Colombian women's cycling team jerseys !

longshank · 16-09-2014 10:38pm

pelevin wrote: »

I find your .........'s very offensive.

I'm sorry you find them offensive, they were there because I couldnt actually think of anything!!

ROK ON · 16-09-2014 10:39pm

Is the uniform objectionable;
(1) objectively or subjectively?
(2) when it was not designed to be so
(3) when the athletes themselves do not feel so?

I thought that I understood what objectifying women and demeaning them as objects of nothing other than sexual desire was - but I am obviously mistaken.

I worry that any innocent action of mine might be construed as objectifying women.

I have a colleague who wears a flesh coloured suit - is that offensive in the way this cycling gear is offensive.

I have a lot to learn. Some people seem to have certain truths.

pelevin · 16-09-2014 10:40pm

longshank wrote: »

I'm sorry you find them offensive, they were there because I couldnt actually think of anything!!

The shape of them more than anything else.

ROK ON · 16-09-2014 10:46pm

MPFG wrote: »

sexism is real

Absolutely. But when is an action judged to be sexist.
If the women were forced to wear the kit because it was lurid or revealing with the purpose of generating cheap PR based in titillation then I think many would agree that it was sexist.

However when that is explicitly not the case or when the case is impossible to prove, then who arbitrates sexism, racism, bigotry.

These issues were highlighted during the recent PantiGate affair. I found myself conflicted then - but now I am simply confused.

Iranoutofideas · 16-09-2014 10:51pm

Given that people who don't have to wear it are the most outraged and the team themselves aren't...well that should just tell you precisely what is going on here.

MPFG · 16-09-2014 10:56pm

ROK ON wrote: »

Absolutely. But when is an action judged to be sexist.
If the women were forced to wear the kit because it was lurid or revealing with the purpose of generating cheap PR based in titillation then I think many would agree that it was sexist.

However when that is explicitly not the case or when the case is impossible to prove, then who arbitrates sexism, racism, bigotry.

These issues were highlighted during the recent PantiGate affair. I found myself conflicted then - but now I am simply confused.

Believe it or not ..I don't go around looking for examples of sexism or any other ism...most reasonable women don't

The kit itself is not an issue as it is not an issue to the team who wear it....However images of it in a certain way/light are being used by the media as the only image of female cycling that anyone ever sees ...this is the problem
I didn't look at the binkin image and alot people like me will see these women and think they are naked...and this is why the image is all across the papers...not because the women are cyclists or the kit is gold
This is why is is objectionable....

And while the image of the men in red is also provocative it is not used as the predominant image of mens cycling

Sexism like racism is imo based on your intent

magicbastarder · 16-09-2014 11:05pm

MPFG wrote: »

Sexism like racism is imo based on your intent

it's possible to be sexist or racist without intending to do so.

eeeee · 16-09-2014 11:08pm

MPFG wrote: »

Believe it or not ..I don't go around looking for examples of sexism or any other ism...most reasonable women don't

The kit itself is not an issue as it is not an issue to the team who wear it....However images of it in a certain way/light are being used by the media as the only image of female cycling that anyone ever sees ...this is the problem
I didn't look at the binkin image and alot people like me will see these women and think they are naked...and this is why the image is all across the papers...not because the women are cyclists or the kit is gold
This is why is is objectionable....

And while the image of the men in red is also provocative it is not used as the predominant image of mens cycling

Sexism like racism is imo based on your intent

^^^^ this, this, a million times this.

ROK ON wrote: »

Absolutely. But when is an action judged to be sexist.
If the women were forced to wear the kit because it was lurid or revealing with the purpose of generating cheap PR based in titillation then I think many would agree that it was sexist.

Overt sexism such as that you have mentioned is easy to spot and find objectionable.
What imo is more dangerous is the insidious kind, the kind that women condone themselves as a result of internalizing a cultural norm/pressure and taking it on as a truth, such as acting/behaving in a certain way and conforming to a patriarchal ideal as opposed to a position of equality.

