# Are British Cycling & Sky being deliberately sexist?



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

For a number of years now, Sky have teamed up with British Cycling to promote themselves cycling to a wider audience. Before the TdF sponsorship, there's a whole raft of money been spent trying to get more people onto two (or three) wheels. And that's a good thing.

However, there's a distinctly male/female split in the way they've gone about it. As they're fully aware, there's a much smaller proportion of female participation in cycling, so they've put dedicated resources to try and encourage more women to try cycling.

If a woman signs up to run the female only rides under the Breeze Banner, that person expected to plan the route, publicise it and lead it, all entirely as a volunteer. And you have to run at least 12 per year. More info here.

However, if a man or woman wants to run a normal Sky Ride, open to all, you get paid for it! You only have to commit to running at least 4 a year, plus possibly some other events. And according to a Sky Ride Leader I was chatting to the other week, he doesn't have to plan or publicise the ride at all - he's sent details of rides occurring near him in the next few months, and asked if he wants to lead them. More info here.

It would however seem very sexist to expect women volunteers to do all that extra work, whilst a bloke gets paid to do far less. But then again, why am I not surprised at such a tactic from an organisation like Sky?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> For a number of years now, Sky have teamed up with British Cycling to promote themselves cycling to a wider audience. Before the TdF sponsorship, there's a whole raft of money been spent trying to get more people onto two (or three) wheels. And that's a good thing.
> 
> However, there's a distinctly male/female split in the way they've gone about it. As they're fully aware, there's a much smaller proportion of female participation in cycling, so they've put dedicated resources to try and encourage more women to try cycling.
> 
> ...


Are normal Sky Rides not open to female leaders?


----------



## ComedyPilot (26 Jan 2014)

Helmets - check
Hi-viz (corporate) tabbard - check




No thanks.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Are normal Sky Rides not open to female leaders?


Yes, they are, and women cyclists are allowed to ride in them too. But that's not the point. If women are a specific target audience for Breeze, to get more women cycling (i.e. "positive discrimination", "we're doing something extra just for you"), then why are Breeze Champions left on their own to plan and lead the rides, with absolutely no compensation? Those are extra hurdles that reduce access/availability = discrimination of the good old-fashioned kind.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

Are female only rides not sexist in themselves.. What is wrong with male cyclists to warrant exclusion?


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Are female only rides not sexist in themselves.. What is wrong with male cyclists to warrant exclusion?


So on balance do you feel you're getting the short end of the straw here?


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Are female only rides not sexist in themselves.. What is wrong with male cyclists to warrant exclusion?


Not as such, due to the low numbers of women involved in cycling generally. Positive discrimination has been used in a number fields as a way of try to balance the field. And in any event, that not the issue.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> So on balance do you feel you're getting the short end of the straw here?



Never stated or suggested that at all.. I was simply expressing that if the goal is fairness excluding men from the ride based upon nothing but their sex is as unfair as what is being asked of the ride organizers. I fail to see why my British Cycling fees should be spent on any ride which excludes another individual. 
If you want something specific and exclusive for your group you should be prepared to do the leg work and preperation for it imho

On balance I don't think Sky is being unreasonable as normal Sky rides can be led by women, my local one is. So the reality is they have a choice


----------



## GrumpyGregry (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Are female only rides not sexist in themselves..


Yes, in a positive way.


Mr Haematocrit said:


> What is wrong with male cyclists to warrant exclusion?


Testosterone surplus? Patronising attitudes? Machismo? Inability comprehend the merits of positive discrimination?
I could go on.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Never stated or suggested that at all.. I was simply expressing that if the goal is fairness excluding men from the ride based upon nothing but their sex is as unfair as what is being asked of the ride organizers. I fail to see why my British Cycling fees should be spent on any ride which excludes another individual.
> If you want something specific and exclusive for your group you should be prepared to do the leg work and preperation for it imho
> 
> On balance I don't think Sky is being unreasonable as normal Sky rides can be led by women, my local one is. So the reality is they have a choice


The goal is achieving fairness, and equality of opportunity, for women.

