominant demographic, it will alwyas be an uphill struggle. In an ideal world we’d have a balanced demographic of both cyclists and leadership, but hey this world isn;t really ideal is it. Lot of work required. We need vision, strategy, planning and most of all execution.
Does this tell is anything we
Does this tell is anything we don’t now already?
I would suggest that direction of travel is more important.
Everyone is infinitely
Everyone is infinitely nuanced, dividing people into a handful of arbitrary categories creates divisiveness and breeds tribalism and division.