Forum menu
It's naff and shit at the same time, I'm annoyed at Maxxis 'cause I like their products, beleive there is no room for sexism in MTB'ing and they could have got plenty of positive images of women doing stuff rather than just "looking pretty". Something that they have every right to do if they so wish, women that is not Maxxis.
However flashing your arse (paraphrasing), male or female, is something people like to do and people like to see, in some ways given that the models are getting paid I doubt they are feeling too exploited. We can all wring our hands and suggest all sorts of negative connotations around this type of marketing but people like sex and it's a quick and simple way to get attention. Men and women have body image issues none of this lowest common denominator stuff helps.
I don't like it personally when used in this fashion and I would hope that Maxxis address the level of disquiet the calendar has attracted. Not because I don't think women can stick up for themselves but more the idea that we are so dumb that a nice picture of a female body will make us buy their stuff over how it actually works. It's just sad and pathetic. - Back to Adele.
cumberlandan and chip - i'm not sure I could do a hand clap slow enough to honour your pitiful arguments. But it's enough that you're both showing everyone how blindly sexist you are simply by carrying on.
Yes binners, i'm quite aware of your attitude.
Another sensible one by surroundedbyhills.
Cougar - ModeratorPlease explain to me how a person of male orientation could ever actually 'win' in your world?
By treating people as equals, I'd imagine. Maybe you should ask a [b]woman[/b] how you can 'win' in [b]their [/b]world, that's kind of the point.
Does that not sound a bit odd when you read it in your head?
Its not the womans world, its not the mans world, its just the world. Somethings you like, somethings you don't like but people have different opinions and I'm quite happy to let them get on with it.
Adele doesn't seem to be.
cumberlandan and chip - i'm not sure I could do a hand clap slow enough to honour your pitiful arguments. But it's enough that you're both showing everyone how blindly sexist you are simply by carrying on.
Maybe, but I find Adele barely credible and a hypocrite.
What is negative about it?
This is nothing to do with procreation any more. We aren't birds. We choose our mates on all sorts of things. Humans have evolved social pressures, higher thoughts, casual sex, women's magazines and dirty calendars, so the evoution argument is out of the window.
What's negative about your statement about women needing to look pretty for men? Well - what if you're not pretty? Or what if you're insecure, and aren't sure how pretty you are? Why should you be made to think how you look is important? (The same goes for men and women here) You end up with a lot of people feeling insecure and worrying about stuff that they shouldn't be. This makes for unahppiness, and unhappiness is bad.
Another issue I have here is that you're a man, cumberlanddan, and women have told you that they find this calendar offensive, and you are basically telling them they are wrong. I am trying to explain why they might think that way. I think that you think they're wrong because you've no idea what they are talking about. But the reason you have no idea what they are talking about is BECAUSE you're a man.
Make an effort to understand, and LISTEN to what people are telling you so that you may learn.
Imagine you had a problem with your bike, you felt the shock wasn't working properly so you took it into Marks and Spencers, and they told you it was fine, stop worrying about it. You wouldnt' beleive them because you know about bikes and they don't.
Sexism does exist. You THINK it doesn't, because you haven't experienced it. Nowadays it's a bit different to 100 years ago; men don't openly go round saying women shouldn't do things because they are useless. It's more subtle than that.
My daughter loves Star Wars. Her school friend (a boy) upset her by telling her Star Wars was for boys. The boy's mum agreed and told my daughter it was for boys. So she then thought she was doing something wrong, and she wasn't allowed to watch it any more.
What the actual ****? Sexism at work.
Its not the womans world, its not the mans world, its just the world.
That's what you think, unfortunately it's not actually true. As I said, do some more reading.
As its Mad Friday, I thought some beers might be in order. So I've bought some in especially for Chip and Cumberlanddan. Stay classy boys....
[img] 
[/img]
In a totally non-sexist, progressive, totally unlike Jim Davidson, 21st century way. Cheers!!! 😆
If you want pin-up calendars banned
I said 'a bit naff', and I think less of places that display them, not 'should be banned'. Many others have said similar and explained why.
Perhaps we need to express this through the medium of interpretive dance to a Jonny Halliday sound track? (Perhaps not.)
Foucault states..."even when individuals think they are most free, they are in fact in the grip of more insidious forms of power
finally, someone who knows Foucault...
cumberlanddan, and women have told you that they find this calendar offensive, and you are basically telling them they are wrong. I am trying to explain why they might think that way.
I thought it was agreed it was not offensive but tacky, sad and dissapointing.
Larger looks appealing...
And a packet of Big D peanuts please
you seem to know rather a lot about what i think. perhaps we shoudl set some of that right.
1. I do think sexism exists. I don't think this calendar is sexist.
2. "I am a man therefore my opinion in this is devalued" is a [i]fundamentally sexist [/i]attitude
3. I am telling no-one anything. I am simply putting across my opinion. Some people don't seem to like my opinion so are very keen to tell me I'm some sort of neolithic misogynist. Funnily enough I take objection to that.
