# Women's Cycling



## Yazzoo (1 Oct 2015)

As a female cyclist I understand I am in the minority here but I'm wondering why?


Why do less women cycle? A look round the women's section of any cycling store suggests there a very few of us out there!
Why is women's pro cycling not as big a deal as mens? Is it ultimately down to speed? I understand and accept that men are generally faster/stronger than women but surely if you're competing against women and you're the strongest thats the same as men competing against men?

Excuse my ignorance but I come from the equestrian world - one of the few sports out there where men and women compete against each other on an equal playing field.


----------



## mjr (1 Oct 2015)

Yazzoo said:


> Why do less women cycle? A look round the women's section of any cycling store suggests there a very few of us out there!


The cycling store problem is a bit chicken-and-egg - women find little nice cycling gear so they stop going to those stores so women going there find little nice gear and so on. I also suspect that a higher proportion of women cycle in ordinary clothes rather than full spandex suits, but that's guesswork.

As for why fewer women cycle, the last solid evidence I saw was in British Cycling's Vision for Women which said:


> Over 30% of female respondents to a recent British Cycling survey identified safety concerns as the main barrier to participating in cycling.
> 
> The other most common responses were:
> ‘lack of knowledge of local routes’
> ...


I can't link to that because it seems that www.BritishCycling.org.uk/women seems to have been deleted!

Somehow British Cycling got from the above list to the Breeze single-sex rides (where you can be out of place if you're not wearing a helmet and lycra and riding a racing bike) which I think do little to address most of those but that's a whole other discussion. I'm more in favour of a Stourbug-style approach: encouraging women but primarily addressing things like safety concerns, routes, friendly people to ride with, offering some mechanical support if it all goes wrong, not requiring special kit or fancy bikes and offering tips on practical cycling (yes, you can do a group ride with baskets and/or panniers!). Most of those barriers affect other under-represented groups too.



Yazzoo said:


> Why is women's pro cycling not as big a deal as mens? Is it ultimately down to speed? I understand and accept that men are generally faster/stronger than women but surely if you're competing against women and you're the strongest thats the same as men competing against men?


I think it's mainly that the history means it's playing catch-up. I really enjoy the women's pro cycling as much as the men's, but it doesn't get as much coverage and so it doesn't get as many resources and so it isn't such a big show (no big screen fan-zones at the Women's Tour of Britain as far as I've seen) and so it doesn't get as much coverage... There are some daft rules about race lengths and so on which I think should be changed soon, too. The great opportunity for women's racing is that they can try to build a calendar that avoids the overlapping chaos of the men's racing.


----------



## fimm (1 Oct 2015)

There's a long discussion about women's pro cycling here:
https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/how-to-grow-womens-pro-cycling.108806/


----------



## TissoT (1 Oct 2015)

I see more and more females cycling for pleasure each year through sportive`s here in Cheshire
as for pro cycling I think they don't get televised which is a same ..
http://www.uci.ch/road/calendar/#date=20151001&view=list&categ=286&country=0&classc=0


----------



## vickster (1 Oct 2015)

I think its because less women watch sport and men seem to like to watch men's sport more

That said I'm not averse to a bit of men's cycling, all those nice tanned legs 

Road cycling has been marketed through advertising and magazines to men not equally to both genders. Get a copy of any cycling magazine and see how much is devoted to women's kit vs men's. Probably <5%. Cycling Active used to be better in that regard but now it's become much more mamilified and aimed at men on road bikes


----------



## vickster (1 Oct 2015)

Regarding the clothing, some shops do carry more women's kit but very rarely if ever in anything other than a size 12
or 14. 99% of my stuff has been bought on line for that very reason. So I spend my life ordering, trying on and 9/10 returning. Frustrating and time consuming! And that's being in London, so heaven knows what the rest of the country is like! I probably have 30+ bike shops within 15 miles or less of here!


----------



## MikeW-71 (1 Oct 2015)

Yazzoo said:


> As a female cyclist I understand I am in the minority here but I'm wondering why?
> 
> 
> Why do less women cycle? A look round the women's section of any cycling store suggests there a very few of us out there!
> ...


It's a difficult one.

1. This is what many people and organisations are trying to work out. I think that for road cycling, women are even more nervous about cars than most men are. They feel more vulnerable riding alone. Generally less interested in sports? They see cycling (or it is presented to them) as male-dominated, which makes them uncomfortable when riding with men as they feel like they are too slow, and that puts them off. (I think that's why the women-only Breeze rides and Cyclettas have been very popular)

2. I really can't work this out. I have watched some of the womens racing, particularly the Womens Tour last year, and it was absolutely brilliant! Yes, speeds are a bit slower than the men, (but that's irrelevent as they aren't racing against men), but they are still going bloody fast! Ultimately it comes down to money.  The profile is being raised though, and things are improving. Long may that continue.

However, I am seeing more people out cycling than I have done before, and more of those new riders are women.


----------



## totallyfixed (1 Oct 2015)

Much of what has been said is correct, fundamentally though until women are treated as equals with men there will always be a problem. The media is very important in this equation and until they give equal reporting / coverage of women's events they are not going to be as inspired. Lizzie Armistead did not even get a mention on the BBC news when she won the road race World Championship last Saturday. Two of the biggest cycling organisations only have one woman apiece on their management committees.
My better half is one of the top amateur cyclists in the UK, yet in a competition she is in next week the winning man will get a far higher reward than the winning woman, presumably because she didn't try as hard as the man. I could go on, suffice to say a fair proportion of my time is fighting inequality. This Sunday I will be talking to some of the top pro women to see how they felt about the poor media coverage last week.
There is still a school of thought in the older generation that the role of women is to support the men.


----------



## xxDarkRiderxx (1 Oct 2015)

Not so sure about men being stronger than women. We had two 14 year old girls from another club join us a social club ride, and they tore the legs of us..


----------



## jefmcg (1 Oct 2015)

Well, there is one part of cycling where women outnumber men: road fatalities in London. This year so far 5 women and 2 men have died. 

As for pro cycling. Personally I dislike all professional sports, so I equally disinterested in men's and women's cycling.

It's also a time/responsibility thing. I do audaxes, I think there are men on these long ride leaving the kids with the wife. This is often less of an option for women. Also - while there are ways around it - it's easier to cycle to work if you don't have to get kids to school first, a job that is nearly universally done in a car, and it's easier to leave for work in time to get cleaned and ready at the other end if you don't have others to shepherd out the door first.

Many women keep up a very high level of personal grooming, and I have worked in few places that have the facilities to reach that level. It's ok for me, I'm IT, so even in working in the City, I'm a lick-and-promise type.

And guys? It's ok to sit back and let women discuss something without you joining in immediately. I'd love to see a discussion on women's cycling that isn't dominated by men for once.


----------



## TissoT (1 Oct 2015)

xxDarkRiderxx said:


> Not so sure about men being stronger than women. We had two 14 year old girls from another club join us a social club ride, and they tore the legs of us..


May be Best to keep this one quite ...


