MegaSack DRAW - This year's winner is user - rgwb
We will be in touch
[b]The day has finally come at the Santos Tour Down Under, with the state announcing its major events will no longer use women as decoration.[/b]
http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/article/2016/12/02/tdu-podium-girls-go
The South Australian Sports Minister, Leo Bignell, today announced that it would replace the Santos Tour Down Under podium girls with junior cyclists.Here at Cycling Central we've long argued for a change of attitude in cycling, as far back as 2013 in fact, preferring to see podium girls as incompatible with a sport striving for genuine gender equity, and preferring to see women deserving of a podium place as athletes not ornaments.
The South Australian Sports Minister, Leo Bignell, today announced that it would replace the Santos Tour Down Under podium girls with junior cyclists.Here at Cycling Central we've long argued for a change of attitude in cycling, as far back as 2013 in fact, preferring to see podium girls as incompatible with a sport striving for genuine gender equity, and preferring to see women deserving of a podium place as athletes not ornaments.
If that means you don't feel like you can enjoy an event any more then maybe time to question why you were watching it 😉
Sad that the sexy chicks will be unemployed due to the hand wringers.
This thread needs pictures.
Good. It's not the world's biggest deal, but the whole podium girl thing seems well past its sell-by date, so this is welcome.
🙂
Refreshing bit of good news.
Can't tell from the article whether they mean exclusively female junior cyclists. If so, not much in the way of progress.
B'out time, sadly Aussies are some of the most sexist so i suspect they're have more of an issue with it than intelligent folk.
Meanwhile, elsewhere in Oz:
I would struggle to struggle with either side of this argument. Yes it feels outdated but sex sells and so never really goes out of fashion it just goes underground. Yes to more women in sport, yet isn't it also patronising to pat these podium girls on the head? Effectively saying 'Off you go, poppet! No, your curves and winning smile are no longer required as your silly little head is holding you and other women back.
Social engineering via censorship?
Sad that the sexy chicks will be unemployed due to the hand wringers.
DT, is that you? 🙂
pity one of the three women in the SA cabinet of fourteen couldn't make the announcement
Are ring girls, podium girls etc really sexist? Really?
If they want me to stand around smiling in skimpy clothes and give Rachel Atherton her medal the next time she kicks arse then will it balance it all out?
edited for meh.
antigee - Member
pity one of the three women in the SA cabinet of fourteen couldn't make the announcement
Is it - that would surely have been tokenism. Is it not far greater progress that a male minister is standing up for equality?
Can't they just have podium guys for the ladies cycling events..? Sod it, they could even be oiled up and wearing thongs for all I care.
I think the whole cycling podium girl thing is, just a bit cutesy, and French. More like a joyful fun celebration... but then I'm a dreaded male-person, white as well. I may as well shoot myself.
I'm not a female lady-person, so who knows... maybe they find the whole podium girl thing totally degrading?
If so, then fair enough.. I guess time to move on.
who has made them do this and who has banned this?Social engineering via censorship?
no mate using scantily clad girls as eye candy at sporting events is definitely not sexist at all as they are there for erm erm erm ok what reason are they there for then if not titillation?Are ring girls, podium girls etc really sexist? Really?
This cropped up at work as a point of discussion. There isn't really any justification for current practice so I see it as progress.
Perhaps someone should tell Breitling. The males in their ads wear clothing suited to the job. However the girl on the plane plane that is being refueled (perhaps the most dangerous place to be) makes do with hot pants.
Breitling, the watch for macho sexist p... .
It is odd that we see Australia as more racist and sexist than European society (and that could very well be true), yet they still have had recent examples politicians of conviction despite popular opinion. Politicians willing to stand up and enact real change rather than just paying lip service, we could definitely do with more of these people here.
But how does that make it sexist? How is it prejudicing or discrimiating against women?Junkyard - lazarus
Social engineering via censorship?
who has made them do this and who has banned this?
Are ring girls, podium girls etc really sexist? Really?
no mate using scantily clad girls as eye candy at sporting events is definitely not sexist at all as they are there for erm erm erm ok what reason are they there for then if not titillation?
But how does that make it sexist? How is it prejudicing or discrimiating against women?Junkyard - lazarus
Social engineering via censorship?
who has made them do this and who has banned this?