4. A grown person banning girls from watching star wars is a pillock. Children tend to separate into boys and girls on all sorts of things. This is not sexism, though obviously it could develop if left unchecked into adulthood.
Basically there are quite a few sexists on this thread and they are not the ones saying that the calendar is a bad thing.
There you go John....
[img] 
[/img]
Anyway... I was talking to this bird, right? Proper tasty she was. Great pair of jugs on 'er! Probably a right goer.....
Keep flying into the window cumberlanddan. The last word isn't the right one.
Binners you are hilarious, you have me down to a T.
binners
[b]
I'm out....POSTED 1 DAY AGO[/b] # REPORT-POST
I just hope you're not relying on withdrawal as a contraceptive method.
Oh come on.... this thread is the gift that just keeps giving. How could I resist? I was only 3 when some of these attitudes were deemed beyond the pale. Its been educational! A trip back in time to a less enlightened age, where self-awareness was a rare quality only displayed by pooftah's... 😆
[img] 
[/img]
Following comments by Binners and Johnx2 I have just had the realisation that dancing rock and roll makes me a grade A sexist in their eyes, and they're right!:
I have never danced rock and roll with a man
I have never asked a man to dance
I dress male for the occasion
I wear suede shoes with low heels
I wear Axe not channel #x
I don't paint my nails or wear lipstick
I refer to women as girls whatever their age
I go to the bar for drinks as do the other men
I lead and get frustrated if the girl doesn't follow
I go to the men's toilet
I don't like dancing with women taller than me (rotor cuff issues)
We make sure women don't have to walk home on their own but aren't worried if men do
Vive la difference!
objectifyplay
verb ob·jec·ti·fy \?b-?jek-t?-?f?\Simple Definition of objectify : to treat (someone) as an object rather than as a person
Men objectify women - this is sexist
Women objectify men - this is sexist
Women objectify women - this is sexist
Men objectify men - this is sexist
The problem is that the calendar presents only one aspect of the women; portrayed as objects, you know nothing else of them. Were they pictured riding bikes or racing cars then it changes the emphasis and provides a back story that says "Look! there is a women hucking a massive drop, nice technique, what equipment does she use..why it's Maxxis tyres of course" But it doesn't it just says - "nice ass - buy these tyres" If you like this sort of stuff fair enough but it's sad and pathetic and like those Tennants Lager cans it is full of pish.
Cumberlanddan - I think you are wrong and so will most of society, you may not care about this that is your right.
BTW the Maxxis Babes section of their website has been closed.
"I wear Axe not channel #x"
*swoon*
Following comments by B*****s and Johnx2 I have just had the realisation that dancing rock and roll makes me a grade A sexist
Oi that's a bit of a leap. Or should I say [i]grand jeté[/i]?
[quote=surroundedbyhills ]
BTW the Maxxis Babes section of their website has been closed.It's OK. If you can manage the language difficulties, alternatives exist
surroundedbyhills - I'm not sure what you think i think but i suspect you are not entirely correct.
I can see your point, yes, the calendar objectifies women, but to say that that in itself is sexist simply isn't correct. Undesirable, maybe. Crass, certainly. But sexist in and of itself? No.
I'm surprised at Maxxis' reaction there. Another blow struck for the censors I suppose.
Considering no-one here had even heard of it before all this palaver do you now all suddenly feel free and un-objectified, or has it really not made one tiny bit of difference to your life?
I can see your point, yes, the calendar objectifies women, but to say that that in itself is sexist simply isn't correct. Undesirable, maybe. Crass, certainly. But sexist in and of itself? No.
And in a similar triumph of logic.....
Another blow struck for the censors I suppose.
They've taken it down off their Facebook page too. Honestly... its like North Korea round here
😆
On positive representation in advertising, here are a few:
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
And then there's fun with gender politics (all Money Supermarket). Refreshingly good?
[img] 
?1422458855[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
[img] 
[/img]
"I can see your point, yes, the calendar objectifies women, but to say that that in itself is sexist simply isn't correct. Undesirable, maybe. Crass, certainly. But sexist in and of itself? No."
Er, yes. In the context of the calender the objectification of women is done so for the gratification of men. If you agree that it does objectify then that pretty much defines it as sexist! It places sole importance on the appearance of the woman at the exclusion of other human qualities, done so in order to sell a product.
It would actually make a difference if a few sexists re-thought their ideas on the back of this debate.
The vast bulk of those are from the 'ban the calendar' brigade.
Can you find one single post where anyone has suggested banning the calendar?
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
I think you dont understand what the calendar is. It is not a piece of highbrow social commentary. Its a calendar of women, paid for by a tyre manufacturer, to raise money for charity.
Is this a cheap, outdated and misguided concept? Maybe. Is it a blow for misogynists everywhere against women. No.
If you object to calendars of women I suggest you dont wander into any stationery shop anytime soon.