----------



## Reddragon (1 Oct 2015)

I have only just started cycling and the majority (I would say 95%) of riders I pass (going the other way) or pass me (going the same way) are men. I can understand the concerns of safety with traffic (my husband's main concern which is why I stick to generally the back roads) and being a lone female but I have never generally worried about this sort of stuff at any other time so don't intend to start now. 
I started jogging a couple of months before cycling and see a lot more women jogging, they need to know you can get further, faster with time to get your breath back whilst still moving and eat cake, so cycling is the way to go 
With regards to the pro cycling it is the same as most sports, the women's version is less watched (generally men are not keen on watching women's sport, women don't watch as much sport and the broadcasters reflect this due to advertising revenue etc) this is the case for all the sports I watch (I will watch men and women, whatever is on) football, rugby, golf etc.
If more women take part, there will be increased interest in the pro sports which will lead to more being broadcast which will lead to more participants so chicken and egg I think.


----------



## mjr (1 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> And guys? It's ok to sit back and let women discuss something without you joining in immediately.


You sexist prig  I knew some stats on this which I hoped might inform the discussion rather than it becoming a stack of anecdotes like certain other topics...



Reddragon said:


> generally men are not keen on watching women's sport


Really? Couldn't it be that it's made much more difficult to watch women's sport and lots of us have been burned by it bouncing around the schedule and sometimes the conclusion of a competition being dropped entirely?

What sport gets equal coverage and worse viewing figures? The sport I can think of where men and women competitions are covered in full is tennis, but then the women's game is shorter and in the major events, the women's finals are usually held on a Saturday (against more competition from other sports as well as other activities) as a prequel to the men's final on a Sunday.

It's pretty annoying the way you have to hunt around to follow the women's cycling World Cup, for example... but then again, the men's World Tour is hardly easy to follow with its conflicting events and competing broadcasters, so I don't know.


----------



## jefmcg (1 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> You sexist prig  I knew some stats on this which I hoped might inform the discussion rather than it becoming a stack of anecdotes like certain other topics...


AKA mansplaining


----------



## jefmcg (1 Oct 2015)

Here's a thing. Shooting used to be mixed in the olympics, or at least the Men's division was actually an open category, so women could enter. Until a woman won gold in skeet shooting, then they closed the category to women.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Shan


----------



## mjr (1 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> AKA mansplaining


I have no idea who drafted British Cycling's Vision for Women or conducted its survey but I'm pretty sure the respondents to the survey were women. Feel free to correct any of it.


----------



## jefmcg (1 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> I have no idea who drafted British Cycling's Vision for Women or conducted its survey but I'm pretty sure the respondents to the survey were women. Feel free to correct any of it.


You really can't see it?



mjray said:


> I knew some stats on this which I hoped might inform the discussion rather than it becoming a stack of anecdotes like certain other topics...


Which is both condescending and inaccurate. There are no real stats in what you posted, _30% of an unstated number of people selected on an unstated basis from an unstated population answered an unstated series of questions. _ Sounds anecdotal to me. And the rest of the list are anecdotes. I'm not sure why you think those anecdotes are more valuable than ours, or why you felt it was your job to _"inform the discussion"
_
Classic mansplaining.


----------



## mjr (1 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> There are no real stats in what you posted


You're quite right. I've not got a reference for the source material and with the deletion of the BC women's website, I can't look it up. I apologise for that. However, we would have got here much more quickly if you had stated that rather than throwing sexist epithets around!

Is there reason to suspect that BC has misrepresented its survey results or screwed it up somehow?

Anyway, looking for alternative data, the Mintel report series "Bicycles in the UK" includes some men/women differences, but it's tedious to dig through http://reports.mintel.com/display/715760/ and I'm not sure there's much there better than the BC summary unless you pay big money. I don't have our local cycling profile dataset but I'll ask if I can have it. Anyone got other suggestions?



jefmcg said:


> why you felt it was your job to _"inform the discussion"_


Not job, but I have an interest in it because I want to get more people cycling more, the under-represented groups (including my own) seem to have the biggest potential for growth and I hate to see such important discussions become a succession of rambling anecdotes.


----------



## midliferider (1 Oct 2015)

Yazzoo, you may be pleased to hear that I really enjoyed watching Lizzie Armitstead winning the road race on the TV. I liked it so much that I watched it again on the BBC website. I did not see any discussion/ thread on that achievement. Or did I miss that thread?


----------



## suzeworld (1 Oct 2015)

I've cycled for leisure over many years, and notice that nowadays more women seem to be out on the road compared to what I used to see 20 years ago --
so my sense of it is that there are MORE women, albeit less women than men, for sure ...

As for competitive sport, women are always under-represented for all sorts of reasons ...
If you find stuff written by Nicole Cook you get some blistering insight into the world of female professionals ... I have not read her autobiog yet, but she has given some great speeches on this topic. Worth a read to see what a real insider has found in her career,

and did you see much mention of LIz Armistead in the press recently when she won the world champion jersey ... ? very scant and disappointing that she was not front page news ... so even the great success women have had is scarcely reported ... hardly boosting the profile even when the success if awesome ...

very sad that,


----------



## mjr (1 Oct 2015)

midliferider said:


> I did not see any discussion/ thread on that achievement. Or did I miss that thread?


Yes. https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/u...ships-sept-19-27-spoilers.187584/post-3924559


----------



## Slioch (1 Oct 2015)

Just an observation, and apologies for being a male posting on a discussion thread about women's cycling, but I am seeing greater numbers of females out on their bikes. This is a really positive development.


----------



## zizou (1 Oct 2015)

totallyfixed said:


> Much of what has been said is correct, fundamentally though until women are treated as equals with men there will always be a problem. The media is very important in this equation and until they give equal reporting / coverage of women's events they are not going to be as inspired. Lizzie Armistead did not even get a mention on the BBC news when she won the road race World Championship last Saturday. Two of the biggest cycling organisations only have one woman apiece on their management committees.



In general i agree with you on the media coverage however i dont think in this particular case sexism is the problem. It was also the British track championships over the weekend and Laura Trott winning gold there made the BBC news whereas Armitstead becoming road world champ wasnt covered and nor were any of the other winners (male or female) at the track champs. The problem isn't just sexism it is the sports editors and journalists not being knowing much about "minority" sports and in that vacuum they instead focus on celebrity. Of course Trott is more than just a celebrity and has achieved great things but her success in Manchester last week was dwarfed many times over by Armitstead in Richmond and a competent sports editor / journalist would have known that and featured Armitstead over Trott.

In terms of the coverage both mens and womens events were fully covered on the red button, the womens race had highlights on sunday afternoon and the mens race monday afternoon.