Are ring girls, podium girls etc really sexist? Really?
no mate using scantily clad girls as eye candy at sporting events is definitely not sexist at all as they are there for erm erm erm ok what reason are they there for then if not titillation?
You are free to not care or disagree but i really dont believe you have failed to grasp the argument to the extent you need it explaining to you.
they are there for erm
Something for the dads.
#dadcam
Junkyard - lazarus
You are free to not care or disagree but i really dont believe you have failed to grasp the argument to the extent you need it explaining to you.
I haven't stated an opinion as yet, so wind in your neck.
I'm interested in why you view it as discriminatory and prejudicial? Hence the questions.
Well in the case of cycling, have you heard of Le Tour Féminin or La Grande Boucle Féminine? But you've heard of Le Tour. Women in cycling get very little sponsorship and almost no media coverage. That's discrimination. Women's football... . The next time you are around a cycle race note the roles that are fulfilled by women. There'll be a few masseuses but no doctors, there won't be many drivers but there will be a few throwing stuff out of "caravane" vehicles. There might be the odd journalist, maybe a translator (a woman who used to work for me was hired by the Tour for German translation, she had lots of fun including shagging France's most famously happily married... ). Madame was hired to translate for Armstrong after I refused.
As for prejudice, it's reinforcing the bimbo/whore role women are supposed to adopt if they want to succeed.
It's no discrimination though, it a complete lack of a market, which is not discrimination, it's something else. The reasoning for which is based on discrimation against women and their fight in society for equality. But that doesn't mean just because, for example a top womens football team doesn't get paid the same as the top mens that it's discriminatory. It means there's no market for it and they need to build one.Edukator - Reformed Troll
Well in the case of cycling, have you heard of Le Tour Féminin or La Grande Boucle Féminine? But you've heard of Le Tour. Women in cycling get very little sponsorship and almost no media coverage. That's discrimination. Women's football..
i did not say you had i stated that you understood the arguments perhaps I was mistaken as it does seem you are very easily confused by the simplest of statementsI haven't stated an opinion as yet, so wind in your neck.
as stated I think you can work out why someone might object and if not any subsequent explanation would be a waste of my time so I shall spend it productively "winding in my neck" rather than explain the obvious to the faux confusedI'm interested in why you view it as discriminatory and prejudicial? Hence the questions
I can work out why some one would object, but I don't believe the act of having women at these things is sexist though. I'm asking you to explain why it is sexist?
Because the role is only open to women is the obvious answer, while the better roles go to men.
Edukator - Reformed Troll
Because the role is only open to women is the obvious answer, while the better roles go to men.
We're talking about 2 separate things here though, conflating them does nothing for the question.
Are women discriminated against in organised sport? IMO, not particularly, it's just a fact that their market is much much much smaller. It's about level of performance and ability to attract an audience. I don't know about cycling, but a while back I looked at women's pay in relation to football, with regard their market, and what I'd perceive as their abilty, and tbh, it came out as pretty much on a par with the men. Yes they earn much less, but we don't live in a socialist society, we live in a market society. and the womens market is equivalent to about the English 5/6 tier level(I can't remember exactly), but in terms of audience, ability and reward it's much the same.
To the other question about having women at the men's event. Personally I think it's completely unrelated to the success of women's sport. It may be demeaning is some peoples eyes, but they aren't forced to do it. It's a job, personally I don't see much wrong with the actual job. YMMV.
There is a valid argument to be had for artificially supporting womens sport, because of years of discrimination in other aspects of society. I don't think it makes mens sport sexist though.
i would support over investing in womens sport.
It's a chicken and egg thing. No media coverage, smaller market. When the media take an interest there's a market. The media taking an interest is generally down to how close to a cover girl the athlete is. In fact if a female cyclist wants to up her profile history suggests that getting naked on a bike is the best thing she can do to up her marketability. Is the world's best paid female tennis star the best tennis player or a blonde?
Media, while it should be encouraged, can only go so far. I think mens sports have the markets they have due to years and years and years of mass participation. Men play more sport therefore they watch more sport.
So aye it is a chicken and egg thing, but imo the solution to the problem lies in encouraging women to mass participate in sport, from there things will develop naturally. Things should be geared as much to allowing it to grow as naturally as possible, imo.
I'm also not against allowing women to enter mens events. I think that would help too.
ok what reason are they there for then if not titillation?
