Top level sport has traditionally been a male environment

And that’s okay, is it?

That’s just the ‘we’ve always done this’ argument and it’s just about the most worthless argument you can make.

Sure, look at your choice of sexy person, whatever – but adding totty to something just to get some people interested who don’t give enough of a shit to care about the sport itself is appealing to base instincts and is fundamentally wrong IMO because it has very corrosive side effects.

If you can’t see those corrosive side effects then you aren’t looking hard enough.

I asked how you felt about that add?

The ad isn’t just a joke, it’s satire. That’s a pretty different thing.

Re the cycling – lots of peple are offended by it, lots aren’t. Removing the girls would have no affect on the cycling – fans will still come to watch the sport and any letchers can go do something else if all the want is totty.

Therefore – they should go. Along with beauty contests.

I’m hardly advocating a nanny state of anti-sexism, just pointing out the essentials of the issue. I think you have defended sexism by not acknowledging the wider issue of sexism, which is sadly one-sided. Anyway, we disagree…

right,

i’ve asked my wife, she responded thusly:

“Do they have a place? – no.”

“in what possible context could they be justified? i’m astounded that no-one gets it. The obvious (if unspoken) message is that the men have ‘won’ the women, I hope i don’t have to try and explain how wrong that is”

Anyway, we disagree…

Everyone’s entitled to their opinion. And it wouldn’t be STW if everyone had the same ideas 😆

Re the cycling – lots of peple are offended by it, lots aren’t. Removing the girls would have no affect on the cycling – fans will still come to watch the sport and any letchers can go do something else if all the want is totty.

The fans are unimportant, there are no turnstiles, it is the sponsors who matter and, if they disappear, then financial support for the sport will disappear.

The fans are who they sell to. Cycling, bikes, associated kit and racing fans aren’t some kind of illusion hung off a pair of double-D knockers. Sponsors and sales aren’t going to disappear without models in bikinis.

Sex sells in a particular way to a specific market, and bigger, more diverse markets are possible. The message in sexist displays is that cycling is for heterosexual men. I’ve been through one industry slowly realising that it’s stupid to only sell to one demographic. Seeing fans/participants of another claim that structure as somehow vital to that industry functioning is a proper facepalm moment.

as for saying its sexist i didnty see anyone standing there holding there arms up there backs making them get there kit off for the lads or the lesbos

I don’t think you understand what sexism is.

I see this thread has now become an excuse for those who’s tastes are so basic that this sort of marketing works on them to post the sort of pictures which put off lots of people from visiting this forum. 🙄

edit: and there go the mods removing the context for my post, damn you 😉

The fans are unimportant, there are no turnstiles, it is the sponsors who matter

Er yeah, so why do the sponsors want to sponsor? Because there are fans…

It is not just the fans you turn up, though, and the range of sponsors goes way beyond cycling companies especially in continental Europe. As I see it, if you start dictating terms to sponsors, you will make an already declining pool much smaller. Cycling may be booming here but it does not make up for the loss of long established teams and races in Europe and that is just the men’s sport. The female side is really struggling to have any commercial viability at all.

EDIT: The entertaining side is incredibly important too, I used to work for a company that was one of the biggest sponsors of cycling and we took huge number of clients to races – very few of whom had much of an interest in cycling, but the overall event as a whole was attractive.

So you’re saying cycling needs totty?

FFS

Well if it’s the sponsors demanding podium girls, then that is a different matter and should be better publicised. It would certainly be interesting to see the social media reaction if a big sponsor declares support for them…

The female side is really struggling to have any commercial viability at all.

You reckon the commercial viability is improved by having bikini clad lovelies parading around? Maybe they should impose a dress code for the female riders to improve the commercial viability?

should be better publicised

Their uniforms are generally in the sponsor’s colours and feature their logo, what more do you want them to do to publicise it?

You reckon the commercial viability is improved by having bikini clad lovelies parading around?

Well if that is what the only available sponsor wants, then yes as the event has no viability without a sponsor. However, I doubt it is quite this black and white. However, there is no doubt women’s cycling really struggles to find sponsors.

So you’re saying cycling needs totty?

No I am saying cycling needs money.

Really? What are the colours of Le Crédit Lyonnais?

Though that’s missing the point anyway – using podium girls to promote the sponsors is not the same thing at all as sponsors demanding podium girls for promotional purposes.

What are the colours of Le Crédit Lyonnais?

Yellow and blue

Though that’s missing the point anyway – using podium girls to promote the sponsors is not the same thing at all as sponsors demanding podium girls for promotional purposes.

I doubt they object, we had plenty of pretty girls at our functions too.

Yet they apparently sponsor a red and white uniform and a green uniform…

Really which race? They are not the sponsors of the green jersey in the tdf, that was PMU who colours are green and red, and the climber’s jersey, I can’t remember who sponsors it now, it used to be Champion whose colour is red.

My 4 year old likes cars especially old American cars. A couple of months ago I bought him a classic American cars mag which was fine, went to buy it again this month and on the cover was a half naked woman draped over a car FFS. NO NEED!

Unnecessary and bizarre – certainly
Offensive, sexist and the rest – hardly. No different from topless makes outside Hollister or the diet coke models.

No one is coerced. Let them get on with it if they want do. Neither titillates nor offends personally. Far more important things to worry about.

The bikini clad ladies are perfectly normal and I’d suggest that any derogatory comments about their form is in poor taste. Their purpose eludes me.

Now, how many folks with strong views suggesting no advertising featuring a stereotypically positive human form wear Assos….