----------



## totallyfixed (1 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> Here's a thing. Shooting used to be mixed in the olympics, or at least the Men's division was actually an open category, so women could enter. Until a woman won gold in skeet shooting, then they closed the category to women.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Shan


Here's another, I guess not that many on here watch ski jumping, but anyway, 3 years ago women finally appeared on tv [Eurosport] and produced some very incredibly good competition, but still it was only the very odd event that was shown compared to the mens. Move forward another year and women competed in mixed national teams, with of course the men always taking the final jump, men always go last in every sport because that is seen as the glory position and is never ever given to a woman. Does anyone realise how discriminatory that is? I digress, unfortunately for the men some of the women jumped further than they did. Move forward another year and women's ski jumping has now mysteriously been dropped by Eurosport, even in the Olympics in Sochi it was not shown, of course being in Russia it did not help that one of the Russian women was in a lesbian relationship.
Quote from a Guardian article 

Even on the eve of the first Olympic competition, some attitudes remain unreconstructed. The Russian men's ski jumping coach, Alexander Arefyev, did not endear himself to the 30 female jumpers who will compete in Sochi:
"It's a pretty difficult sport with a high risk of injury. If a man gets a serious injury it's still not fatal, but for women it could end much more seriously," he said. "Women have another purpose – to have children, to do housework, to create hearth and home."

If you can spare the time read this and watch the 2nd one minute video.

http://deadspin.com/why-it-took-90-years-for-womens-ski-jumping-to-make-the-1520520342

PS if anyone can get to Monsal Head in The Peak District on Sunday, there is a famous hill climb competition in which most of the best female hill climbing cyclists in the country will be competing, including Jessie Walker [pro] and Dame Sarah Storey. It attracts hundreds of spectators and is amazing to watch, just 675yds of serious gurning.


----------



## Smurfy (2 Oct 2015)

Serious logistics question. If women ride the same distance as the men's cycling race, won't the pee stops be a bit tricky? It's not like ladies can just turn their backs and whip it out.

http://www.wheelsuckers.co.uk/page/toilet-stops


----------



## ColinJ (2 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> There you go @jefmcg @totallyfixed - women's cycling will never take off, because women can't p1ss standing up. End of thread.


If it doesn't end the thread, then somebody will probably use it as an explanation for making women's races shorter than men's!

Anyway, I can't hang around in this thread all day because I have a few things to do in preparation for my hilly forum ride tomorrow. My tiny friend Carrie is coming along again and as usual will no doubt leave me and all the other male riders grovelling in her wake every time the road goes uphill ...


----------



## ColinJ (2 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> I think somebody just did.


D'oh! 

I must spend more time taking in posts rather than half-reading them and posting replies ...


----------



## Supersuperleeds (2 Oct 2015)

All you need is a she wee:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Shewee-Extreme-Travel-Accessories/dp/B00KEDCK24


----------



## Yazzoo (2 Oct 2015)

Interesting reading - thanks all for the input

I appreciate that efforts are being put in to encourage more women into cycling, I'm just not sure I always agree with them! 

I'm a BC member and have received emails and letters from them regarding the breeze events and found them to be incredibly patronising, I don't need events to be based around cake and chatting in coffee shops to find them appealing - in fact it puts me off altogether. I don't find riding with men intimidating or riding on the roads (possibly due to horsey background, always hacking on roads and being close passed!) But I guess this does appeal to some women if it seems to be working? Personally I think things like this tend to enhance the gap between men and women, rather than close it.

FWIW I have a similar problem with our local chamber of commerce. We have networking events and lunches that all can attend, then there's also women only events usually entitled 'Cuppa, Cake and Conversation' or something equally as condescending. I bet if the men wanted to start their own men only group there would be uproar. Segregating into a women only group only serves to encourage the feeling the regular lunches are a bit of an old boys club, the women have their own group where they sit around and eat cake and natter whilst the men do the real business.


----------



## steveindenmark (2 Oct 2015)

It would be a good idea for you to set up a womens only cycling group in your area. I would think lots of women would like to bicycle but have not had the opportunity because of all the above concerns.


----------



## theclaud (2 Oct 2015)

ColinJ said:


> Anyway, I can't hang around in this thread all day because I have a few things to do in preparation for my hilly forum ride tomorrow. My tiny friend Carrie is coming along again and as usual will no doubt leave me and all the other male riders grovelling in her wake every time the road goes uphill ...



No worries. You can catch up while she's having a waz.


----------



## Yazzoo (2 Oct 2015)

Not if I don't agree with separating women!

I'd rather set up a club that had a fast group and a slow group (our local club is very small) - and if that slow group was mainly women that would be fine. I'd rather everyone was comfortable riding to their own ability than separated because of gender!


----------



## Smurfy (2 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> There you go @jefmcg @totallyfixed - women's cycling will never take off, because women can't p1ss standing up. End of thread.


LOL! I never said that!


----------



## Smurfy (2 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> the 'men only groups' exist by default, which of course the men are very happy with


What makes you think that? Some of us would welcome more diversity in cycling.


----------



## Smurfy (2 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> My personal experience makes me think that, Tim. I see you're enlarging your trolling activities beyond SC&P, which is a great pity as the discussion here was developing in quite an interesting direction. Oh well.


Whatever. I'd prefer a mixed group of riders, as I think it is more interesting socially, and helps keep some of the more macho elements in check.


----------



## vickster (2 Oct 2015)

Yazzoo said:


> Not if I don't agree with separating women!
> 
> I'd rather set up a club that had a fast group and a slow group (our local club is very small) - and if that slow group was mainly women that would be fine. I'd rather everyone was comfortable riding to their own ability than separated because of gender!


Why can't you develop that within your local club? Advertise in local bike shops etc


----------



## Smurfy (2 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> Yes yes, so would we all. If you have any practical ideas about how to encourage women who find wall-to-wall lycra-clad men intimidating to go along and brave the club rides, do feel free to share them with us.


More female ride leaders would probably help, so that ladies can have confidence that the ride ethos will be set by someone who is likely to understand the concerns of female newcomers.


----------



## Smurfy (2 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> How.


How to do what? Get more female ride leaders? Clubs need to work harder with existing female members. Find out why they have so few female leaders, and develop a plan to improve, with training or leader buddying schemes if required. It won't happen overnight, a long term committed plan is required.


----------



## Smurfy (2 Oct 2015)

Also need to make sure that publicity prominently displays female riders and female ride leaders. No need for full names, but saying a ride will be led by 'Liz T', for example, is a nice indicator for female newcomers.


----------



## Smurfy (2 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> All good, I hope you're working for all that in whatever clubs you belong to.


I'll ask them if they have a policy on promoting female involvement.



User13710 said:


> Any thoughts about why it isn't happening more widely already?


A lot of cycling clubs are probably managed predominantly or entirely by men, and some have probably not even spotted that there is a problem. Maybe British Cycling should make it a condition of affiliation that clubs should have a policy and plan to improve female participation.



User13710 said:


> Why is it that initiatives like Breeze, that are actually doing something practical about getting more women cycling, tend to be criticised from all sides for being 'condescending' or ghettoising women?


I haven't heard these criticisms before. Who is making them?