I'm gonna be a bit controversial here but, when I've attended events such as this I'm not wandering around with a little chubby on concealed in my jeans and my eyes out on stalks...
If anything I may glance awwardly at those girls and feel intimidated and perhaps maybe even inspired..
On the very surface level, before one starts analysing and being right-on about it, one may be struck with the notion that working really hard at your sport means you might possibly one day end up in a position where an attractive female will be hanging around, which could potentially minutely increase the chances of an attractive female actually taking an interest in your pathetic personality..
It's not titillation, it's motivation
an attractive female actually taking an interest in your pathetic personality.
More probably the money you're earning. Gold diggers or a less polite description.
an attractive female [b]has to be paid to be[/b] actually taking an interest in your pathetic personality.
FIFY!!
🙂 it really is impossible to underestimate some people in this place.
I mean, seriously, having to explain to folks that using podium girls might be sexist?
This place is increasingly like an undergraduate coffee bar after hours
But, Charlie, no one has managed to explain how it is. They've mentioned women's sport being underfunded or watched or competed in, but not why podium girls are.
They are paying women to stand there to look pretty, it's objectifying women and saying that we would rather pay you to stand here and be leered at than put money into womens sport. The South Australian Government has decided that it's not something tax payers should be funding at all.
In other news from down here they are moving towards removing government funding from sports that don't pay/treat men and women equally (things like mens teams travelling in a better section on the plane or in better hotels etc.)
And yes a government can place those stipulation when they are funding sport.
Calm down... You'll be letting the sheila's vote next!
It's a slippery slope.. Free chocolates and prosecco and subsidised washing machines await you..
But, Charlie, no one has managed to explain how it is. They've mentioned women's sport being underfunded or watched or competed in, but not why podium girls are.
My point is that it is disappointing that anyone actually needs this explained to them. Unless that is some sophomoric intellectual exercise
Jeez, if you people [i]really[/i] can't work out what the problem is then YOU are the ****ing problem.
[i]But how does that make it sexist? How is it prejudicing or discrimiating against women?[/i]
because the women are there to suggest to other men in the audience that the winners on the podium are able to "have" women that are pretty and under dressed. the girls are not there because they choose to (you hve to pay them to do it), it's because they have nice teeth and tits.
the women have no say in it, they are window dressing, just another perk of the men winning. I'll bet there are sports organisations stupid enough to use men in the same way, and it's discriminatory then as well.
because the women are there to suggest to other men in the audience that the winners on the podium are able to "have" women that are pretty and under dressed
You are Millie Tant from Viz and I claim my £5 😆
You are Millie Tant from Viz and I claim my £5
And you are Donald Trump and I claim my let's make America great again baseball cap. 👿
It's absurd to say that the women there don't want to be there as you have to pay them. Can the same be said of me each day at work? I sure as hell wouldn't go in for free!
Emsz - you say "have" but I'm fairly sure that the women aren't part of the prize!
[i]"the girls are not there because they choose to...it's because they have nice teeth and tits."[/i]
Nice teeth and breasts and choice aren't mutually exclusive. My wife has all three. So do I, if it comes to that!
I've noticed that in all of these 'protests' it isn't the women who are taking part who are offended but other people on their behalf. A little like when people were marching to have the age of consent lowered for gay people. You know who was conspicuous by their absence there? 15 year old homosexuals.
As long as people are there through their own free will and there is no kind of force then who the hell are we to decide who is allowed to wear what and where they're allowed to stand. Is it not a little patronising and to tell these women that they're no longer allowed to do their jobs.
To the handwringers amongst us, would this be permissible if for every skimpily clad woman, there's a skimpily clad man too?
I can work out why some one would object, but I don't believe the act of having women at these things is sexist though. I'm asking you to explain why it is sexist?
I'll try my take. You are sat with your family watching a tour stage. Your fraternal twins of 10 are sitting with you. Your son sees a man being rewarded for being a fantastic cyclists. The cyclist has demonstates mental and physical toughness, the reqwards of sustained hard work. Your son is more likely to identify with a role model of the same gender. He gets the message that hard work and talent will bring rewards. He may not ever be a cyclist but the message is clear. Effort brings success.
Your daughter sees 2 women who have only been selected on the basis of here their appearance. There are no messages about determination, drive and talent. The message is that all that matters as a woman is how you look. She is recieving the message that she will only be judged on one, thing her appearance
Now I'm not saying that this one event will set their life courses for ever. But there does seem to be evidence, that via thousands of images per day the media does send some very negative messages to young women
But, Charlie, no one has managed to explain how it is.
