Are British Cycling & Sky being deliberately sexist?

[theclaud]

. It's not about the men

This is the bit some of them find so difficult to handle.

 

[Mr Haematocrit]

Men don't run Breeze rides. However if you read the link I provided in the first post for normal Sky Rides:

Breeze Ride Leaders don't get that.

So it does.....

led by women for women

.
So you have no problems with men who would like to run such rides being discriminated against?

I'm not sure I'm adding anything to this thread, I see it very much as wanting your cake and to eat it while expecting others to pay. The choice women have is to organise the same rides as men and get the same treatment.
Increasing the funding of this unnecessary ride could eat into the budget of disability cycling and other more important projects. I don't think my view is going to change. I do not think the teatment of the organizers of these exclusive events is sexist or unfair

 

[GrumpyGregry]

I had something along those lines all ready to post but then thought it was stating the obvious. Perhaps it's not.

I thought it was better coming from a boy

 

[GrumpyGregry]

Surely the answer to make women more comfortable cycling, is remove the element that makes it uncomfortable?

"Comes in here, proposing simple solutions to complex problems, it is a wonder anybody reads his posts."

 

[velovoice]

...wish to exclude themselves from others?

"Wish to exclude from others"?!

The Breeze programme is NOT about men being excluded from womens' rides, it's about helping women who feel excluded from CYCLING full stop.
Getting them on their bikes in a comfortable environment (where gender -- both their own and everyone else's -- is totally removed from the equation) removes the exclusion.

 

[velovoice]

So you have no problems with men who would like to run such rides being discriminated against?

Are you such a man?

Again, this is not about exclusion/discrimination, but about positive criteria.

Say you start a club for like-minded people who want to pursue a particular aim... do you accept as members people who don't share the club's "mission" and don't have any interest in furthering it?
Why would such a person wish to join?

Okay, I'll stop now in trying to point out where you've missed the point of the OP altogether.

I'm not sure I'm adding anything to this thread, I see it very much as wanting your cake and to eat it while expecting others to pay. The choice women have is to organise the same rides as men and get the same treatment.
Increasing the funding of this unnecessary ride could eat into the budget of disability cycling and other more important projects. I don't think my view is going to change. I do not think the teatment of the organizers of these exclusive events is sexist or unfair

Okay, fair enough, you've nailed your colours to the mast and your answer to the question (as you've interpreted it) is No.

Any other views?

 

[jowwy]

"Wish to exclude from others"?!

The Breeze programme is NOT about men being excluded from womens' rides, it's about helping women who feel excluded from CYCLING full stop.
Getting them on their bikes in a comfortable environment (where gender -- both their own and everyone else's -- is totally removed from the equation) removes the exclusion.

but breeze rides are being funded by sport england and not by sky/BC if you want sky/bc to fund it, then go on the sky ride already provided.

the thing is your not asking about equality, your asking them to provide exclusive rides. which is unfair and against their equalities intitiative.

would you be happy if they offered the same breeze type rides for males only and led by males, if said males did all the leg work?????

 

[Flying Dodo]

The saddle?

Close, but I imagine it's the willy waving bloke sat on it that's the problem.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

Are female only rides not sexist in themselves.. What is wrong with male cyclists to warrant exclusion?

Too fast?

 

[velovoice]

but breeze rides are being funded by sport england and not by sky/BC if you want sky/bc to fund it, then go on the sky ride already provided.

I don't think it's relevant who's paying for the scheme - British Cycling have got the contract to deliver it, and Sky does the marketing for it alongside the Sky rides where leaders are paid. Perhaps BC are less culpable here. Maybe Sky is the "bad guy". I don't know and don't really care. But both schemes are being run side by side and marketed together, and signup/registration for individual rides is all done via the same website. But behind the scenes, men are being paid to do the same job (leading) as women but much less often and aren't being required to do other essential work (planning) that women are doing.

FYI, I work for Sustrans. Every single little thing that we do is funded out from one or more of a myriad different, separate and unconnected revenue streams. Yet all Sustrans employees, regardless of what team they're on or what local project they are delivering, are on the same pay scale with the same benefits package.

I don't know what your work is or who your employer is, but would you be happy to work alongside someone working under the same "umbrella", doing the same job as you but their salary comes from a different "pot" and is a lot higher than yours?

the thing is your not asking about equality, your asking them to provide exclusive rides. which is unfair and against their equalities intitiative.

You haven't read this thread all the way through yet, have you?

would you be happy if they offered the same breeze type rides for males only and led by males, if said males did all the leg work?????

Yes, of course. Is there a need for that? I thought that's what most cycling clubs are, either by design or in effect.

 

[400bhp]

Sky will pay a women to run a sky ride same as a man <-------- this is not discrimination

Well it can be, as it's implicit discrimination.

Many women may feel intimidated for leading a mixed group ride due to the (perceived) difference in ability. (the average) women are generally slower than (the average) men on a bike.

 

[jowwy]

I don't think it's relevant who's paying for the scheme - British Cycling have got the contract to deliver it, and Sky does the marketing for it alongside the Sky rides where leaders are paid. Perhaps BC are less culpable here. Maybe Sky is the "bad guy". I don't know and don't really care. But both schemes are being run side by side and marketed together, and signup/registration for individual rides is all done via the same website. But behind the scenes, men are being paid to do the same job (leading) as women but much less often and aren't being required to do other essential work (planning) that women are doing.

FYI, I work for Sustrans. Every single little thing that we do is funded out from one or more of a myriad different, separate and unconnected revenue streams. Yet all Sustrans employees, regardless of what team they're on or what local project they are delivering, are on the same pay scale with the same benefits package.

I don't know what your work is or who your employer is, but would you be happy to work alongside someone working under the same "umbrella", doing the same job as you but their salary comes from a different "pot" and is a lot higher than yours?



You haven't read this thread all the way through yet, have you?



Yes, of course. Is there a need for that? I thought that's what most cycling clubs are, either by design or in effect.

then your in the wrong club, our club have mixed rides every week and some of the women riders are quicker and more vocal than the male counter parts. its not about were we both work, although sustrans in itself promotes equality, then it throws cyclists and dog walkers together on the same track. which causes problems in its own right.

 

[theclaud]

then your in the wrong club

Believe me - she isn't.

 

[Pat "5mph"]

then your in the wrong club, our club have mixed rides every week and some of the women riders are quicker and more vocal than the male counter parts. its not about were we both work, although sustrans in itself promotes equality, then it throws cyclists and dog walkers together on the same track. which causes problems in its own right.

Well, you have a point about sustran's "cycling routes style" sorry @velovoice them routes seem to be the steepest anyhow surely VV is not responsible singlehanded for the organization operational choices.
As mentioned before, most women start their cycling with zero confidence: before becoming quicker and "more vocal" (you mean like choosing rest stops and so on?) they need a less competitive environment to find their wheels.
Returners to cycling after many years or folks that only ever cycled in their quiet home town, then moved to the city for uni or work reasons come to mind.
I've seen women starting out on hybrids on segregated paths now racing with the local club up the moor.

 

[velovoice]

Au contraire, I speak from the refuge of having found one of the FEW cycling clubs where sexism is entirely and refreshingly absent.

But I have been EXACTLY where many of these beginners on Breeze rides are now. That's why I help out on Breeze rides as a Sustrans-trained marshal. I've been there and totally understand their insecurities and can reassure them that they WILL get better. With a little more fitness / skill / confidence, they'll go on to doing so much more.

Including -- if they wish <gulp> -- riding with men.