----------



## classic33 (2 Oct 2015)

YellowTim said:


> Serious logistics question. If women ride the same distance as the men's cycling race, won't the pee stops be a bit tricky? It's not like ladies can just turn their backs and whip it out.
> 
> http://www.wheelsuckers.co.uk/page/toilet-stops



There's ways round that.


----------



## totallyfixed (2 Oct 2015)

I completely understand where everyone is coming from having been around women's cycling [the term is women not ladies unless men become gentlemen, highly unlikely] for a long time. Sensibilities are easily bruised when discussing gender participation, stereotyping is rife, more often from men but sometimes from women too.
What you ride, how you ride, what clothes you ride in [with the one exception of wearing the world championship rainbow jersey] should not be a subject that attracts criticism yet it frequently does on CC [I have been guilty of this in the past when referring to sportive riders].
Who a woman wants to ride with is obviously an individual choice, if they would rather ride with other women, perhaps because their experiences of riding with men has not been a happy one, is of course up to them. There are clubs that cater for all abilities but not as many as I would like to see, Cambridge CC is one such, everything from a potter [I have seen folk turn up on sit up with baskets on the front] to race training and women and men ride together in all 5 groups. The turn out ranges from about 80 to 120 on a Sunday morning, I reckon they are doing something right.
I personally prefer riding with women, they are usually always comfortable with the level they are riding at with nothing to prove. A high percentage of men however think every hill is to be raced in order to prove they are somehow top dog, which incidentally they are almost always not.
Personally I/we would like to see more women riding bikes, it is a frequent discussion in this house as those of you who know us will appreciate. The reasons why there are not more are many and varied, not least is culture and to a slightly lesser extent, intimidation, though this applies to some men too. Numbers are rising and hopefully in the future a tipping point will be reached [also for cycling in general in relation to the number of car drivers who also ride a bike] where any woman will feel comfortable on a bike at what ever level they are at.
Everyone has to start somewhere, not something everyone seems to remember.


----------



## jefmcg (2 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> You're quite right. I've not got a reference for the source material and with the deletion of the BC women's website, I can't look it up. I apologise for that. However, we would have got here much more quickly if you had stated that rather than throwing sexist epithets around!



Um, you called me a sexist prig before I addressed anything to you.


> Is there reason to suspect that BC has misrepresented its survey results or screwed it up somehow?



Most surveys are crap. I'd need a good reason to think this one wasn't. I don't really see the value of a survey over my experience. You seem to think it's better than the experience (aka anecdotes) of women here,


----------



## jefmcg (2 Oct 2015)

I do keep seeing the idea that women don't cycle because they think it's dangerous. Maybe that's not it. Maybe it's because they *know* it's dangerous. I'd say there are maybe 25% women cyclists in London, yet they are dying at a rate of 5:2. If cycling is 10 times as dangerous for woman as for men, maybe not cycling is a sensible, life saving decision.


----------



## Reddragon (2 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> I do keep seeing the idea that women don't cycle because they think it's dangerous. Maybe that's not it. Maybe it's because they *know* it's dangerous. I'd say there are maybe 25% women cyclists in London, yet they are dying at a rate of 5:2. If cycling is 10 times as dangerous for woman as for men, maybe not cycling is a sensible, life saving decision.


They are really frightening stats @jefmcg Do you have any insight or links to why this is the case. I must admit I would be wary of cycling in real built up areas, at least until i was more confident, I would definitely look to use off road cycle ways. Around the quite roads of north wales I am quite happy to stand my ground on the roads. Today I made a white van man wait behind me on a single track lane, uphill, until I got to a gate way. Fair play to the driver, he could see I peddled quicker and was very patient


----------



## Postmanhat (2 Oct 2015)

Very interesting debate. Have recently been going through my accreditation at Derby velodrome, Seven sessions so far, probably at least a hundred different riders in those, two of which were women. The occasional women-only sessions are though, quite well attended I believe

Safety isn't a gender-specific issue on the track, as it's a sterile environment, equally dangerous for everyone. And the role model imbalance doesn't apply as there are arguably more famous female track cyclists now, who get loads of media coverage.

Maybe a lot of women just don't like riding with men for some of the reasons mentioned above, and/or prefer the company of women. In which case, segregation probably is the only answer?


----------



## classic33 (2 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> I do keep seeing the idea that women don't cycle because they think it's dangerous. Maybe that's not it. Maybe it's because they *know* it's dangerous. I'd say there are maybe 25% women cyclists in London, yet they are dying at a rate of 5:2. If cycling is 10 times as dangerous for woman as for men, maybe not cycling is a sensible, life saving decision.


You've been listening to Radio 2 & want to live to 150!


----------



## Julia9054 (3 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> I do keep seeing the idea that women don't cycle because they think it's dangerous. Maybe that's not it. Maybe it's because they *know* it's dangerous. I'd say there are maybe 25% women cyclists in London, yet they are dying at a rate of 5:2. If cycling is 10 times as dangerous for woman as for men, maybe not cycling is a sensible, life saving decision.


That is London. I wouldn't cycle there - or drive for that matter!
Anecdotally, I have noticed an increase in women on my commute in the 3 years I have been doing it and middle aged couples cycling together at weekends seems to be a thing too.
When I cycle with female friends, there does seem to be a lot of cake and talking which I enjoy occasionally but I'm a bit more of a Lone Ranger normally.


----------



## jefmcg (3 Oct 2015)

Reddragon said:


> They are really frightening stats @jefmcg Do you have any insight or links to why this is the case. I must admit I would be wary of cycling in real built up areas, at least until i was more confident, I would definitely look to use off road cycle ways. Around the quite roads of north wales I am quite happy to stand my ground on the roads. Today I made a white van man wait behind me on a single track lane, uphill, until I got to a gate way. Fair play to the driver, he could see I peddled quicker and was very patient



I was going to say those figures are an anomaly, but when I googled I found that things might be even worse. It was only 1 women of the 14 deaths last year, but maybe that's the anomaly. In 2009, it was 10 women and 3 men.

Then there is this ...

http://icycleliverpool.co.uk/2013/02/18/the-ladykiller/


> In 14 years there have been 14 people killed in one small circular area of central London. It is a tragedy to be sure, but not exceptional in itself, that is until you notice that it is only women who have been killed in that area, not a single man.








(even if you extend the circle, the number of women - blue - is way out of proportion with the numbers on the roads)

All but one of these was caused by a HGV or bus.

Here is an illustration of a HGV blind spot. It's nearly exactly the same shape as the ASL and approach lane for bikes at most London intersections.

One theory is that women sit meekly in these, obliviously in the blind spot of a lorry, while men dart ahead - running red lights, or just racing off as soon as they change. Personally I make active eye contact (up to and including a wave and/or a nod) if I am not absolutely sure the driver has seen me, and I might be in danger if he (it's invariably a _he_) hasn't.


----------



## jefmcg (3 Oct 2015)

classic33 said:


> You've been listening to Radio 2 & want to live to 150!


I've never consciously listened to Radio 2, and I have no idea of what you are talking about.