Objectification isn't sexism. By definition. Which you yourself posted.
grum - MemberThe vast bulk of those are from the 'ban the calendar' brigade.
Can you find one single post where anyone has suggested banning the calendar?
In response to you:
https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/strawman
/p>
Though I suspect you wont see the ironing...
You're all bloody crackers.
That doesn't even make any sense. You've suggested there is a 'ban the calendar brigade' - I'm asking you to provide some evidence to back up that statement (which you obviously can't because you made it up).
How is that a straw man argument on my part? I directly quoted you. 😕
Objectification isn't sexism. By definition. Which you yourself posted.
Where?
As it goes, my understanding of objectification is where one is treated more like a thing than a person (someone who undergoes subjective experience). This encompasses sexism.
"Objectification isn't sexism. By definition."
Say it is many times as you like, it's wrong. Objectification isn't always sexist, but in many - especially this case - it couldn't be clearer!
1. I do think sexism exists. I don't think this calendar is sexist.
How do you define sexism?
2. "I am a man therefore my opinion in this is devalued" is a fundamentally sexist attitude
I have not said that. I am also a man.
3. I am telling no-one anything. I am simply putting across my opinion. Some people don't seem to like my opinion so are very keen to tell me I'm some sort of neolithic misogynist. Funnily enough I take objection to that.
I think you are being a little naieve that's all. As I used to be.
4. A grown person banning girls from watching star wars is a pillock. Children tend to separate into boys and girls on all sorts of things. This is not sexism, though obviously it could develop if left unchecked into adulthood.
There was no banning, explicitly, but there was labelleing. And the labelling was damaging. As an isolated incident, it's not much of an issue, but speaking as a parent it's absolutely bloody everywhere. Girls do this, boys do that. You are right that girls and boys do separate on SOME things (not many, and far from all kids) but the problem is society assuming that you like or dislike certain things BECAUSE of your gender, and labelling things as suitable for girls or boys. And sure, boys might go to the truck aisle and girls to the doll aisle in a shop, but why? Largely because society has conditioned them to want to do those things, by making out that the alternative is some kind of weird choice or not acceptable. Their parents do it just as much as they do, so what choice to they have?
My kid might love trucks, but if she's made to feel weird for liking them then it's going to piss on her chips a bit isn't it? And this kind of attitude is so pervasive it has a deep and lasting effect. We take our cues from the society in which we live.
It's good if you are genuinely not sexist, dan, that's great and I will retract that allegation if I made it, but I think you should put a bit more thought into why things like this calendar can be sexist.
I think Maxxis really ought to get a grip - I mean, they should know to tread more carefully. In this day and age, they need a marketing strategy with real traction, otherwise they will eventually feel the pinch when their customers spend their money elsewhere. This may well deflate the brand entirely.
They are promotional models used at commercial events and shows, as many car manufacturers, tv manufacturers soft drink manufacturers, Motorsport and cycling events do.
They made a calendar like much the same as other glamour calendars with proceeds going to charity.
I am also a man.
As am I. Let us shake hands and talk about the big game.
Pirelli managed to do something a bit different for 2016 though chip.. why not Maxxis?
So the logic goes that if other companies do sexist things to sell things, then it is OK?
The fact the money goes to charity means nothing at all, it doesn't absolve the sexism in any way.
Those poor Maxxis Babes will now have lost income as a result of all this furore. I guess some will say they deserved it on account of the way they dressed.
fourteen pages before dannyh comes along! 😆
Molgrips and faustus:
Define sexism:
Discrimination solely on the basis of gender. I'm not getting my dictionary out but that is a perfectly normal working definition.
There is no discrimination inherent in the calendar ergo not sexist. It may inspire sexist views in some small minority of people but I don't think you should ban everything because of a small minority of muppets.
grum:
You quoted a phrase in quotes! You don't want to ban it, you just don't want anyone to make it, or anything like it, ever again. Explain that logic.
I think Maxxis really ought to get a grip - I mean, they should know to tread more carefully. In this day and age, they need a marketing strategy with real traction, otherwise they will eventually feel the pinch when their customers spend their money elsewhere. This may well deflate the brand entirely.
We had two recent threads on MMA and josh what's his face.
Did they use promotional models (ring girls), where was the disapproving 14 page threads then.
I hope all you real men who believe this is sexism boycotted these fights.
Objectification is one form of discrimination, and a common one at that. It perpetuates the societal conditioning of females as sexual objects, for the gratification of men. The calendar is therefore a pretty obvious bit of objectification and 'ergo' discriminatory sexism. How can this not be sexist apart from you saying it isn't!?
You quoted a phrase in quotes! You don't want to ban it, you just don't want anyone to make it, or anything like it, ever again. Explain that logic.
I assume that like me he wants people to understand why it's negative and not do it, rather than simply ban it.
fourteen pages before dannyh comes along!
To be honest, I thought it had been a bit of a let down until now, so thought I'd make a serious point.