UCI Bans Lewis Buchanan For OnlyFans Sponsorship

On reflection maybe there is a case for a ‘porn’ ban in cycling, because it’s a sport that struggles to attract and put on races for an even split of men and women.

Either women’s fields are very thin (MTB) or there’s not enough interest to maintain a full calendar (pro road tour). And against that background it’s arguably wrong, it’s a dog whistle version of having pit/podium girls.

If we were talking about netball, hockey, the WSL, or something like that then the argument would perhapse be different.

@squirrelking Ah, OK. I thought you were lumping your question to me in with the response you quoted immediately after.

Why? Ultimately I think porn and the sex industry in general is a significant net harm to society (for both men and women) and so I’d rather not see it celebrated, normalised or promoted in other industries.

I probably won’t be able to respond if you have any more questions, partly because I’m getting ready for a funeral early tomorrow morning, but also because I’m not really interested in debating the pros and cons of the sex industry on here.

And it makes him sound whiny and a bit dim here

It does. Selective interpretation of ‘services’ when there is a clear and unambiguous definition.

Reminds me of a teenager in the wrong squirming to get out of it.

Isn’t the whole point of his sponsorship to try to promote the fact they’re not a porn site?

How much content on OF isn’t porn though? This is sportswashing just as much as Qatar hosting the football world cup.

OF is problematic for a number of reasons, not least of which are the endless clickbait articles in eg. the MEN* saying how much money people have made off it – but for every one who makes big money, there will be hundreds of potentially vulnerable people being exploited for pocket change.

(*The editor of the MEN recently did a ridiculous interview where she said she wanted the MEN to be like the New York Times. Cue hollow laughter from everyone)

Obviously Only Fans crosses the lines for the UCI bods

In a way donating to the NRA doesnt…

but then what do the UCI actually do in MTB? (do as in an actual action)
1/ Set rules
2/ have some jerseys
3/ take money
4/ be “we are the UCI”

I don’t think they actually organise events, build the tracks or even do the travel for the athletes themselves…
To paraphrase someone commenting on PB it’s not a difficult job to call a ski resort, tell them if they pay you then you’ll stick some summer revenue their way and they’ll be hearing from your “event partner” if interested

https://www.vogue.com/article/10-surprising-playboy-articles

https://thehundreds.com/blogs/content/reading-playboy-for-the-articles-13-must-read-journalism-literature-pieces-from-playboy-magazine

Not specifically to make a point, but there were a surprisingly high quality of contributors and a few genuinely literary important articles hidden behind the bushes.

eg: Fahrenheit 451 – had little circulation when published, then was serialised in Playboy, became the classic and at the same time helped Playboy through the early issues.

I guess that’s the benefit of being an autocratic governing body, you can have a flexible moral compass. See also BC, CIPD, etc, etc.

True but I guess the real benefit of working at one is you can have donations direct to your own bank account as well.

The donations will just be resting in people’s own bank accounts, though

@theotherjonv, Playboy is also where the modern version of the Illuminati conspiracy was given lots of column space.

Makes you think.

I think most governing bodies don’t do much for the sport per se. They set the rules and take money. What do fifa actually do? The FIA? To give just 2 examples.

I’ve no idea about the road/track stuff but surely calling it “the same sport” as DH/Enduro and prob XC is about as accurate as saying Rugby is just another “football” with a slightly different ball?

A fair point – if there was a different organisation, a UMTBI or something, and all the off road disciplines switched to that; I’d be equally as happy.

Its happened before, in various sports, with varying degrees of success. Sometimes they become separate rival entities, in others athletes happily cross between them.

ocrider

Putting our off-road biking exceptionalist train of thought aside…
Aren’t football and rugby different sports with similar names whereas MTB, road and track cycling are different disciplines of the same sport?

I think the “exceptionalist” train of thought could just be reversed.
Ignore the names and they are both using balls.. it could easily be square and tennis ?

A DH MTB has as much to so with a road or track bike as a squash racquet has to a tennis racket…

If XC broke away from the UCI, it’d no longer be in the Olympics unless the IOC accepted a new international governing body for off-road riding. Which is more than doubtful.

I guess I just see that as a scale-up.
Isn’t football and olympic sport? How is it being an Olympic sport make it “better” than Rugby ???
Is XC “better” than DH or BMX “better” than slopestyle?

The Olympics just seems like an extra layer of faff and buerocracy?

probably less, but you have gone to the two extremes

You see a lot of top or near top level pro athletes that will cross over between at least 2 if not 3 adjacent disciplines

Sure but they don’t need to have the same governing body or that isn’t a reason they should.
A lot of endurance athletes might do completely different sports (bike/running) or there is a lot of crossover between BMX and skateboards ..

A better example from Olympics maybe

Boxing, fencing, judo, karate, taekwondo, and wrestling are all listed as martial arts in the Olympics but don’t share a governing body anywhere I know of.

BMX (racing) should be slap bang in the middle of that list as there have been successful riders moving into track and DH / Enduro.

Well you can add moto-x and swimming etc. but again doesn’t mean they should have the same governing body

A fair point – if there was a different organisation, a UMTBI or something, and all the off road disciplines switched to that; I’d be equally as happy.

Its happened before, in various sports, with varying degrees of success. Sometimes they become separate rival entities, in others athletes happily cross between them.

It almost feels like this is happening at least some manufacturers seem to be moving away or at least hedging bets for MTB???
I guess ultimately the UCI are basically the emperor with no clothes .. but whilst people pay taxes as it were the “World Cup” is still the world cup.

The difficulty seems to be the “bike manufacturers” are between a road and a rocky place? To take your list the big 5 have various degrees in each so if the UCI starts punitive “if you compete in XYZ we’ll ban you from every discipline” they are losing the other disciplines.