It all comes down to market forces and economics, in the end. We are all ‘objects’ that have a variety of saleable assets and skills. It is up to us as individuals whether we monetise these assets, and it is up to us as a society what value to place on people’s various personal assets and skills. Society is a sick puppy in many ways in the way it values these things; footballers wages being a prime example, but porn, modelling, ‘celeb’ culture and many other weird ‘valuable’ personal attributes are also prime examples of the weird way society values people. Meanwhile, the NHS work force has a real world pay cut for about the eighth year in a row.

Whilst society places value on such things, you can’t really blame people for exploiting the fact. No point cutting your nose off to spite your face now.

Beach volleyball anyone?

I’ll say it again, SOCIETY is sexist. This sexism expresses itself in many different ways, from under-representation in boardrooms/public office to more “trivial” comments about “women drivers” and such.
Sponsors employ women in bikinis at sporting events because that is what they believe will help them shift units, because they understand that society is sexist, so pander to sexist views of women. It is not the job of sponsors to challenge sexism, it is their job to sell things to society. So, if society is sexist, sexism sells…

If you are lucky enough not to be negatively affected by sexism, or unaware of how sexism may negatively affect you, you may not see sexism as a problem. You may well even argue that sexism does not exist, as, in your own experience/awareness, it does not.

THIS DOES NOT MEAN SEXISM DOES NOT EXIST.

The fact that you are far more likely to see women standing around in bikinis at many sporting events rather than competing in said sport is an expression of a SEXIST society. The very fact that women in bikinis at a WOMEN’S sporting event has caused such a stir is confirmation of this.
It is not the women in bikinis that is an unusual sight, it is the women ON THE PODIUM. The image of the women on the podium causes us to really see the women in bikinis for what they are, an expression of SEXISM. Whether or not we choose to recognise what we see for what it is and begin to properly challenge sexism in sport is an individual choice and is usually dependent upon whether or not we benefit from the status quo.

It is very important that we see the sexism in society, whether it affects us or not. The only way to make society more equal is for those who benefit from inequality to stop shrugging their shoulders and take responsibility. Recognise that you are benefiting from an unequal society, then make the choice whether you want to challenge that inequality and fight for equality or support sexism by continuing to benefit from it.

If you chose the latter, fine, but understand that your need to defend sexism is most likely a result of your benefiting from it, whether you realise it or not.

Sorry for the rant, I’ve had a couple of ciders, they’ve always made me quite philosophical.

Perfectly said fin25. I’d kind of given up..!

*drops mic and walks away…*

That’s all very well, but only an idiot would think differently. the bigger question is can that be changed? Should it be changed? Whether we like to admit it or not, the sexes ARE very different. Men are more commonly ambitious than women. Men tend to compete harder than women. Women tend to be drawn more towards caring, nurturing roles than men. (I appreciate that these are sweeping generalisations, but stats bear them out) Is this because we live in a sexist society and young boys and girls are conditioned to seek out these roles? Or is it more organic, a subtle (and by no means universal) genetic predisposition towards these roles? My gut feeling is that it’s a chicken and egg question. That one leads to the other, which leads to the other. And in the face of such fundamental differences, society is always going to be unequal, giving differing opportunities to individuals based on their sex.

I do however, feel lucky to be living in a society that has pushed back a great deal, and is more equal than it ever has been. I just don’t think that true equality is a realistic goal.

None of the above is in anyway condoning girls hanging around looking awkward in bikinis at cycling events. That’s just a bit odd.

I’ll say it again, SOCIETY is sexist.

I don’t think anyone is debating that society isn’t sexist, just what people define as sexist and the difference between men and women.

A place for them at the races could be in the back of my car 😆

Fin25, you are a very wise and eloquent person.

One thing I am curious about, there are lots of comments here in the vein of “back to the 1970s”. If fin25 and others are right – and I believe they are – then why was it any more acceptable then? Surely the reasoning doesn’t change with time and the core fact remains? Or is this the context of the times changing? Just curious.

don’t have aproblem with it at all. TBF its the only interesting thing about F1 and road cycling. If I won a race, I’d rather be handed flowers/prize by an attractive woman than some bloke. Its not sexist to have dolly brollys and podium girls

agree with fin25 and agree with franksinatra from the first page…

I would rather see their place taken with young kids from within the sport, a bit like mascots at football matches. That would be so inspiring for kids to share the podium with their heros.

Its not sexist to have dolly brollys and podium girls

So why aren’t blokes doing it then?

Is it time to re-open the Danny Mac/Playboy vid debate?

If brolly dollies were genuinely there to hold brollies, they would 6’7″ tall and weigh 200kg, for maxium shade coverage. Gender irrespective.

So why aren’t blokes doing it then?

not asked to? – that doesn’t make it sexist

So, there is agreement that bikini clad girls is inappropriate for the podium.
Bearing in mind that the majority of podium girls are wearing sponsors or winner’s shirt colours and are not at all provocative. Where do we stop using attractive girls or guys in publicity or public imagery?

those girls in that pic look like the typical skanky girls at local car shows. thats just tacky

I would rather see their place taken with young kids from within the sport, a bit like mascots at football matches. That would be so inspiring for kids to share the podium with their heros.

I missed this at the time, but, absobloodylutely. Here’s some podium girls and front-of-stage dressing you can get behind

Would that have been better with a bunch of girls in their pants? Would it make you more likely to buy a thing?

Is disappointed at the distinct lack of females responding to this topic. 😐

Not surprised at some of the male responses either, Neanderthal man never went away. 😐