BC's policy is to support women only events so you best cancel your sub if exclusion nips your sack so hard. 

But I guess you don't mind exclusion on economic grounds either, lots of BC events are not free to enter.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Never stated or suggested that at all.. I was simply expressing that if the goal is fairness excluding men from the ride based upon nothing but their sex is as unfair as what is being asked of the ride organizers. I fail to see why my British Cycling fees should be spent on any ride which excludes another individual.
> If you want something specific and exclusive for your group you should be prepared to do the leg work and preperation for it imho
> 
> On balance I don't think Sky is being unreasonable as normal Sky rides can be led by women, my local one is. So the reality is they have a choice



The goal isn't "fairness" as you seem to be defining it but increased numbers of women on bikes.


----------



## uclown2002 (26 Jan 2014)




----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

ComedyPilot said:


> Helmets - check
> Hi-viz (corporate) tabbard - check
> 
> 
> ...


There is that as well. Some people, from Wiggins downwards, clearly are happy to accept the Sky lure of gold. But again, that's not the issue.


----------



## Tommy2 (26 Jan 2014)

They are being sexist, by discriminating against men.

Women can join normal
Sky rides, but if they are incapable of participating with the men folk maybe they should just stay at home with the kids.


----------



## ComedyPilot (26 Jan 2014)

Got any air raid shelters in Harrogate, 'cos you might now need one......


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Yes, in a positive way.
> 
> Testosterone surplus? Patronising attitudes? Machismo? Inability comprehend the merits of positive discrimination?
> I could go on.



I had something along those lines all ready to post but then thought it was stating the obvious. Perhaps it's not.

When a woman is one of the slowest (on any ride but especially in a mixed group), she beats herself up for holding up the others. She's thinking "I'm ruining it for the others. They'd all be having a better time if I weren't here." (=It's all my fault.)

It's been said that when a man is the slowest in a group, he gets angry that the others are leaving him behind. (=It's all their fault.)

Women who somehow survive this kind of "hazing" (however inadvertent it may be) learn how to cope with that inner voice. Breeze targets women who are not already cyclists. They need an environment where they can learn and improve which includes learning how to respond/silence that inner voice telling them "you're totally crap at this AND ruining everybody else's day". That, for most women, means NO MEN until they've gained some confidence. (These are often women coming to Breeze because trying to get started cycling by going on rides with their husband/boyfriend/SO -- who, no matter how helpful and sympathetic they may be, still have different abilities and don't have a clue about the subliminal sabotage going on in her head -- is dragging them down, not building them up.

This thread was never about "why have women's-only rides" -- but why the organisation that created them for gods' sake isn't giving them the same support (in all senses of the word) as they do the rides they run that are not gender restricted.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

Some people are making assumptions based on stereotypes and I think its important to appreciate that not all men are the same.
I'm against discrimination of all kinds, and do not feel there is such a thing as positive discrimination. What needs to be addressed is the issues which deter women from taking to the bike, from feeling comfortable in their own space.
IMHO positive discrimination is a sticking plaster for deeper issues in society and if people want/desire events such as this they have to appreciate they more leg work/self motivation is required to make it work and Sky and BC should not pick up the tab.

To be frank I could not care about this type of event itself but I personally think Sky/BC have a balanced view regarding funding an exclusive event. There is a limited amount of funding and support available and I would not wish for disability sport to have reduced funding to give more money to exclusive events no matter whom they are for.


----------



## Kookas (26 Jan 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Yes, in a positive way.
> 
> Testosterone surplus? Patronising attitudes? Machismo? Inability comprehend the merits of positive discrimination?
> I could go on.



Because every single man is like that.