OK then, for the hard of thinking I'll give it a go.
Something is xxxxist when attitudes towards or interactions with that that group of people is based on a single, or narrow suite of characteristics rather than their actual worth as an individual.
AFAIK 'Podium girls' are appointed on the basis of their sex and sexual attractiveness, two physical characteristics and so it's sexist.
If you're still struggling to understand just put another group of people selected by a physical characteristic into the scenario:
'And here is Peter Sagan accepting his rainbow jersey from the podium dwarf'
I've noticed that in all of these 'protests' it isn't the women who are taking part who are offended but other people on their behalf.
I'm not saying the women on the podium are unhappy with the arrangement. Them being happy does mean its not sexist
As long as people are there through their own free will and there is no kind of force then who the hell are we to decide who is allowed to wear what and where they're allowed to stand. Is it not a little patronising and to tell these women that they're no longer allowed to do their jobs.
We aren't deciding what is allowed are we, so that is a silly argument. We are using our freedom of speech to express an opinion in favour of a decision taken by a race organiser an against decisions taken bu other race organiser.
No one is tryimg to send a message to the women on the podium. They trying to send a message to race organisers
would this be permissible if for every skimpily clad woman, there's a skimpily clad man too?
This is a bit like Baldrick trying to solve the problem of his mother's low ceiling by cutting off her head.
I know this hasn't got anything to do with anything, but even my wife can appreciate a pretty girl promoting something. She doesn't see it as sexist, just a way that they're using their beauty to make a very decent wage. If you've got it flaunt it, was one of her quotes the other day (when watching Susanna Reid on morning TV) Most of the outrage seems to be coming from men rather than women which seems a bit strange to me.
Most of the outrage seems to be coming from men rather than women which seems a bit strange to me.
It's a MTB forum so somewhat self selecting in terms of sex.
If it helps, I know some women who think podium girls are a sexist anachronism.
Are you saying that physical attractiveness can never be considered an attribute? I'd say thats's you judging them purely on their appearance. It probably takes a huge amount of drive to be where they are as well as some genetic luck. Can't the same be said of anyone with success in any arena?
Can someone not have worth based on their looks? Do honestly believe that we should [b]only[/b] be judged on intellect? Can physical prowess extend into sports or is it only if their physicallness is for aesthetic reasons. Do clever people have more worth? How would you judge David Beckham? All round nice guy. Very good footballer. Success is in no small part due to his looks: it certainly isn't due to his academic ability.
@ampthill - you're still talking about the prevailing sport being male as opposed to female and not why it's sexist to have podium girls. Show you're daughter Rhonda Rousey's fights and interviews if she needs a strong female rolemodel (or your son). Show her Missy or Rachel Atherton or any number of the awesome lady cyclists. Explain to your son [b]and[/b] daughter that some people in life will get a particular job due to their looks, others to intellect, others due to determination and others because of a skill they have which others don't.
I'm not even deliberately being an arse, it's just that you are actually all wrong.
If these women were being coerced into whatever's going on then I'd be as horrified as anyone else. Suggesting that they're too stupid to understand that what's going on is sexist and it takes someone more intelligent (and male?) to step in and save them is fairly ironic.
"This is a bit like Baldrick trying to solve the problem of his mother's low ceiling by cutting off her head"
Or suggesting that someone should as his mother instead of telling her she was going to be beheaded.
Well this got depressing quick.
What is lost by not having podium girls?
Giving young cyclists the opportunity to meet top riders is a much better idea IMO.
It probably takes a huge amount of drive to be where they
Quite probably but is it that drive they are judged on?
Can someone not have worth based on their looks?
Nope. It's OK to appreciate good looks but to suggest it adds to someones worth as a human is wrong.
Suggesting that they're too stupid to understand that what's going on is sexist and it takes someone more intelligent (and male?) to step in and save them is fairly ironic.
Neither myself nor ampthill have done this.
Podium girls cost money. Let's put that money into women's sport instead. So rather than conforming to some narrow standard of beauty and having employment opportunities solely for that, why not encourage sport participation instead. It's good for physical and mental health as well - I would imagine more than a spray tan and dental work.
