That Maxxis "babes calendar" article…

I really don’t know where the majority of the professionally offended hang out (apart from on here). Ive fortuantly never actaully met one in real life.
I’m off for a ride, have a great Christmas!

I am not reading 21 pages to check if I’m the first, but : Drink Coke.

Thanks Bill, you prophet.

Christ some of you lot would not notice the evidence unless it was beautifully and tastefully adorned by a lady with her norks out.

Useless without pictures.

I’m sure customers can decide what advertising they do and don’t like but maybe that’s the problem.

This is the interesting part for me.. It’s the education thing that takes time and lot’s of understanding from all to allow progression.

If we had the most perfect idealistic education system that created intelligent perfectly rounded people across the board; What would people then choose?
My guess would be that everyone might like slightly different things and some of those things might be intellectual, stylish, weird, tacky, explicit, artistic etc etc. Equality and fairness shouldn’t lead us to more narrow mindedness.

Bring on the new world I say 😀

Got back to p17 and got bored.

BinBins, if you want I can hook you up with a Marine Biologist, well Marine Conversationist. She is very smart indeed and may be able to tell your daughter some useful things 🙂

Greetings from the land of no hills.

So you lot would happily see these girls on the dole? Maybe the guy holding a gun to their head should be the one to blame, oh hang on…

Not saying it’s right or wrong but should a human being not be able to do what they wish with their body? And if you disagree maybe instead of attacking Maxxis or whoever admits to liking the calender maybe it’s the models themselves that are ‘to blame’? Just a thought..

Well all this exposure I imagine has boosted sales of the calendar if anything!!! Good job 😆 .

I am not reading 21 pages to check if I’m the first, but : Drink Coke.

Thanks Bill, you prophet.

😆

I suddenly feel thirsty…

If I may sum up:

1. Someone complains about something that negatively affects a group of people.

2. Someone who is not a member of that group or has experienced the negative effects denies the negative effect.

3. When others try to point out to the denier what the problem might be, instead of listening and learning, they simply pour scorn on the explainers, dismissing their explanation because of point 1.

Circular logic, I think.

1 someone is very selective about her complaining, bigging up some people who have done much more risqué photo shoots yet has a problem with this very tame calendar.
In another of her articles she says.

and “that woman just did the roll-up that you’re really scared off,” while pointing to a woman who also happened to be REALLY HOT!.

Is that the same as black people can use the n word but white people cant, would I as a man if describing a woman as hot, be sexist.
Sorry HOT!.

Even by the standards of stw this thread is bonkers.

No one ever lay on their deathbed and thought “I wish I’d spend more time arguing on the Internet with strangers”. Apart from some of you.

Seriously…

I’m at the shops buying coke but can’t remember why…

Junkyard, seriously? Have a read of your last post and ask yourself if that seems OTT. So what if you don’t agree with others.. Swearing,ranting and name calling are not things the forum allows. Rein it in or pull yourself away from the keyboard

You need to hit the report post button and see what comes back or at the very least apply for the position of moderator. OH and thanks for making up colorful , and inaccurate, descriptions of what I did in order to pour scorn on me not that you are stooping to name calling or OTT hyperbole now are you and lastly thanks for not o making it personal :lol:This thread really has some gems of folk doing the thing they are moaning about
Still well done for not engaging with what I said and just shooting the messenger
No one has said ban why do folk eep repeating this lie? Both sides are being rude but only side is getting upset about it and pretending they are not doing it — see you even did that as well.

No one ever lay on their deathbed and thought “I wish I’d spend more time arguing on the Internet with strangers”. Apart from some of you.

DO they lie there wishing they had said that to a bunch of strangers arguing on the internet?

The Lance Armstrong defence?

Surely what lance Armstrong did was illegal.

chip – Member
1 someone is very selective about her complaining, bigging up some people who have done much more risqué photo shoots yet has a problem with this very tame calendar.
In another of her articles she says.
and “that woman just did the roll-up that you’re really scared off,” while pointing to a woman who also happened to be REALLY HOT!.
Is that the same as black people can use the n word but white people cant, would I as a man if describing a woman as hot, be sexist.
Sorry HOT!