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Some people are making assumptions based on stereotypes and I think its important to appreciate that not all men are the same.
> I'm against discrimination of all kinds, and do not feel there is such a thing as positive discrimination. What needs to be addressed is the issues which deter women from taking to the bike, from feeling comfortable in their own space.
> IMHO positive discrimination is a sticking plaster for deeper issues in society and if people want/desire events such as this they have to appreciate they more leg work/self motivation is required to make it work.
> 
> To be frank I could not care about this type of event itself but I personally think Sky/BC have a balanced view regarding funding an exclusive event. There is a limited amount of funding and support available and I would not wish for disability sport to have reduced funding to give more money to exclusive events no matter whom they are for.



Surely the answer to make women more comfortable cycling, is remove the element that makes it uncomfortable?


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

Kookas said:


> Because every single man is like that.


No, but quite a few are, as indicated by some of the comments posted above.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Some people are making assumptions based on stereotypes and I think its important to appreciate that not all men are the same..


Nobody said all men are the same.


Mr Haematocrit said:


> I'm against discrimination of all kinds, and do not feel there is such a thing as positive discrimination. What needs to be addressed is the issues which deter women from taking to the bike, from feeling comfortable in their own space.



That's exactly the point: what goes on women's heads, that keeps them from cycling. It's not about the men _per se_.



Mr Haematocrit said:


> IMHO positive discrimination is a sticking plaster for deeper issues in society and if people want/desire events such as this they have to appreciate they more leg work/self motivation is required to make it work.



Generally speaking, I'd agree. But as I've said, this is about encouraging women to have a go, instead of thinking they can't and/or that they're not welcome/wanted. the factors that make them feel that way are totally immaterial in this context. The fact is, they feel it. If Breeze gives them HEADspace to try cycling with less of that internal pressure, then... mission accomplished.

The point is still -- if an organisation is claiming to promote something with a specific stated goal, why are they not supporting it?


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

I'd say it's not positive discrimination to run a women's only ride, but an example of positive action, to redress an imbalance. Many organisations, such the House of Commons, to the police, to armed forces and multi national organisations, use positive action to encourage more participation from elements of society which are under represented.

But once again, that's not the issue.

The issue is why should Sky expect women to volunteer to run rides for free, yet be happy to pay a bloke to do an easier job?


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> Surely the answer to make women more comfortable cycling, is remove the element that makes it uncomfortable?



Sky/BC do not have an unlimited budget. There is only so much money to go round.
Do you feel that funds should be provided to exclusive events if the cost is a reduction in funding to disability cycling and youth cycling projects?

I just think Sky/BC have a reasonable balance, they are permitting exclusive discrimatory events, they are supporting them on their website, but they do not fund them as extensively at the cost of other projects. I simply do not believe Sky/BC is being sexist which is what they are being accused of as they do not exclude women from leading normal sky rides.


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Sky/BC do not have an unlimited budget. There is only so much money to go round.
> Do you feel that funds should be provided to exclusive events if the cost is a reduction in funding to disability cycling and youth cycling projects?
> 
> I just think Sky/BC have a reasonable balance, they are permitting exclusive discrimatory events, they are supporting them on their website, but they do not fund them as extensively at the cost of other projects. I simply do not believe Sky/BC is being sexist which is what they are being accused of as they do not exclude women from leading normal sky rides.



You're ignoring the main issue.

As I stated in my opening post:


> It would however seem very sexist to expect women volunteers to do all that extra work, whilst a bloke gets paid to do far less



Birmingham City Council recently have to pay out millions due to underpaying women.
This is a similar thing.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2014)

If women can get paid to lead open Sky rides then I don't really feel it's unfair. Except perhaps if there's a ghettoising process where a woman steps up to ask about leading a Sky ride and gets directed towards the unpaid Breeze rides.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> The issue is why should Sky expect women to volunteer to run rides for free, yet be happy to pay a bloke to do a similar job?



Sky will pay a women to run a sky ride same as a man <-------- this is not discrimination
Breeze rides are funded by Sport England.... The same organization funding disability and youth cycling projects. The issue is from my perspective is should limited funds be used to help and support those who do not have choices and require expensive specialized equipment like the disabled or those who do have a choice yet wish to exclude themselves from others?


