Read the first few posts from before the video was out

I just have and have no idea what you’re talking about. Saying something seems like a crap idea is not the same as being offended by it you realise?

So, as well as Danny we saw some monkeys and birds and parrots, oh, and some girls who just happen to be draped around the garden and tennis court and pool in way that almost made them seem like they weren’t really human beings at all but just….objects?
Hmmmmmmmmm

If those women wish to spend there afternoons cavorting around the playboy mansion in bikinis who are you to say that’s wrong, they are not braking the law .

They looked like humans to me. Do you have to be buttoned up to the chin to appear human.

If you are offended by naked flesh don’t look. But you can’t tell people how to dress or behave who are acting of free will with in the law.

If you are offended by naked flesh people’s opinons don’t look. But you can’t tell people how to dress or behave who are acting of free will with in the law think

FIFY.

I’m not offended, I am debating.

It’s what forums are for .

From what I posted on page 2 in response to you as you’re debating:

“chip – Member

If I see a glamour model I don’t think women are being objectified, just that woman who is probably getting paid handsomely for doing a job she probably has to work hard to keep (excercise diet ) in a cut throat industry.

I have a bigger problem with more socially acceptable fashion modelling industry using rake thin woman thus promoting an unhealthy image.”

So you don’t think there’s anything damaging about the body image created by the ‘glamour’ ( 😆 ) industry? Take a look at the ‘No More Page 3’ campaign and Page 3 stories to see how (some) women (and men) are affected by it.

I am debating.

Indeed when playboy is involved, quite a lot of mass debating gets done.

I thought someone said there’d be a bike in that video?

😉

for Wrecker.

One of the classic STW threads 😆

We are indeed a Broad Church 😀

I read the first 3 or 4 page three stories on your link .

Seriously, I have always found people who play teams sports the least embarrassed about nudity .

The human body is not to be ashamed of and if someone is going to be emotionally troubled by naked breasts they are in trouble.

I’m not offended, just think it’s tacky.

Well it will be after touching any surface in that compound.

You’ll have noticed there wasn’t a single Dabbed foot from Mr Macaskill throughout that entire video, The bike however had to be burned soon after he manualed it out of the gates…

I think what disappoints the most isn’t the Tackiness of it, that’s sort of a given with Playboy/Hefner, but that the riding isn’t all that imaginative/inventive/new for him. There’s way too much copter-Cam and if it hadn’t been shot in Hugh’s palace of conspicuous consumption and aspirational flesh dolls, then it wouldn’t be particularly noteworthy by standards of Danny Macaskill’s other riding videos…

The human body is not to be ashamed of and if someone is going to emotionally troubled by naked breasts they are in trouble.

I’m not even engaging in your “debate” but your constant twisting of the discussion away from what anyone else is saying is starting to irk.

Unfortunately, MTBing seems to attract a fairly puerile following for some reason. Pretty embarrassing sometimes.

I’m not even engaging in your “debate” but your constant twisting of the discussion away from what anyone else is saying is starting to irk.

I was asked to read the page three stories, which I did and commented on.

and is anyone in the anti-page3 groups “emotionally troubled” by breasts or are they simply pissed off at objectification of women and using breasts to sell newspapers?

I feel a little sad when I see a Playboy Bunny.
What happens to them when they’re old and saggy and don’t fit with young, sprightly Hugh’s view of nubile beauty any more?

And why is the music on McAskill videos always so shite?

I feel a little sad when I see a Playboy Bunny.
What happens to them when they’re old and saggy and don’t fit with young, sprightly Hugh’s view of nubile beauty any more?

They get relegated to the fantasy of STW you know still unobtainable for the average fat IT worker

And why is the music on McAskill videos always so shite?

wash
your
mouth
out
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMFWFhTFohk[/video]
[video]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sLvkqS_AyyE[/video]
(admittedly debatable whether that’s a danny m vid but he is in it and it’s named after my local hill so 😛 )

I feel a little sad when I see a Playboy Bunny.
What happens to them when they’re old and saggy and don’t fit with young, sprightly Hugh’s view of nubile beauty any more?

Once Hugh’s used them a few times the Bunnies often have to be put down, before the myxomatosis or rabies take hold…

POSTED 11 MINUTES AGO # REPORT-POST

DezB – Member

I feel a little sad when I see a Playboy Bunny.
What happens to them when they’re old and saggy and don’t fit with young, sprightly Hugh’s view of nubile beauty any more?

They sing shit songs in a band called Blondie.

Anyone mentioned yet that this might be aimed more at a USA audience?

Boost Danny’s profile in America?

Rachael, whilst I applaud your courage to live the life you live, – you come across as narrow minded here which is ironic to say the least. Different strokes and all that, live and let live etc.

Not narrow minded at all – believe me.

Neither am I outraged by the video; I’m just disappointed that someone like Danny Macaskill would want to associate himself with something as cheesy and tacky as Playboy.

It’s not the relative nakedness or otherwise of people in the video that I was commenting on. It’s more about what they represent in the video – “objects” rather than people capable of something themselves. I very much appreciate women (!) but I recognise they are slightly more than their breast size…

Ask yourself this – have you got any kids, say 7 or 8 years old? Would you be completely comfortable for them to watch that video and answer why there are these women stood around like that? No? Why is it any different for an adult to have to see it?

Rachel

Exactly live and let live.
Freedom, freedom to live your life how you want with in the law.
Freedom to wear what you want and do what you want with in the law.

And I would rather live in a society where woman can make there own choices to wear and behave how the want with in the law with out other people objecting about them being objectified.

There are a lot places in the world wear people are forced to dress a certain way and behave a certain way avoid offending other people.

If you can’t sensor your own life move somewhere where the state will do it for you.