----------



## jefmcg (3 Oct 2015)

YellowTim said:


> Serious logistics question. If women ride the same distance as the men's cycling race, won't the pee stops be a bit tricky? It's not like ladies can just turn their backs and whip it out.
> 
> http://www.wheelsuckers.co.uk/page/toilet-stops



OK, I know this is trolling, but the only time I've suffered from penis envy was while watching the boats waiting for the start of the men's eights head of the river. Crew member (@Fnaar) after crew member stood up in the boats and had a sneaky wizz. When in a women's eight, there is nothing to do but concentrate and hold on and hope. 

Of course, needing a pee focuses the mind and probably improves your rowing, but there is so much unpredictable waiting in a head race that's not something that could be used safely to your advantage.


----------



## classic33 (3 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> I've never consciously listened to Radio 2, and I have no idea of what you are talking about.


Piece on yesterday saying what you said, almost word for word.


----------



## jefmcg (3 Oct 2015)

classic33 said:


> Piece on yesterday saying what you said, almost word for word.



Oh dear. That is a worry. Is radio 2 the station for dull middle age people to listen to the music of their youth? Are you sure it wasn't radio 4? I wouldn't mind sharing ideas with Melvyn Bragg.


----------



## Yazzoo (4 Oct 2015)

Thanks all for your input, really interesting to see everyone's opinions!


----------



## steveindenmark (4 Oct 2015)

Jefmcg. You said this "All but one of these was caused by a HGV or bus."

Did you mean to say " All of these involved a HGV or bus?" To say "Caused by" implies that all the HGV or bus drivers have been to court and convicted of an offence. I would like to know if that is the case.

If that is not the case, some of these accidents could have been caused by a cyclist.


----------



## theclaud (4 Oct 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> Jefmcg. You said this "All but one of these was caused by a HGV or bus."
> 
> Did you mean to say " All of these involved a HGV or bus?" To say "Caused by" implies that all the HGV or bus drivers have been to court and convicted of an offence. I would like to know if that is the case.
> 
> If that is not the case, some of these accidents could have been caused by a cyclist.


Being hit by the HGV/bus was what caused them to die. It's not difficult.


----------



## Simpleton (4 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> I was going to say those figures are an anomaly, but when I googled I found that things might be even worse. It was only 1 women of the 14 deaths last year, but maybe that's the anomaly. In 2009, it was 10 women and 3 men.
> 
> Then there is this ...
> 
> ...



There's no blind spots in the above pic. Don't get sucked into the bullshit that the FHA, TfL and the met are coming out with.


----------



## Simpleton (4 Oct 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> Jefmcg. You said this "All but one of these was caused by a HGV or bus."
> 
> Did you mean to say " All of these involved a HGV or bus?" To say "Caused by" implies that all the HGV or bus drivers have been to court and convicted of an offence. I would like to know if that is the case.
> 
> If that is not the case, some of these accidents could have been caused by a cyclist.



Yeah, like a cyclist would deliberately go and get themselves run over. You are reminded of the case of Putz, the other guy who had killed someone up in Notting hill. And that farking piece of garbage who only pleaded guilty when it came out in court his previous driving convictions would be disclosed who killed a cyclist near Kings x.

And please do me the courtesy of not responding with the caveat of ''I said they could...'' I know what you are implying and you are bang out of order.


----------



## jefmcg (4 Oct 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> Jefmcg. You said this "All but one of these was caused by a HGV or bus."
> 
> Did you mean to say " All of these involved a HGV or bus?" To say "Caused by" implies that all the HGV or bus drivers have been to court and convicted of an offence. I would like to know if that is the case.
> 
> If that is not the case, some of these accidents could have been caused by a cyclist.



The collisions may have been caused by the driver of the vehicle, or the cyclist, or some combination or a freak event that involved neither being at fault.

The deaths however, were caused by the vehicles. If you are crushed under a 50 tonne lorry, then the cause of death will be injuries caused when you were crushed under a 50 tonne lorry. How you came to be under that lorry is a separate issue.


----------



## jefmcg (4 Oct 2015)

theclaud said:


> Being hit by the HGV/bus was what caused them to die. It's not difficult.


as usual, @theclaud is there quicker and more succinctly


----------



## jefmcg (4 Oct 2015)

Simpleton said:


> There's no blind spots in the above pic. Don't get sucked into the bullshit that the FHA, TfL and the met are coming out with.



???? Of course there are blind spots. Every vehicle has blindspots. If you assume a driver can see you if you can't see him, it's could end badly.

Can you elucidate your remarks above? Links or a more detailed explanation would be useful.

(I'm not wedded to the above theory - that the blind spots combined with female riders behaviour caused the deaths. I just proposed it as one possible explanation. I am very happy to be enlightened)


----------



## steveindenmark (4 Oct 2015)

Jefmcg. I understand what you are saying. I was just clarifying that not all of these accidents may be the fault of the drivers.

I have never actually seen annual stats which explained who is considered to be at fault for these fatalities. I think a lot could be learnt if such stats were available. As it is motorists blame the cyclists and cyclists blame the motorists. Nobody learnt anything and so the circle continues.


----------



## jefmcg (4 Oct 2015)

Honestly? I couldn't give a shoot who is at fault. What if you proved that every one of these deaths was caused by an error made by the cyclist? Would that make it OK? People who make errors on the road should not die.


----------



## jefmcg (4 Oct 2015)

Data. Also from the same site, I haven't reviewed it, so I'm trusting a stranger on the internet. That will never lead me astray, will it?







(the one non-HGV was a motorcycle)

7 out of 14, the other vehicle was turning left. The others I'm not clear on the language.


----------



## Simpleton (4 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> ???? Of course there are blind spots. Every vehicle has blindspots. If you assume a driver can see you if you can't see him, it's could end badly.
> 
> Can you elucidate your remarks above? Links or a more detailed explanation would be useful.
> 
> (I'm not wedded to the above theory - that the blind spots combined with female riders behaviour caused the deaths. I just proposed it as one possible explanation. I am very happy to be enlightened)


excuse the paint skills.


----------



## steveindenmark (4 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> Honestly? I couldn't give a shoot who is at fault. What if you proved that every one of these deaths was caused by an error made by the cyclist? Would that make it OK? People who make errors on the road should not die.



It would not make it ok but it may provide information to help prevent it happening again. How do you expect it to stop if it is not looked at?


----------



## classic33 (4 Oct 2015)

Simpleton said:


> excuse the paint skills.
> View attachment 105795


Why the different colours?


----------



## theclaud (4 Oct 2015)

classic33 said:


> Why the different colours?


It's colour-coded to show which mirrors/vantage points can see which areas. If the driver looks. I think it's rather good.


----------



## jefmcg (4 Oct 2015)

Simpleton said:


> excuse the paint skills.
> View attachment 105795


Ah, thanks. 

I assume the black marks the blind spots without the mirrors in place.


