ttcycle
Cycling Excusiast
Gender is not determined by biology
Dealing with distractions
- Thread starter punkedmonkey
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
snorri
Legendary Member
- Location
- East coast, up a bit.
Indeed, just yesterday a friend was telling of his experience with an earphone wearing jogger on the centre line of a shared use path. He rang his bell to give warning of approach, and again, and then again when his wheels were less than a metre from her. She still did not hear and he was unable to overtake until they both came to a junction and they went there separate ways.
Angelfishsolo
A Velocipedian
- Location
- Cwmbach, South Wales
Genetics then.
I should imagine that looking at an attractive lady is fine, but you should at least attempt to be discreet about it. The woman in question has the right not to be the object of your gaze, if you know what I mean; she didn't leave the house that day in order to be looked at (in that way) by a stranger. She may feel flattered by the attention, she could not care about it, or she might find it a bit intrusive. I think it behooves men not to allow it to be the third option.
I think the problem is that sometimes men don't understand that the looking itself is not necessarily complimentary. There's a fine line between admiring beauty and leering.
I think the problem is that sometimes men don't understand that the looking itself is not necessarily complimentary. There's a fine line between admiring beauty and leering.
Unless I am with my wife - in this case the survival instinct is stronger!
SportMonkey
Guest
Any physical attribute is determined by biology; gender therefore is. The want to leer and make sexists remarks which goes all ways however is psychological/cultural.
The marketing is indeed sexist as sexism works, the thing is it's using shock and "righteous anger" to provoke a response and get their name out. It is also lazy.
I've no objection to men using their bodies to sell me or anyone else a product, as I'm sure most people don't, so why is there such an objection about women choosing to do it?
jefmcg
Guru
Total publicity stunt as has been pointed out before http://www.linkedin.com/in/jasmijnrijcken
On the actual report itself, what sort of nonsense is the BBC producing? I've stopped watching broadcast TV, so haven't seen an infotainment report like this for a while, and it's shocking how infantile it is. It's like something from a 1980s children's current affairs program, with bright colours and "pop" music and zero intellectual input from the reporter. (I'm sure this is fairly standard journalism, but restricting my intake of news to written and spoken has raised my expectations)
None of the responses by authorities seem rational: going up to someone in the street with headphones on and lecturing them? What is that supposed to do? There is nothing wrong with walking down the street with headphones, the problem is walking onto the road without looking. The US seems to think this is OK, so they are fitting speakers to the front of electric vehicles, so they make a noise! Traffic noise is a "silent" killer, but instead of taking electric cars as an opportunity to reduce, they are doing the opposite. Silent cars would save lives, and pedestrians would quickly learn to look before stepping on to the road which would make life easier for cyclists.
I wonder how long before someone suggests that cycles need to make noise - and loud enough to be heard through ear buds? Compulsory Airzounds, perhaps?
On the actual report itself, what sort of nonsense is the BBC producing? I've stopped watching broadcast TV, so haven't seen an infotainment report like this for a while, and it's shocking how infantile it is. It's like something from a 1980s children's current affairs program, with bright colours and "pop" music and zero intellectual input from the reporter. (I'm sure this is fairly standard journalism, but restricting my intake of news to written and spoken has raised my expectations)
None of the responses by authorities seem rational: going up to someone in the street with headphones on and lecturing them? What is that supposed to do? There is nothing wrong with walking down the street with headphones, the problem is walking onto the road without looking. The US seems to think this is OK, so they are fitting speakers to the front of electric vehicles, so they make a noise! Traffic noise is a "silent" killer, but instead of taking electric cars as an opportunity to reduce, they are doing the opposite. Silent cars would save lives, and pedestrians would quickly learn to look before stepping on to the road which would make life easier for cyclists.
I wonder how long before someone suggests that cycles need to make noise - and loud enough to be heard through ear buds? Compulsory Airzounds, perhaps?
MrHappyCyclist
Riding the Devil's HIghway
- Location
- Bolton, England
The Sunday Times article referenced in there has a classic example of how to propagate a lie without actually lying: "Many will argue that it is the risky behaviour of some cyclists — particularly those who jump red lights and ride the wrong way along one-way streets — that is to blame for a significant number of crashes."
It's probably true that "many will argue that..."
I've never met Jonathan Leak, and already I feel I want throttle him.
For the sake of your blood pressure..... Never ever watch the film "OutFOXed"
Demonstrates clearly how this technique is used to massive effect by the Fox News Network to qualify their agenda
ttcycle
Cycling Excusiast
Just a clarification, gender is not necessarily the same thing as someone's biological sex.
That was what I was pointing out.