I would rather live in a world where a young woman who wanted to be a glamour model was free to do so than it be outlawed incase her breasts offend someone who could have chosen not to look at them.

They sing shit songs in a band called Blondie.

All of them? Blimey.

It’s more about what they represent in the video – “objects” rather than people capable of something themselves. I very much appreciate women (!) but I recognise they are slightly more than their breast size…

As do (I hope/suspect) 99% of the people on here. But…

If the ladies in question were being forced into being ‘objectified’, I would agree with you. But they’re not, they *choose* to pose for Playboy, to be Bunnies – if you like to look at it that way, to objectify themselves.

I don’t see any foul play in looking at a woman who has chosen to put herself in a position which says “look at me”. What are we to do, pander to the wishes of the woman who wants to be viewed and admired, or pander to the wishes of those who say we shouldn’t be admiring them?

(Edit: Not denying the tackiness, by the way. Just highlighting the element of choice)

Can I suggest that if you don’t like it, you boycott Red Bull and Playboy?

Simple.

boycott Red Bull and Playboy?

What would I do with my Friday nights?

Can I suggest that if you don’t like it, you boycott Red Bull and Playboy?

Never really bought Playboy, and it was a bit too high class a mag to be found in the hedgerows when I was younger…

They’re just making a few quid with their natural (or otherwise) assets. They are certainly not being forced to do it. Yes it’s tacky but there is a paying market and you could view it as the punters being exploited by the models. At the end of the day, you lose nothing by baring some boobie/penis/whatever if you’re not insecure. The punters have their wallets lightened.
If we were slim, well endowed and handsome, we may have had a opportunity to be nudie models and if the money was there; why not?

Just to be really REALLY clear. I’ve seen the video and i’m not outraged or insulted in the slightest by it.

I am, however, disappointed that Danny and RedBull have decided on this particular, outdated and misogynistic style of marketing. I just don’t think using women to promote the bike industry is something worth doing anymore. It’s a bit exploitative in my view – NOT of the women in the video, who it has been pointed out are almost definitely doing this of their own free will and look like they are actually having fun, but rather of the male viewers they are clearly aiming at (and as a consequence kind of alienating the women viewers). It’s the cynical way that they have gone for the old fashioned ‘pretty girls with not a lot on will get us lots of viewers’ marketing approach.

and just to be really clear… I’m NOT outraged, insulted or otherwise upset by any of it. I really am a bit meh and disappointed by it all.

The human body is not to be ashamed of and if someone is going to be emotionally troubled by naked breasts they are in trouble.

Ah the old “you’re the one with the issues” argument…
But if its a case of appreciating the beauty of the female form why do all of the Bunnies conform to a particularly narrow range of physical proportions?
Of course its about objectification, categorization and control of women, why try and argue your way around it?
Basically its not simple “appreciation of the female form”, its appreciation of and an idealized version of the female form, Hugh has spent much of his life helpfully documenting and promoting this optimised version of woman kind, distorting Womens self image and mens expectations…

Does Hugh Hefner exploit/objectify women?
Well of course he does, is this a new thing?
No of course not, the obvious defense Chucked about is that the bunnies are totally willing and receive financial remuneration in return for being objectified, can’t argue with that I suppose….
Heff wrote the book on selling Plain old sexualized imagery labeled as “Sexual liberation”… And you simply label anyone pointing out the gaps in equality or dehumanization of women, as repressed, illiberal, puritanical, enemies of free speech and sexual freedom, its genius really…

Defending the whole playboy Brand is an entire topic in its own right.
Of course we all understand how that brand operates, what it boils down to though is the premise that you too could “Live the dream” Just like Hugh has all these years…
The Dream of course is ultimately becoming an octogenarian millionaire who nightly hoist’s his wizened old carcass over some lucky girl, 60 year’s his junior, who finds herself in this position because she was uncontrollably attracted to his natural charisma and charm… No really.

If you don’t think some aged Paternal figure, hording young women in his gated off mansion, and deriving profits by publishing pictures of them in various states of undress isn’t a wee bit Dark…
Well then its clearly those of us who object with the problems. But TBH it’s still not the kind of Career I’d want for my children when they grow up…

Exactly as our Resident Grumpy says ^

It’s not about outrage; just a comment of disappointment. I thought mountain biking had started to move away from this stuff.

Rachel

How is playboy still a thing?

Kinda sums up my view as well, I’m not outraged by nudity I don’t buy Knog stuff because the advertising is just annoyingly tacky (“that laundromat picture” the naked cartoon girl, the one with the girls bum, the packaging made to look like condom packets)the list is endless, the assos advertising is just as bad, all porn face and high heels, its just so…13year old boy.

Hur hur boobies…. Oh Grow up 🙄

Not seen the vid as I can’t be asked.

So tell me: did any of the women grab a bike and do any stunts?
Did Rachel Atherton turn up and because she was a woman told to hand in her bike as that’s only for fourteen year old bishop-bashers men?

And where is Matt Hunter? He hasn’t turned up yet. 😥

Well said Mark & cookeaa.

Just imagine what they could have done with the budget, Danny’s skills and a little imagination…

My stepson who is 18 regularly (not me) buys Playboy and keeps it on the kitchen table.
I will admit to having a look.
It’s just naked women and some actually quite well written pieces regarding politics, cars etc.
It’s actually not a bad mag.
The models are highly paid and don’t get exploited.

It’s just naked women and some actually quite well written pieces regarding politics, cars etc.
It’s actually not a bad mag.

sounds like a winning formula, I can’t wait for Razzle and the Sunday times to Merge and deliver more of the same…

The models are highly paid and don’t get exploited.

Do you do their taxes or something?

…Resident Grumpy…

Oi!… Yeah alright.

I don’t understand your taxes comment cookeaa.
I’ve never seen Razzle. I assume it’s another nudie mag.