Here is a good Ted talk on why the representation of women and men is fundamentally different, and may help clear up why the kit is so damaging:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMS4VJKekW8

Right now, the kit is the predominant image of women's cycling. Indeed if you google women's cycling it is the first thing that comes up. That is not ok. The naked male kit does not even come up in the first few pages of the google results for mens cycling. And therein lies the problem, and where the media and our current culture place women's cycling.

slap/dash · 16-09-2014 11:50pm

MPFG wrote: »

Ok go ahead and ban me

I won’t stand by while some posters are being deliberately provocative and undermining the women posts on here with words like 'histronics’ when we women object to these images of women cycling and are dismissed with almost a 'nothing much going on here' as if its just our reaction that is at fault … sexism is real ...but this point scoring and baiting is insidious and enfeebling the seriousness of how some of us see it

As for the picture of the bikini …it doesn’t fit fully in the post frame and I didn’t see the caption ..but I didn’t look hard because the women took up most of the frame and I didn't look hard after that

Well said. Sexism racism etc are attritional microaggressions as well as and perhaps more so than the obvious stuff that everyone almost would agree on being foul. And that is why the easy dismissals of the PC brigade is so very insidiously harmful. Is it really such a chore to act with thoughtful care for other human beings?

alastair · 17-09-2014 12:41am

MPFG wrote: »

Except you didn't ask any questions ....

Oh, but I did. You still haven't managed an answer.

MPFG wrote: »

You said “Except that there's nothing to suggest that anyone is trying to market anything here .”

No I didn't. But nice try. Care to engage with what I actually wrote?

MPFG wrote: »

You haven’t asked me If I feel anyone is exploited …I would have given you an answer But you have just interpreted my post as you will and tried to undermine my replies with derogatory remarks like You also introduce a picture of a woman in a bikini....for what purpose I don't know except to be provocative

That you didn't get the point of the image I posted isn't that surprising, given your record of missing the point in this thread.

MPFG wrote: »

You are the worst kind of poster…you think you are smart but you come across as anything but determined to twist statements to argue around the edges of what can be a very emotive issue for some who feel they ARE sexually exploited and this kind of imagery (even if it was unintentional) does nothing to alleviate that predicement .

I'm not twisting anything. If you had the courage to stand over your insinuations, instead of rolling out straw men arguments, you might be better served.

NIMAN · 17-09-2014 12:43am

This story for me just sums up how easily a nothing story can go viral in todays world.

alastair · 17-09-2014 12:52am

slap/dash wrote: »

Well said. Sexism racism etc are attritional microaggressions as well as and perhaps more so than the obvious stuff that everyone almost would agree on being foul. And that is why the easy dismissals of the PC brigade is so very insidiously harmful. Is it really such a chore to act with thoughtful care for other human beings?

Any of this stream of consciousness relate to the kit? Because no-one has made a case for any objectification, sexualisation, sexism, or harm in said kit. The only 'attritional microaggressions' at play here are being rolled out by those determined to ascribe some sort of malice, without any evidence. It's a poorly designed kit, nothing more. There's no dismissal of the PC brigade here, just pointing out that the emperor of outrage has no clothes (unlike the cyclists).

shruikan2553 · 17-09-2014 1:06am

Iranoutofideas wrote: »

I'm worried that I can't tell if some of these posts are serious or sarcastic.

Glad I'm not the only one. I saw the picture, thought it was just an unfortunate choice of colouring and a fed days later come across this thread and see the replies. I thought they were serious at first, then sarcastic and now I'm back to serious

eeeee · 17-09-2014 2:23am

alastair wrote: »

Any of this stream of consciousness relate to the kit? Because no-one has made a case for any objectification, sexualisation, sexism, or harm in said kit. The only 'attritional microaggressions' at play here are being rolled out by those determined to ascribe some sort of malice, without any evidence. It's a poorly designed kit, nothing more. There's no dismissal of the PC brigade here, just pointing out that the emperor of outrage has no clothes (unlike the cyclists).

The case for objectification etc has been made repeatedly throughout this thread. It has not gone viral because of hotter innocuous it is, it looks like a women's cycling team naked from the waist down. That this is now the top story in women's cycling and not that teams athletic achievements and why is the reason for this discussion.

The poster you quoted put forward why such forms of sexism/ homophobia, transphobia etc. are as dangerously permissive and pervasive as more overt forms of same. I would argue that these are more insidious and dangerous as they are couched in (very flawed imo) logic.

read the first post on this thread. It specifically asks whether the female contributors to this forum would wear the kit, in a flippant, dismissive manner, not to speak of the latent objectification contained within such a suggestion.

furiousox · 17-09-2014 8:21am

alastair · 17-09-2014 8:22am

gadetra wrote: »

The case for objectification etc has been made repeatedly throughout this thread.