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Sky will pay a women to run a sky ride same as a man <-------- this is not discrimination



But it is when they expect women to do far more work for nothing, in running a women only ride (ie plan, publicise and lead).


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> You're ignoring the main issue.
> 
> As I stated in my opening post:
> 
> ...



I don't think I'm missing the point at all, if women run a inclusive sky ride they get paid..
To show that it is sexist treatment you need to provide evidence of a man who is running a Breeze ride and getting paid for it. I do not think anyone has at this point.
It is not prohibited for a man to run a Breeze ride as far as I know and they are subject to the same terms as women running these events.


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> I don't think I'm missing the point at all, if women run a inclusive sky ride they get paid..
> To show that it is sexist treatment you need to provide evidence of a man who is running a Breeze ride and getting paid for it. I do not think anyone has at this point.


Men don't run Breeze rides. However if you read the link I provided in the first post for normal Sky Rides:


> In addition to free training, we’ll provide you with branded kit, a British Cycling Ride membership, *payment for leading and assisting on rides*; plus plenty of other goodies.



Breeze Ride Leaders don't get that.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (26 Jan 2014)

Kookas said:


> Because every single man is like that.


Hence I posed questions. Hence the question marks. This interwebs lark isn't as hard are you are making out.

Now if you want to claim that you have never ever experienced those things when riding with men, go ahead.


----------



## theclaud (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> . It's not about the men



This is the bit some of them find so difficult to handle.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> Men don't run Breeze rides. However if you read the link I provided in the first post for normal Sky Rides:
> 
> Breeze Ride Leaders don't get that.



So it does.....


> led by women for women


.
So you have no problems with men who would like to run such rides being discriminated against?

I'm not sure I'm adding anything to this thread, I see it very much as wanting your cake and to eat it while expecting others to pay. The choice women have is to organise the same rides as men and get the same treatment.
Increasing the funding of this unnecessary ride could eat into the budget of disability cycling and other more important projects. I don't think my view is going to change. I do not think the teatment of the organizers of these exclusive events is sexist or unfair


----------



## GrumpyGregry (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> I had something along those lines all ready to post but then thought it was stating the obvious. Perhaps it's not.


I thought it was better coming from a boy


----------



## GrumpyGregry (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> Surely the answer to make women more comfortable cycling, is remove the element that makes it uncomfortable?


"Comes in here, proposing simple solutions to complex problems, it is a wonder anybody reads his posts."


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> ...wish to exclude themselves from others?


"Wish to exclude from others"?!

The Breeze programme is NOT about men being excluded from womens' rides, it's about helping women who feel excluded from CYCLING full stop. 
Getting them on their bikes in a comfortable environment (where gender -- both their own and everyone else's -- is totally removed from the equation) removes the exclusion.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> So you have no problems with men who would like to run such rides being discriminated against?



Are you such a man?

Again, this is not about exclusion/discrimination, but about positive criteria. 

Say you start a club for like-minded people who want to pursue a particular aim... do you accept as members people who don't share the club's "mission" and don't have any interest in furthering it? 
Why would such a person wish to join?

Okay, I'll stop now in trying to point out where you've missed the point of the OP altogether. 



Mr Haematocrit said:


> I'm not sure I'm adding anything to this thread, I see it very much as wanting your cake and to eat it while expecting others to pay. The choice women have is to organise the same rides as men and get the same treatment.
> Increasing the funding of this unnecessary ride could eat into the budget of disability cycling and other more important projects. I don't think my view is going to change. I do not think the teatment of the organizers of these exclusive events is sexist or unfair



Okay, fair enough, you've nailed your colours to the mast and your answer to the question (as you've interpreted it) is No.

Any other views?