Adasta, a very reasoned post +1
Sportmonkey- I think the difference in answer to your question is that Women are often used to sell products but in a different way to men -old art works can be critiqued in terms of women 'being the object of a man's gaze'. Without getting too academic. If you think of how men and women are portrayed bodily or not (which is not what I'm talking per se- that in itself is a different arguement) it's the stereotyping and the fact that women are presented in one light and men in a very different light- it is the subtle continuation of male society, a man is a doing, strong, active force. Women are mothers, pretty, to be looked at, passive, emotional, domestic, at it's worst a sex object or a shag for a male...look for it in our legal system, look for it in shows, films and advertising and then you start realising how ingrained it is. People struggle with it, especially if you don't fit the mould and it affects the way people interact with each other - men are affected by it as much as women are. I question as these stereotypes are so invasive whether things are simply just 'choice' broadcasting, fashion and film can be very male dominated and smutty worlds.
Why I have an issue with the woman in NY doing that publicity stunt is it is using a issue of sexism to self promote and then posing with a bike to reinforce that idea...stupid really, the idea of reinforcing what she is trying to criticise and it's just disingenuine.
Still back to the headphones..I don't want to derail this..as you were!
That was what I was pointing out.
Adasta, a very reasoned post +1
Sportmonkey- I think the difference in answer to your question is that Women are often used to sell products but in a different way to men -old art works can be critiqued in terms of women 'being the object of a man's gaze'. Without getting too academic. If you think of how men and women are portrayed bodily or not (which is not what I'm talking per se- that in itself is a different arguement) it's the stereotyping and the fact that women are presented in one light and men in a very different light- it is the subtle continuation of male society, a man is a doing, strong, active force. Women are mothers, pretty, to be looked at, passive, emotional, domestic, at it's worst a sex object or a shag for a male...look for it in our legal system, look for it in shows, films and advertising and then you start realising how ingrained it is. People struggle with it, especially if you don't fit the mould and it affects the way people interact with each other - men are affected by it as much as women are. I question as these stereotypes are so invasive whether things are simply just 'choice' broadcasting, fashion and film can be very male dominated and smutty worlds.
Why I have an issue with the woman in NY doing that publicity stunt is it is using a issue of sexism to self promote and then posing with a bike to reinforce that idea...stupid really, the idea of reinforcing what she is trying to criticise and it's just disingenuine.
Still back to the headphones..I don't want to derail this..as you were!
jefmcg
Guru
I think you missed the point. She wasn't trying to criticise anything, she was trying to appear in lots of news papers - a goal she achieved - and appearing to take a stand against sexism while posing in a short skirt did the trick.
Now she can show potential clients how she can make their product go viral. It's purely commerce, not politics.
Whatever it takes. Welcome to the 21st century.
btw, thread is completely derailed. A good example of distraction.
Seigi
Senior Member
- Location
- Carlisle, UK
What are these wind deflectors you speak of? I hate the wind noise in my ear when cycling, I'm surprised some long-time cyclists don't go deaf because of it, would like some wind deflectors
OP
OP
punkedmonkey
Active Member
Oooh errr... lit the kindling/touch paper on this one.
A bit of mixed opinion to fuel the flames...
http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/hearing.htm - conclusion here seems to be that hearing plays a minor part in cycling
http://www.visordown.com/the-grapevine/cycling-with-headphones-you-deserve-to-crash/8147.html - some bad experiences by this m'cycle rider results in a relatively anti-headphone view
It seems the BBC ran out of news... who says history doesn't repeat itself - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10463227
Also, it seems that there is no real hard facts available on the contribution of headphones to accidents:
I think I am now of the position that personally I don't want to or feel the need to wear headphones - and I wouldn't recommend it to people on road- but they are free to do so if they are confident that they are as aware as they can and feel they need to be to be operating in the environment they are in (so riding in the country might be different to the city etc).
A bit of mixed opinion to fuel the flames...
http://www.bikexprt.com/bicycle/hearing.htm - conclusion here seems to be that hearing plays a minor part in cycling
http://www.visordown.com/the-grapevine/cycling-with-headphones-you-deserve-to-crash/8147.html - some bad experiences by this m'cycle rider results in a relatively anti-headphone view
It seems the BBC ran out of news... who says history doesn't repeat itself - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10463227
Also, it seems that there is no real hard facts available on the contribution of headphones to accidents:
http://road.cc/content/news/11629-aa-calls-dft-ban-cyclists-using-ipods-they-ride
I think I am now of the position that personally I don't want to or feel the need to wear headphones - and I wouldn't recommend it to people on road- but they are free to do so if they are confident that they are as aware as they can and feel they need to be to be operating in the environment they are in (so riding in the country might be different to the city etc).