But, Charlie, no one has managed to explain how it is. They've mentioned women's sport being underfunded or watched or competed in, but not why podium girls are.
Actually if you read the SA announcement their main crux is that they invest in psychological help to give young women a better self-image and at the same time fund a load of young pretty things standing around or kissing blokes on podiums and that these two things are not compatible. If the grid/podium girls were a selection of local women of all ages, shapes and sizes (and who knows, maybe blokes too) then perhaps they'd have continued to fund it.
The sexism side, IMO, is glaringly obvious. A bunch of blokes standing around whilst young women flaunt themselves seems quite clear. They're not selected for any reason other than how they look. It's irrelevant whether they volunteer, it relegates them to set dressing. In those racing classes where women are racing alongside men, I've known of women request to have the grid girl removed and they usually replace them with a member of the team, friend etc instead.
I know this hasn't got anything to do with anything, but even my wife can appreciate a pretty girl promoting something. She doesn't see it as sexist, just a way that they're using their beauty to make a very decent wage.
I take that you are both in favour of prostitution then, and you would have no qualms if your daughter, should you have one, chose to be a podium girl, a lap dancer or a prostitute?
[i]Well this got depressing quick.[/i]
Because not everyone became a MumsNetter decrying the patriarchal micro-agressions invading their safe space? Check your privilege!
[i]What is lost by not having podium girls?[/i]
Jobs. Freedom of these girls to do what they want and for the perma-offended to declare a victory over physical beauty.
Do you think every successful Hollywood actor / actress is there because of their acting ability? Of course there are a few Melissa McCartheys or Steve Buscemis there are far more Luthers (I don't know his real name but my wife's made it quite plain she'll leave me for him) or Jeniffer Lawrenceses.
I don't think that it's a narrow standard of beauty although perhaps this is showing my ignorance. Tall, slim, symmetrical etc. They're fairly standard standards aren't they? I'm not saying anyone outside of this isn't beautiful but it's hard to deny that Beckham, Daniel Craig, [url= https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=lie+to+me&hl=en&biw=1745&bih=895&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwigi7XP4tfQAhXBL48KHdGhApgQ_AUIBygC#hl=en&tbm=isch&q=lie+to+me+kili+williams ]Kelli Williams[/url], the average podium girl et al are unattractive to the majority of the population.
[i]Quite probably but is it that drive they are judged on?[/i]
No, it's their beauty. The Willams sisters are judged on their ability to hit a ball past their opponent. Atherton (whichever) on how quickly they get from the start to the finish. Me, how well my children have progressed through the curriculum in the year I've been responsible for them. We have different jobs, different roles and different criterion for success. I accept I'm a high 6 as regards looks and understand why I wouldn't be chosen to present flowers to winning women at an event.
[i]Giving young cyclists the opportunity to meet top riders is a much better idea IMO.[/i]
This is a very valid argument as is the person who said the cost of hiring podium girls could be spent on sport*.
@ChalieMungus - if you can't see the difference between prostitution and podium girls then I'm not the man to help you.
This isn't a sexist issue as people of [b]both[/b] sexes are chosen for their strengths. In some this may be for the fact they conform to general ideals of what is beautiful.
I made the comment earlier,
I've noticed that in all of these 'protests' it isn't the women who are taking part who are offended but other people on their behalf. A little like when people were marching to have the age of consent lowered for gay people. You know who was conspicuous by their absence there? 15 year old homosexuals.
No one has answered yet as to why they feel they have a right to voice an opinion over what these people are feely doing with their bodies. Assuming that the beautful people are there of their own volition, what gives anyone else the right to say they shouldn't.
I'm off out to a charity boxing event. FYI, there are ring boys for the lady fight as well as ring girls for the men's. Everyone happy?
*of either sex - not sure why it need be directed toward female sport
wYE dunt thay yooose fat ugly birds insteade ? eh ?
You do know the podium bit is a tiny part of what the podium girls do, right? The rest of their job will be there, just not the standing round like an ornament bit.
And there are more than enough places to worship at the alter of conventional beauty, the podium at a sporting event seems a bizarre place for it IMO.
But luckily you've dismissed my opinion in your first paragraph so whatever.
between prostitution and podium girls then I'm not the man to help you.
Why not? Can you not explain it?