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> "Wish to exclude from others"?!
> 
> The Breeze programme is NOT about men being excluded from womens' rides, it's about helping women who feel excluded from CYCLING full stop.
> Getting them on their bikes in a comfortable environment (where gender -- both their own and everyone else's -- is totally removed from the equation) removes the exclusion.


but breeze rides are being funded by sport england and not by sky/BC if you want sky/bc to fund it, then go on the sky ride already provided.

the thing is your not asking about equality, your asking them to provide exclusive rides. which is unfair and against their equalities intitiative. 

would you be happy if they offered the same breeze type rides for males only and led by males, if said males did all the leg work?????


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

2893388 said:


> The saddle?


Close, but I imagine it's the willy waving bloke sat on it that's the problem.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Are female only rides not sexist in themselves.. What is wrong with male cyclists to warrant exclusion?


Too fast?


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> but breeze rides are being funded by sport england and not by sky/BC if you want sky/bc to fund it, then go on the sky ride already provided.



I don't think it's relevant who's paying for the scheme - British Cycling have got the contract to deliver it, and Sky does the marketing for it alongside the Sky rides where leaders are paid. Perhaps BC are less culpable here. Maybe Sky is the "bad guy". I don't know and don't really care. But both schemes are being run side by side and marketed together, and signup/registration for individual rides is all done via the same website. But behind the scenes, men are being paid to do the same job (leading) as women but much less often and aren't being required to do other essential work (planning) that women are doing.

FYI, I work for Sustrans. Every single little thing that we do is funded out from one or more of a myriad different, separate and unconnected revenue streams. Yet all Sustrans employees, regardless of what team they're on or what local project they are delivering, are on the same pay scale with the same benefits package.

I don't know what your work is or who your employer is, but would you be happy to work alongside someone working under the same "umbrella", doing the same job as you but their salary comes from a different "pot" and is a lot higher than yours?



jowwy said:


> the thing is your not asking about equality, your asking them to provide exclusive rides. which is unfair and against their equalities intitiative.



You haven't read this thread all the way through yet, have you?



jowwy said:


> would you be happy if they offered the same breeze type rides for males only and led by males, if said males did all the leg work?????



Yes, of course. Is there a need for that? I thought that's what most cycling clubs are, either by design or in effect.


----------



## 400bhp (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Sky will pay a women to run a sky ride same as a man <-------- this is not discrimination



Well it can be, as it's implicit discrimination.

Many women may feel intimidated for leading a mixed group ride due to the (perceived) difference in ability. (the average) women are generally slower than (the average) men on a bike.


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> I don't think it's relevant who's paying for the scheme - British Cycling have got the contract to deliver it, and Sky does the marketing for it alongside the Sky rides where leaders are paid. Perhaps BC are less culpable here. Maybe Sky is the "bad guy". I don't know and don't really care. But both schemes are being run side by side and marketed together, and signup/registration for individual rides is all done via the same website. But behind the scenes, men are being paid to do the same job (leading) as women but much less often and aren't being required to do other essential work (planning) that women are doing.
> 
> FYI, I work for Sustrans. Every single little thing that we do is funded out from one or more of a myriad different, separate and unconnected revenue streams. Yet all Sustrans employees, regardless of what team they're on or what local project they are delivering, are on the same pay scale with the same benefits package.
> 
> ...


then your in the wrong club, our club have mixed rides every week and some of the women riders are quicker and more vocal than the male counter parts. its not about were we both work, although sustrans in itself promotes equality, then it throws cyclists and dog walkers together on the same track. which causes problems in its own right.


----------



## theclaud (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> then your in the wrong club



Believe me - she isn't.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> then your in the wrong club, our club have mixed rides every week and some of the women riders are quicker and more vocal than the male counter parts. its not about were we both work, although sustrans in itself promotes equality, then it throws cyclists and dog walkers together on the same track. which causes problems in its own right.


Well, you have a point about sustran's "cycling routes style" sorry @velovoice them routes seem to be the steepest  anyhow surely VV is not responsible singlehanded for the organization operational choices.
As mentioned before, most women start their cycling with zero confidence: before becoming quicker and "more vocal" (you mean like choosing rest stops and so on?) they need a less competitive environment to find their wheels.
Returners to cycling after many years or folks that only ever cycled in their quiet home town, then moved to the city for uni or work reasons come to mind.
I've seen women starting out on hybrids on segregated paths now racing with the local club up the moor.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

_Au contraire_, I speak from the refuge of having found one of the FEW cycling clubs where sexism is entirely and refreshingly absent. 