Erm, no. It’s about what’s appropriate for advertising bike tyres.

(Hot babes/boys whatever may be appropriate for advertising other products.)

They never used them to advatise bike tyres as far as I am aware.

Price of fish?

You compared what Armstrong did to what these models did. It’s exactly the same.

Erm, no. It’s about what’s appropriate for advertising bike tyres.

chicks with big tits and tight asses works for me. I’d buy those tyres in a flash

Have another think about exactly what was I comparing

Macmillan seemed pleased enough with the results of the fundraising maybe someone should ask them if they feel stupid. Or if any of the people benefiting from the great work Macmillan do.
Or ask Adele if Macmillan had gone from hero to zero because of their assosiation with such models.

22 pages!

Mind you, I suppose that’s what you get if you combine a sexism thread with a ‘what tyres’ thread on STW. The perfect storm. I wouldn’t be surprised if at least one of the serial contributors to this thread had actually spaffed themselves with the sheer excitement.

I put my old supertacky high roller on the front wheel of my bike yesterday as it is getting a bit slick out there. Does this make me a misogynist? Or am I environmentally ‘right-on’ to re-use an existing tyre rather than buy a new one, thus reducing my carbon footprint? These issues are so vexed.

I expect those at the Livestrong foundation were also happy

though I could probably just give you one of these:

Mind you, I suppose that’s what you get if you combine a sexism thread with a ‘what tyres’ thread on STW

😀

never used them to advatise bike tyres

Appropriate brand association then. My point wasn’t really about marketing terminology.

It’s those pics binners has been posting

put my old supertacky high roller on the front wheel of my bike yesterday as it is getting a bit slick out there

Mmmm. Keep talking…

never used them to advatise bike tyres
Appropriate brand association then. My point wasn’t really about marketing terminology.

So because Lisa Snowden and Victoria Pendleton got there kit off to sell lads mags that’s ok.
But if They did the same to sell a tyre companies calendar that’s sexist and wrong.

Mmmm. Keep talking…

No way. There’s a premium rate charge for that service.

whataboutery, and yes I know we’ve done that Adele is a fan of those two, but then if that’s the reason you think her article is wrong, that’s playing the man, not the ball

chip » So because Lisa Snowden and Victoria Pendleton got there kit off to sell lads mags that’s ok.
But if They did the same to sell a tyre companies calendar that’s sexist and wrong.
whataboutery, and yes I know we’ve done that Adele is a fan of those two, but then if that’s the reason you think her article is wrong, that’s playing the man, not the ball

I’m a bit lost here (I keep dipping in and out of this thread). Have some people actually been digging through the internet history of the woman who wrote the article to try to unearth some kind of conflict of opinions?

If so, that’s bordering on a bit sinister if you ask me. One person is capable of holding apparently contradictory views at different times. Changing over time is not unheard of. Nor is a change of mood or outlook. Not that I’m insinuating anything about women and moods, just so we’re clear on that. 😳

because Lisa Snowden and Victoria Pendleton got there kit off to sell lads mags that’s ok.
But if They did the same to sell a tyre companies calendar that’s sexist and wrong.

The latter seems a bit naff and tacky for sure. The former is unlikely to impinge on most of us.

Fwiw I’ve a vague recollection that VP was a bit retrospectively rueful that the off with kit stuff she did failed to do much for her income. And a young female pro cyclist might find it a bit disheartening. Or not. Whatever, different argument.

Heh. Yes, somebody checked earlier. Cant remember who. It does seem that our Adele has some very conflicting opinions, especially for one apparently so easily offended.

Tell us, how does that impact on the validity of what she writes in that article?

Heh. Yes, somebody checked earlier. Cant remember who. It does seem that our Adele has some very conflicting opinions, especially for one apparently so easily offended.

Ok. Still I do think that aracer’s point about playing the man not the ball is valid in that case…….

Beaten to it!

he is not name calling everyone else is doing this instead whilst asking for it to be banned.

You bullies wont stop will you?

It doesn’t affect what the validity of what she says. It does make her look a bit silly though.

The real problem in my opinion is that what she says is not valid int he first place!

You do like to bicker don’t you.