And that statement really is at odds with comments like
But, Charlie, no one has managed to explain how it is. They've mentioned women's sport being underfunded or watched or competed in, but not why podium girls are.
the women have no say in it
You sure about that?
the girls are not there because they choose to (you hve to pay them to do it),
Or, they choose to and accept a wage for their time spent doing it. Who the **** works for free? Seems a little like you're looking down on individuals, who happen to be female, for a) some people's propensity to objectify, and b) your own prejudice.
When I was in my 20s I had a relationship with a woman who did event marketing - short skirts, push-up bra, be very flirty with young men and very friendly with other young women - and she loved it. She was smart and great conversation, too. There is, for sure, a huge moral question revolving around using sex to promote anything; but, apart from makecoldplayhistory, few here seem able to do anything other than be offended and confused by things they don't actually appear to have given any substantial though to.
Why not? Can you not explain it?
Care to try and figure it out yourself?
Spot on emsz.
emsz - Member
But how does that make it sexist? How is it prejudicing or discrimiating against women?because the women are there to suggest to other men in the audience that the winners on the podium are able to "have" women that are pretty and under dressed. the girls are not there because they choose to (you hve to pay them to do it), it's because they have nice teeth and tits.
the women have no say in it, they are window dressing, just another perk of the men winning. I'll bet there are sports organisations stupid enough to use men in the same way, and it's discriminatory then as well.
I think you read too much into it. They are they to make a dull event look good, it is not exploitation. If you are against women looking good, then I guess you go out dress in a burka to most nights out? Listen I don't really care either way, I basically turn things off when it comes to the podium anyway it's a dull affair..
I do think yous are way overplaying it. No-one is sitting there thinking ohh that scrawny wee cyclist is rattling loads of super models! 😆 I must become a pro cyclist!
The women have lots of say in it, they don't need to take the job.
Regardless anyhow, as I explained earlier, if the goal here is to promote women's sport it's a pretty feeble attempt at it. The 2 things are completely unrelated to the bigger picture. You need to think a wee bit harder about maybe doing something of substance.
mikewsmith - Member
we would rather pay you to stand here and be leered at than put money into womens sport. The South Australian Government has decided that it's not something tax payers should be funding at all..
This I can understand, diverting a small bit of funding to go elsewhere, it's the only real valid point made, the rest is getting offended of offendedness's sake imo.
To the handwringers amongst us...
Most of the hand wringing seems to be coming from people who are having trouble accepting a bit of progress...
I'll be quite happy if my daughter grows up not seeing podium girls.
I think you read too much into it. They are they to make a dull event look good, it is not exploitation. If you are against women looking good, then I guess you got out dress in a burka to most nights out? Listen I don't really care either way, I basically turn things off when it comes to the podium anyway it's a dull affair..
i)so they're there to make a dull event look better, but it's dull anyway so obviously they've failed on that score then?
ii)WTaF?
And as for the 'oh it's just the offended/handwringers against it' I'm not offended by it, just seems pointless.
It is pointless, it's making something out of nothing. When they could easily just say, right, we're diverting this funding as we think it'll do a bit more good going elsewhere. End of story.
It's not some progressive masterstoke and it'll have next to no affect on progressing womens sport.
Sad that the sexy chicks will be unemployed due to the hand wringers.
What is lost by not having podium girls?Jobs. Freedom of these girls to do what they want and for the perma-offended to declare a victory over physical beauty.
Something tells me this won't close down the 'being pretty industry' overnight.
I am not expecting to see long queues outside job centres filled with statuesque women clutching a single sided CV...
What exactly goes on a 'professionally attractive' persons CV anyway?
Keys skills:-Not eating/shoving fingers down throat
-Smiling on command
-Standing and walking
-Feigning a lack of disgust at gawping Oafs.Qualifications:
-Tits
-Teeth
-Bone structure
-Facial symmetry
-1st class honours degree in Physics from Oxford...
Possibly not...
Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate others physical beauty, I just don't think it needs to be used as a garnish for sporting events. It's not the right context IMO, we're supposed to be appreciating sporting achievements, there's plenty of other places where you can find images of genetic lottery winners to toss one off over I'm sure...
Ultimately you don't need to worry about the poor little lambs, they're still going to find plenty of work for years to come making "normal" people feel inadequate and inspiring millions to take up an eating disorder.
On the very surface level, before one starts analysing and being right-on about it, one may be struck with the notion that working really hard at your sport means you might possibly one day end up in a position where an attractive female will be hanging around, which could potentially minutely increase the chances of an attractive female actually taking an interest in your pathetic personality...