But I have been EXACTLY where many of these beginners on Breeze rides are now. That's why I help out on Breeze rides as a Sustrans-trained marshal. I've been there and totally understand their insecurities and can reassure them that they WILL get better. With a little more fitness / skill / confidence, they'll go on to doing so much more. 

Including -- if they wish <gulp> -- riding with men.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> then your in the wrong club, our club have mixed rides every week and some of the women riders are quicker and more vocal than the male counter parts. its not about were we both work, although sustrans in itself promotes equality, then it throws cyclists and dog walkers together on the same track. which causes problems in its own right.


Pat "5mph" has already replied to the underlying issue here, but I've got to add to that by saying, you're speaking to gender inequality from the club members' perspective. (That whole "curse him/her for being faster than me" thing that men do, rather than "oh god I'm ruining everybody's day".)

In bringing in the employment analogy, I was speaking to the ride leader's experience, i.e. how happy would you be knowing someone is doing effectively less than you for more money?

Right now, Breeze Champions are doing this for love. I applaud that, but having found out that their colleagues on the "SkyRide" side are getting paid for having rides (routes, riders, publicity all pre-arranged) just handed to them, well, that really galls me.


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> Pat "5mph" has already replied to the underlying issue here, but I've got to add to that by saying, you're speaking to sexism from the club members' perspective. In bringing in the employment analogy, I was speaking to the ride leader's experience, i.e. how happy would you be knowing someone is doing effectively less than you for more money?


But they are two totally different types of ride or activity.

Skyride
One is a ride for everyone, whether male, female, young or old. The ride leader whether male/female get paid the same.

the other - Breeze ride is exclusively for women only

now i ask again

would you be happy if sky/bc were asked to fund rides for men only, if the male leader did all the leg work. inthe same way the breeze lead rider does???

i would guess the answer would be no, you wouldnt be happy with that scenario at all


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> But they are two totally different types of ride or activity.
> 
> Skyride
> One is a ride for everyone, whether male, female, young or old. The ride leader whether male/female get paid the same.
> ...



I'll answer you as I did above: No problem! But I ask _you _again, is there a demand for that? a need for that? Isn't it already being done all over the country in every village and town?


----------



## oldroadman (26 Jan 2014)

There is a fair bit of megaphone discussion here.
Facts, as alreday noted, are:
Sky Local Rides/Sky Rides are led by people who get a small compensation for doing the leading. Supported by Sky.
Breeze Rides are led by Breeze Champions who lead women-only rides because they want to do it and get more women into cycling properly. Supported by Sport England funding, which is PUBLIC money, and that means every last penny probably has to be counted. I think the scheme was a BC initiative, so they probably actually went and got the money from Sport England - what's the bet if they mantioned "wages" the whole thing would not have happened?
Both categories of ride leader could come under the heading of "volunteer", because no-one is likely to make a living from leading a few Sky Local Rides!
Voluntering is a backbone of the sport and of promoting bike riding - it's a long tradition of doing the right thing and passing on knowledge, which those of us who have been around a long while, have done and continue to do.
I don't see discrimination. I try not to find fault. I support women's racing now (as a retired competitor of a reasonable standard) with my own efforts as a volunteer. I don't feel discriminated against becsaue I don't get paid wages, neither do the women involved so far as I know, and I've actually asked the question of those who deliver.
The Sustrans analogy is silly - they are a business/charity and have plenty of full time workers, who should get paid at whatever grade they are in equally for an identical job. There's legislation for that.