----------



## theclaud (5 Oct 2015)

The whole 'exchanging places' thing is not actually an exchange at all, it's a campaign to scare cyclists off the roads. The interesting thing is that to do this effectively, the industry has to take a gamble - it has to admit, state or imply that its vehicles are unfit to share public roads. Cycling and pedestrian safety campaigners need to exploit this faultline, and one way or another make those who bring the danger to the streets take responsibility for it.


----------



## jefmcg (5 Oct 2015)

steveindenmark said:


> It would not make it ok but it may provide information to help prevent it happening again. How do you expect it to stop if it is not looked at?


We need to know the cause of the death, but not necessarily fault. 

e.g if death was caused by a rider being in a drivers blind spot, you could look at 

rider education
driver education
new designs of vehicles
enforcement (eg penalties for missing mirrors, fines for cyclists moving up the left)
removal of certain vehicles from central London
road design changes to encourage riders out of blind spots
placards on the rear of vehicles
etc etc etc. None of the above require looking at fault. It's just irrelevant.


----------



## Smurfy (5 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> Data. Also from the same site, I haven't reviewed it, so I'm trusting a stranger on the internet. That will never lead me astray, will it?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


What a terrible list


----------



## Simpleton (5 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> Ah, thanks.
> 
> I assume the black marks the blind spots without the mirrors in place.



Without the mirrors in place there would be a blind spot that would completely surrond the vehicle.


----------



## fimm (5 Oct 2015)

Blog post (not my blog) on blind spots here:
http://mccraw.co.uk/sorry-mate-i-cant-see-blind-spot/


----------



## Simpleton (5 Oct 2015)

fimm said:


> Blog post (not my blog) on blind spots here:
> http://mccraw.co.uk/sorry-mate-i-cant-see-blind-spot/



I forgot that blog entry from Dave. Just illustrates perfectly the whole blind spot bullshit.


----------



## jefmcg (6 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> Is that order just random, or an order of priority?
> 
> Moving up the left side of stationary traffic doesn't endanger anyone but the cyclist themselves, and is an everyday occurrence for many, so how would fining the cyclist work?


List is random thoughts of the top of my head of things that could be suggested. I'm not endorsing any of them. Just indicating fault isn't a factor in any remedial suggestion I could dream up.


----------



## jefmcg (6 Oct 2015)

Simpleton said:


> I forgot that blog entry from Dave. Just illustrates perfectly the whole blind spot bullshit.


Ok, blind spot was just a thought. 

Any other idea as to why women a dying in central London so disproportionately and largely under left turning HGVs?


----------



## Simpleton (6 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> Ok, blind spot was just a thought.
> 
> Any other idea as to why women a dying in central London so disproportionately and largely under left turning HGVs?


No idea, and I would not like to speculate.


----------



## seraphina (14 Oct 2015)

Bit late to this one but for what it's worth here's my 2p. By the time we are asking why women don't cycle, it's too late. As a kid growing up, sport is generally not really expected of women/girls. With the exception of tennis, women's sport on TV was a rarity when I was growing up. Even now, every four years we get Jessica Ennis at the Olympics and then it's back to football, rugby, formula 1, men's cycling. How much media coverage was there of Nicole Cooke or Lizzie Armitage winning WCs?

My dad was a big cyclist/runner etc. So he got to spend his weekends doing things like that whilst my Mum looked after the kids. There's a cultural expectation that I can look after the kids whilst MrS can do fun stuff at the weekend (this isn't what happens, BTW) and given that I almost always see packs of men out cycling at weekends, it doesn't seem to have changed that much.

So even if you overcome all that and think, hey, I want to go cycling, off you trot to your LBS. When was the last time you saw LBS window display with anything other than a road bike (for the men, obvs) or if they think to target the women's market, a Pashley Princess?

Bike acquired, maybe you think about joining a local cycling club. Which is probably run by a man and will fall into one of two categories - the kind that like to sleep in bus shelters or the Lycra clad Strava warriors. Given you'll need to write off a morning/afternoon of a weekend to try a group ride out, is it worth the hassle? Not really, so off we trot to our socially approved exercise classes, Zumba and Aquafit.

There's always cycling with the kids -but if you're not confident on a bike and see media messages takllking about how dangerous cycling is, are you going to take that risk? No, so cycling is confined to Centre Parcs at half term.

Interestingly, I think running has seen a surge in women's participation. I think some of that is because once you've got a half decent pair of trainers, you can use an app on your smartphone to get going.


----------



## Dutchonwheels (14 Oct 2015)

There is a lot of different reasons being given, why women are not cycling so much, and it's good to see most people are aware of the possible reasons specially the lack of media coverage of women's sports. I don't know much about pro cycling, not really interested, but I do know from experience that a lot has to do with society. In Holland, there is no difference in male v female percentage of cyclists, so I suspect it has got to do with the general outlook and social expectations. Women in the UK, specially the older ones are not so 'in to' outdoor activities (and please don't hang me for saying that, I mean it as a comparison) and I think cycling is not seen as a normal activity, open to all. The country is not really geared up to people using a bike for leisure or daily life so it has been separated and viewed as a 'sport' which very often means, organised and joining a club. Knowing that a lot of women just don't have the time to do something extra outside of family life (and again, I don't mean that as being sexist, but guys do tend to have or make space for leisure time more than most women do) and cycling with kids in tow is not easy (extra bikes, safety, no designated cycle paths) and on your own as a women is very often not a safe option. Of course us women like to have company and while a man would takes his bike and has a run out on his own, many women prefer someone to share the experience. I know there is a lot of generalization here, but they are all small facets of how cycling has developed in the UK and why we are were we are. If the infa structure would allow a bit more financing for cycle paths and cycling in general would be made more acceptable and easier option, we might see a change. Let's hope so for future generations.


----------



## mjr (14 Oct 2015)

Like @Dutchonwheels, I see the cycling=sport misperception as part of the problem, but I disagree that "a man would takes his bike and has a run out on his own" - maybe the minority of men who currently cycle would, but they're a minority. I wouldn't be surprised if the five-sixths who don't cycle would like friendly people to ride with too, especially if they're also part of another minority group. I agree that safe-feeling and child-friendly rides are things that should be provided too.

I agree with @seraphina about media and recent general culture, but I hope a change in cycling culture is underway as more people wake up to the need to get out of the couches and motorised armchairs.


seraphina said:


> When was the last time you saw LBS window display with anything other than a road bike (for the men, obvs) or if they think to target the women's market, a Pashley Princess?


Yesterday.  https://goo.gl/maps/qbtdcfcRq3q shows the same shop from a while ago - not a woman's road bike, but only a minority ride road bikes now, don't they? I can't see in the window of the two sportier bike shops (one is obscured by the reflection of the StreetView car, the other by parked cars/vans.) But it's not unusual to see people in suits propelling town bikes or old hybrids around here, or children in a trailer or bakfiets.

While I recognise the British Cycling club stereotype (male-run, lycra-loaded, no short rides, ...), other types of cycling group are available: I like freewheeling groups with diverse leadership, ordinary clothes and bikes, some short evening rides and so on. Why don't more people try other groups before dismissing cycling?