With regard to the kit - no it has not.

gadetra wrote: »

T It has not gone viral because of hotter innocuous it is, it looks like a women's cycling team naked from the waist down.

Nope - it's gone viral because it's a funny, if unintentional, design fail.

gadetra wrote: »

T That this is now the top story in women's cycling and not that teams athletic achievements and why is the reason for this discussion.

It's not the top story in women's cycling. It's the current top google news hit on the string women's cycling, because it's a viral story containing those words. It means nothing - any more than the biggest google hit on the string 'cat and keyboard' might lead you down a particular path. It's worth noting that google returns the same (funny viral story) news hits for 'cycling' on it's own. Is this then the top story in cycling?

gadetra wrote: »

TThe poster you quoted put forward why such forms of sexism/ homophobia, transphobia etc. are as dangerously permissive and pervasive as more overt forms of same. I would argue that these are more insidious and dangerous as they are couched in (very flawed imo) logic.

I'd argue that there's a rather more apparent flawed logic at play here.

gadetra wrote: »

Tread the first post on this thread. It specifically asks whether the female contributors to this forum would wear the kit, in a flippant, dismissive manner, not to speak of the latent objectification contained within such a suggestion.

The first post in this thread contains nothing of the sort. And even if it did contain that question - the image deserves no more than flippancy - it's not the sexist scenario you claim it to be - it's simply a poorly considered kit design.

letape · 17-09-2014 9:02am

shruikan2553 wrote: »

Glad I'm not the only one. I saw the picture, thought it was just an unfortunate choice of colouring and a fed days later come across this thread and see the replies. I thought they were serious at first, then sarcastic and now I'm back to serious

I also saw the picture a few days ago on Facebook and maybe in my innocence thought nothing of it - I didn't see any apparent nakedness just a not very nicely coulered kit.

The analogy someone here made to the "emperors new clothes" seems very appropriate to me.

REBELSAFC · 19-09-2014 10:26am

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/cycling/29256334

But at a team news conference on Thursday, Rojas said: "I've already said that I designed the uniform and, as an athlete, as a woman, as the cyclist that I am, I wouldn't be ashamed with this kind of design.
"They're the sponsors' colours; there's nothing scandalous in that. We wear our uniform with pride and we are not considering changing it..............

"It's the primary colour used by Solgar, a company that makes vitamins, and is also similar to the one used by San Mateo University, another one of our sponsors," Rojas told the Cycling Inquisition blog.
"In fact, it was going to be the kit's primary colour, throughout the upper portion.
"But within the peloton, that colour would not be visible enough, so we opted to switch it to the shorts, and instead used red and yellow on the upper part, for the sake of visibility. The red and yellow are the colours of the flag of Bogota [the capital of Colombia]."

Another case of a story blown out of all proportion.

The reasons mentioned for the kit design in that article make sense, and the colour is gold.

whupdedo · 19-09-2014 10:34am

REBELSAFC wrote: »

http://www.bbc.com/sport/0/cycling/29256334

But at a team news conference on Thursday, Rojas said: "I've already said that I designed the uniform and, as an athlete, as a woman, as the cyclist that I am, I wouldn't be ashamed with this kind of design.
"They're the sponsors' colours; there's nothing scandalous in that. We wear our uniform with pride and we are not considering changing it..............

"It's the primary colour used by Solgar, a company that makes vitamins, and is also similar to the one used by San Mateo University, another one of our sponsors," Rojas told the Cycling Inquisition blog.
"In fact, it was going to be the kit's primary colour, throughout the upper portion.
"But within the peloton, that colour would not be visible enough, so we opted to switch it to the shorts, and instead used red and yellow on the upper part, for the sake of visibility. The red and yellow are the colours of the flag of Bogota [the capital of Colombia]."

Another case of a story blown out of all proportion.

The reasons mentioned for the kit design in that article make sense, and the colour is gold.

Careful now, we don't want reasonable argument to get in the way of righteous indignation and implied sexual (discrimination, exploitation,harassment) or whatever buzz words come to mind

gallag · 19-09-2014 11:06am

whupdedo wrote: »

Careful now, we don't want reasonable argument to get in the way of righteous indignation and implied sexual (discrimination, exploitation,harassment) or whatever buzz words come to mind

Don't forget racism also!

Colombian women's cycling team jerseys !

Comments