Could be an accurate notion re some young male competitors. When 18 I opted for the leggy model (literally leggy and a Car Show model) and she turned out every bit as vacuous, narcissistic and fickle as I should have guessed she was. Luckily I then met a girl who was both smart, funny and loved cycling. Better looking too as didn't require (neither did think she required) 3mm thick of concealers, fake tan and blusher.
Competitors (either aspiring to be on the podium or aready there) might do well to motivate themselves beyond 'getting close' (standing close?) to someone they admire simply for aesthetics/ego. 'Attractive' and 'glamorous' are so often confused, especially in this neo-1950s era we seem to be having.
...It's not titillation, it's motivation
Both, shirley? The whole podium-girl thing is (variously) about glamour, money, fun, sexiness, tittilation, sexism, tradition, tackyness, fakeness, a bit of creepiness and (for some) - motivation. 'Get the prize = get the girl(s)'
We know that the knight in shining armour always slays the hordes to stand alone on the heaped corpses of the slain. And he always gets a fawning beauty as a prize. Why change years of tradition?
[img] 
[/img]
Objectification is not the same as sexism, it's a slippery slope to pair the 2 due to ignorance.
It's difficult for white heterosexual men to understand because their main experience of the move towards equality is largely about losing things they used to have.
If we really want to live in a society based on gender equality (which many people need to admit they don't) we need to raise up women, perhaps artificially at times. This means that society must be reformed from one that celebrates the sort of attributes intrinsic to podium girls (narrowly defined body image, subservience to men, sexual availability) to one that more widely celebrates the achievements of women across the board.
But of course, every step towards such a goal will be met with the usual clamour of white heterosexual men dumbfounded as to why such things are such a big deal.
It's not about labelling everything as sexist or racist or whatever (and I accept that all the Social Justice Warriors are very guilty of this), it's about moving towards greater equality, which means moving away from things like podium girls.
If society was truly equal podium girls would not matter. So no, in isolation, there's no problem with podium girls, the problem is equality, or the lack thereof.
It's difficult for white heterosexual men to understand because their main experience of the move towards equality is largely about losing things they used to have.
If we really want to live in a society based on gender equality (which many people need to admit they don't) we need to raise up women, perhaps artificially at times. This means that society must be reformed from one that celebrates the sort of attributes intrinsic to podium girls (narrowly defined body image, subservience to men, sexual availability) to one that more widely celebrates the achievements of women across the board.
But of course, every step towards such a goal will be met with the usual clamour of white heterosexual men dumbfounded as to why such things are such a big deal.
It's not about labelling everything as sexist or racist or whatever (and I accept that all the Social Justice Warriors are very guilty of this), it's about moving towards greater equality, which means moving away from things like podium girls.
If society was truly equal podium girls would not matter. So no, in isolation, there's no problem with podium girls, the problem is equality, or the lack thereof.
Spot on.
Losing things?
I've gained the social acceptance of being a stay at home dad, an increase involvement in child rearing, a more balanced more equal relationship with women who are more prepared to take initiatives... . If pom-pom girls were replaced with rock and roll/salsa couples I'd watch with more interest.
Edukator, I wish more men had your attitude.
I think the problem with threads like this is you have a handful of folk that seem to be confused and would like to know what it is they're doing/saying/thinking that is deemed wrong. Amidst the folk that are trying to be rational and explain this and explore the issue you have a small number using the subject as a way of insulting and abusing other users in a bid to demonstrate how advanced and intellectual they are.
Very sad and definitely not constructive.
Edit : Took me so long to write that a similar the point was made by Fin. That'll teach me to focus.
fin25 +2. Very well put.
I have a niece who, aged 12, decided she was fat and ugly and to have panic attacks when in school. So she lost 20 months of schooling. Now, I'm not saying that this was a direct cause of podium girls (as obviously it's not and there's a lot more going on than body hatred) but wtaf are pre-teen girls getting these ideas from?
Some 'eye candle' to ogle is not slap and tickle with zero harm. It's outdated and definitely not helpful. We really should be better than this by now.
I agree with lot's of that fin25, not so keen on the sexist stereotyping though 😀
Equality will lead to some very interesting social changes. Podium people should be a legitimate and unquestioned choice in the new order. When do we get to that point?