----------



## seraphina (14 Oct 2015)

@Dutchonwheels Bit of stereotyping there wrt some wanting company on rides;-) If I am lucky I get out on my bike once a week to commute (about 19 miles all told) and I bloody love having time to myself!

@mjray Glad you are seeing half decent window displays! I live just outside Cambridge and yes, there are a good number of bakfiets and a high proportion of utility cyclists. But I can count on one hand the number of parents who utility cycle.

Wrt other cycling clubs - Cambridge has quite a good CTC group IIRC but who has the time to check out different groups, assuming they exist? If you're limited to weekends, you've also got to fit in swimming lessons, building a Roman fort for school homework, washing, kid's party, etc etc...

It may sound like I am being deliberately defeatist but I am just trying to illustrate some reasons why women might not cycle - it needs to be at the very top of your priority list to fit it in. And I am sure plenty of these reasons apply to men too. I do think that utility cycling is far and away the best thing to try and highlight, which is why I weep when I see some cyclists rant against segregated cycle paths. Infrastructure like that would help address some of the "cycling is dangerous" fears.


----------



## Dutchonwheels (14 Oct 2015)

seraphina said:


> @Dutchonwheels Bit of stereotyping there wrt some wanting company on rides;-) If I am lucky I get out on my bike once a week to commute (about 19 miles all told) and I bloody love having time to myself!'#



I am sorry @seraphina  I must admit I love some time on my own as well.....but it's so much better with a good (girl)friend so you can put the world to rights while the wind takes all the frustration and laughter and scatters it around....omg, I'm going all poetic in my old age.


----------



## mustang1 (14 Oct 2015)

Yazzoo said:


> As a female cyclist I understand I am in the minority here but I'm wondering why?
> 
> 
> Why do less women cycle? A look round the women's section of any cycling store suggests there a very few of us out there!
> ...


1. When I go to an Evans store and check the clothing range, I go through all the mainly blacks eventually finding myself in the more colourful section. Then I realize I'm checking out women's clothes. I don't understand why men's clothes can't be more colourful. I'm not saying there's no colour at all, just extremely limited. 

2. I've got no problem watching women's cycling. Not trying to be kinky or anything, but I think I prefer watching women's cycling, and not for the reasons you might be thinking. I recall seeing some race this year and it was way more fun than the blokes bit I can't put my finger on why. I reckon it was more competitive rather than guys just starting each other... Women were just getting on with it. (Sorry, can't recall what race it was, but iirc it was in London and plenty of rain).


----------



## Milkfloat (14 Oct 2015)

jefmcg said:


> Here's a thing. Shooting used to be mixed in the olympics, or at least the Men's division was actually an open category, so women could enter. Until a woman won gold in skeet shooting, then they closed the category to women.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhang_Shan



As a man I think I have waited the appropriate 2 weeks for the ladies to have their say 

I just thought I would comment on the Zhang Shan story. She won gold with a remarkable performance in 1992 with a world record setting score. Shooting actually separated by sex in 1984, except for trap and skeet. Trap and skeet planned to follow the rest of shooting and be separate well before she won gold.

I do not know why the separation occurred, but Zhang was a complete freak (in a good way), if women's shooting was not separate it is highly likely that we would never have heard of the likes of Amber Hill (maybe you have not) who acts as a huge role model to girls her age.

Myself I am equally happy to be out shot or overtaken (cycling) by men or women.


----------



## mjr (14 Oct 2015)

User13710 said:


> Even in the city of Brighton and Hove, where cycling clubs and groups abound, it's next to impossible to find the kind of utopian group you describe.


Aw heck. What's happened to the Shed Rides? I had high hopes for that... but OK, maybe in some places, good (not utopian... the road is not perfectly smooth) groups don't always exist, but they do in lots of places. Is it simply that we need better ways to find them?


----------



## Pat "5mph" (14 Oct 2015)

With a few exceptions, I don't like riding with men, I am simply too slow to keep up, I feel I should go faster, try, end up totally knackered.
Mind, most of the women I ride with are faster than me too, but for some reason I don't feel obliged to keep up. With the girls we say to each other "I wait for you up the hill" and that is that, while some guys insist on riding along me, slower than they really are, but faster than me. It gives me anxiety.
Then there is the "caring" factor: when on an all girls ride, if one has a mechanical or any other difficulty, we all stop to assist.
If I tell the girls you go along, I'll stay to help with the puncture or whatever, nobody will go. If one struggles, we will split the group, somebody always stays with the person struggling.
In a mixed group I have often seen the men leaving behind other men to sort out their problems, once a (male, experienced ride leader) practically abandoned another (male) that crashed, he left him to take a train home by himself, half dazed.
Another time, on a forum ride, 2 guys heard us girls screaming - one had lost a wheel on ice - they never even turned around! After they reasoned, well, if you were screaming you obviously were still alive. Charming!
Then there was the time when the male ride leader went miles ahead without waiting for me and a few others: ok, we only stopped for a comfort break, but we could have had a crash.
There is also the trust factor: I don't like riding bunched up with guys, I find their riding aggressive. By large, riding with girls feels safer, even the wobbly ones, I can predict what they are going to do, men I cannot.
Finally there is the patronizing factor: do I really have to be told, on losing my chain on a deserted country road, to "find a safe place to stop"?
Or to spin up a hill? Effoff, leave me to die in peace


----------



## mjr (14 Oct 2015)

I know there are mixed groups which don't abandon people, but like many, I've also firsthand experience of one that did. I don't see any reason why an all female ride wouldn't abandon riders unless they're a group with rules against it, but I've no personal experience of them, of course.

Other than that, the need to chase men but not women isn't one I share


----------



## Pat "5mph" (14 Oct 2015)

mjray said:


> I don't see any reason why an all female ride wouldn't abandon riders unless they're a group with rules against it,


The Belles on Bikes can be found allover Scotland.
We don't leave anybody behind, ever, and it's not even in the rules.


----------



## Kumquat (14 Oct 2015)

Milkfloat said:


> As a man I think I have waited the appropriate 2 weeks for the ladies to have their say
> 
> I just thought I would comment on the Zhang Shan story. She won gold with a remarkable performance in 1992 with a world record setting score. Shooting actually separated by sex in 1984, except for trap and skeet. Trap and skeet planned to follow the rest of shooting and be separate well before she won gold.
> 
> ...



Totally unrelated to cycling, but in my (youth) shooting club, nearly all the best shots were girls, which seemed to be the standard status quo. I don't think there is much physical advantage to being male in shooting, so maybe the reason men do better is for other reasons?


----------



## Milkfloat (15 Oct 2015)

Kumquat said:


> Totally unrelated to cycling, but in my (youth) shooting club, nearly all the best shots were girls, which seemed to be the standard status quo. I don't think there is much physical advantage to being male in shooting, so maybe the reason men do better is for other reasons?



My personal unsupported by research thoughts are, that it may have to do with cost and time. To be a great shot, you need to practice a lot - upwards of £500 per day in clay/cartridge costs and 5-6 hours at the top level. Even a good club shot will need to spend 10-15 hours per week at it. I also suggest that as a youth, a girl is more likely to listen and follow instruction, remaining open minded to a coach compared to a boy who thinks 'cool and gun, let's make it go bang'.


----------



## totallyfixed (15 Oct 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> With a few exceptions, I don't like riding with men, I am simply too slow to keep up, I feel I should go faster, try, end up totally knackered.
> Mind, most of the women I ride with are faster than me too, but for some reason I don't feel obliged to keep up. With the girls we say to each other "I wait for you up the hill" and that is that, while some guys insist on riding along me, slower than they really are, but faster than me. It gives me anxiety.
> Then there is the "caring" factor: when on an all girls ride, if one has a mechanical or any other difficulty, we all stop to assist.
> If I tell the girls you go along, I'll stay to help with the puncture or whatever, nobody will go. If one struggles, we will split the group, somebody always stays with the person struggling.
> ...


Pat, the experiences you have described are I believe becoming all too common, even among rides where it is mostly men. Maybe it reflects a general more uncaring society, for sure it is reflected in clubs where etiquette is being eroded by a new breed of riders who appear to be more aggressive than the old school I cut my teeth with. This may be controversial [who me?] but more people on bikes can be a double edged sword. Beginners, although you wouldn't think it to look at them with the latest carbon, electronic gears and trade team kit, are a new breed that have disposable income, a desire to emulate the pros but without the experience. This market was quickly exploited by the sportive organisers, followed closely by Strava. I have ridden with plenty of these newbies and it is not a pleasant experience, albeit sometimes hilarious.


----------



## Dogtrousers (15 Oct 2015)

Just an anecdote, but the club I occasionally ride with has a fair few women (and a woman as one of the founders I think). It may be because I ride with the easy going groups but there's no leaving of people behind, and quite a few women. I expect when you move up the levels to faster, more competitive groups it probably becomes more macho.


----------



## Yazzoo (15 Oct 2015)

love that this is still going and seeing everyones opinions

I was thinking about this thread last night when I duly chauffeured the little one to his tri-club and the OH went off on a mid week club ride. Same each week, never been discussed, it just seems to be the norm!


----------



## seraphina (15 Oct 2015)

@Milkfloat i suspect the idea that a female is more likely to listen to a coach/follow the rules is part of the reason so many women die cycling in London - they are obediently waiting their turn in the gutter. Not sitting at the ASL, 'cos that's pushy. Not jumping red lights (are more women killed waiting at lights than men jumping them???), not thinking sod that, I am extricating myself from this situation....

I also agree with whoever it was who objected to men cycling with them, slower than they would otherwise to look after the wimmen. To paraphrase an argument I have seen used in the Women in STEM debates, we don't need white knights, we need blokes to call other blokes out on dickish behaviour. This has the added advantage of making cycling a better place for everyone. There are probably loads of guys turned off by the behaviour on group rides, for example; it's just guys don't have a similar social conditioning of "must fit into group" or quite so much disapproval for doing their own thing.

FWIW when I rode motorbikes I found exactly the same atmosphere in group rides. Middle aged men wondered why no women rode with them; dismissed all concerns raised as they liked rides as they were so why change?


----------



## jefmcg (15 Oct 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> Then there is the "caring" factor: when on an all girls ride, if one has a mechanical or any other difficulty, we all stop to assist.
> If I tell the girls you go along, I'll stay to help with the puncture or whatever, nobody will go. If one struggles, we will split the group, somebody always stays with the person struggling.
> In a mixed group I have often seen the men leaving behind other men to sort out their problems, once a (male, experienced ride leader) practically abandoned another (male) that crashed, he left him to take a train home by himself, half dazed.
> Another time, on a forum ride, 2 guys heard us girls screaming - one had lost a wheel on ice - they never even turned around! After they reasoned, well, if you were screaming you obviously were still alive. Charming!


I'm sorry you have had such negative experiences. I can't tell you the number of times I've been helped by other riders. They are usually men, not because men are more helpful, just more plentiful. As a "full value" audaxer, riders who are near me are usually running short of time, so it would be excusable to leave me behind. For example, on London-Edinburgh-London I had a gear cable break on the most isolated part of the journey, and the other riders near me really didn't want to leave me behind after helping me jury rig a 2-speed solution. The only reason to stay with me was in case the fix failed, and i had to walk, which would have meant they'd have missed completing the ride. I assured them that the worst case scenario, I could walk 15km to the next stop, and there was no need for us all to DNF.

I could list at least 1/2 dozen other cases. It goes beyond caring and way into gallantry, I think. Except I am sure they would do the same for a man in trouble. Maybe audaxers are different? Of course, being dropped on a club ride where you are going to be a taxi ride from home is not such a disaster.


----------



## Smokin Joe (15 Oct 2015)

Both clubs I belonged to were welcoming to female riders, indeed the first one (Easterley Road Club) were very strong in female riders having had a couple of internationals back in the day. I think the traditional clubs were more friendly to all types of cyclists than the MAMIL and STRAVA inspired outfits that have sprung up in recent years. I have a female friend back in London who joined such a club and from what she has told me they are a bunch of hi-tech kit and performance obsessed individuals who turn every club run into a race, leaving the slower riders to fend for themselves, often in the middle of nowhere. A few women who were members drifted away because of this, as did some male newcomers who were blown off the back on runs that were supposed to be no more than social rides. That NEVER happened in my day, unless club runs were specifically described as pre-season training sessions the group moved at the pace of the slowest with older members ready and willing to encourage and advise newcomers of both genders, and shorter slower rides for those were run in conjunction with a common tea stop.

I probably sound like an old fart, but the modern cycling scene doesn't cut it for me. The camaraderie and willingness to help newcomers turn into lifelong cyclists has largely disappeared.*

*EDIT: This forum being a great and welcome exception, of course.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (15 Oct 2015)

Dogtrousers said:


> I expect when you move up the levels to faster, more competitive groups it probably becomes more macho.


Ahem ... the experiences I have described have happened on a CC Ecosse ride, on a social ride (intermediate, average speed 10mph on cycle paths) organized by a local cycling enterprise run for charity, and on a ride (CTC age group) organized by a local cycling lobby group.
The tour de France we weren't!
Nowadays I will only cycle in mixed groups if I know what the leader and/or some participants are like. I might go even if I think I could get dropped if I have a gpx file for the Garmin to get me home.
This is actually not difficult to do in Glasgow - to vet a prospective ride - most leisure riders here belong or have belonged to one or more clubs, we all know each other, if not personally through friends or facebook.


----------



## Dogtrousers (15 Oct 2015)

Pat "5mph" said:


> Ahem ... the experiences I have described have happened on a CC Ecosse ride, on a social ride (intermediate, average speed 10mph on cycle paths).


I'm not doubting it. I wasn't referring to your experiences. I was describing the club I ride with, which is mixed sex and easy going. I don't ride with the fast groups and I was speculating that they are probably different.

Apols for any misunderstanding.


----------