Perhaps instaed of finding fault we should look positively at what's happening, and be mighty pleased that there are good people who will give time to help promote this wonderful thing, cycling.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

oldroadman said:


> Both categories of ride leader could come under the heading of "volunteer", because no-one is likely to make a living from leading a few Sky Local Rides!
> Voluntering is a backbone of the sport and of promoting bike riding - it's a long tradition of doing the right thing and passing on knowledge, which those of us who have been around a long while, have done and continue to do.
> I don't see discrimination. I try not to find fault. I support women's racing now (as a retired competitor of a reasonable standard) with my own efforts as a volunteer. I don't feel discriminated against becsaue I don't get paid wages, neither do the women involved so far as I know, and I've actually asked the question of those who deliver.
> The Sustrans analogy is silly - they are a business/charity and have plenty of full time workers, who should get paid at whatever grade they are in equally for an identical job. There's legislation for that.
> ...



Thanks for your input. I agree that's the ideal.

As I said, people do this for LOVE not money. This discussion has crystallised my thoughts on several issues around this -- I certainly didn't have set-in-concrete views on it when I first saw FD's post. In the end, what I'd like is for everybody to be doing it as volunteers. I'd like SkyRide leaders to be more actively involved in route planning, reccie rides and risk assessments. And to do it for free. As the Breeze Champions do.

I am very glad that BC/Sky does provide excellent ride leader training, with a respected qualification at the end of it.


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> I'll answer you as I did above: No problem! But I ask _you _again, is there a demand for that? a need for that? Isn't it already being done all over the country in every village and town?


but are they being funded by sky/bc in the same way your asking breeze to be funded. By the public purse


----------



## oldroadman (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> Thanks for your input. I agree that's the ideal.
> 
> As I said, people do this for LOVE not money. This discussion has crystallised my thoughts on several issues around this -- I certainly didn't have set-in-concrete views on it when I first saw FD's post. In the end, what I'd like is for everybody to be doing it as volunteers. I'd like SkyRide leaders to be more actively involved in route planning, reccie rides and risk assessments. And to do it for free. As the Breeze Champions do.
> 
> ...


----------



## oldroadman (26 Jan 2014)

Does this apply to Breeze leaders as well, if it does that would be a benefit worth having, who knows where it could lead?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2014)

I'm still having trouble with the discrimination point. If there is equal opportunity for both riders and leaders in the open Sky rides then I would prefer seeing a greater effort towards getting women to lead those rides - they're not races, they're primarily participation events, so there's no need for the balls-out high-testosterone riding anyway. And having women leaders would, I'd have thought, in turn encouraged a greater uptake from women. 

As it is, I believe the Sky rides were open from the start but there was a very unequal uptake, and Breeze was bolted on to try to reduce that disparity. So be it.

But, as long as the open Sky rides are genuinely equal opportunity then I feel there's no real cause for beefing about how the Breeze rides are organised. I'd prefer to see them as ''feeder'' rides and judge them by their results, in terms of more getting more women on bikes, be it by participating on Breeze rides, Sky rides, or simply riding around a lot more.

(I should admit that I'm not a BC member and I've never been on a Sky ride. I have been on woman-led CTC rides and have no problem whatsoever with that.)


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

the question was this - are sky/bcbeing sexist. answer NO. because whether the sky ride leader is male or female they both get paid the same and both get training and given routes.

breeze is a totally different event/activity being funded by a different funding stream (public purse), therefore even though its being actuvely publicised by sky/bc its not their place to fund it.


----------



## totallyfixed (26 Jan 2014)

Hilarious! Discrimination is endemic throughout women's cycling, not specifically talking about volunteering so I will not derail this thread, but really, do some research people.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> I'm still having trouble with the discrimination point. If there is equal opportunity for both riders and leaders in the open Sky rides then I would prefer seeing a greater effort towards getting women to lead those rides - they're not races, they're primarily participation events, so there's no need for the balls-out high-testosterone riding anyway. And having women leaders would, I'd have thought, in turn encouraged a greater uptake from women.
> 
> As it is, I believe the Sky rides were open from the start but there was a very unequal uptake, and Breeze was bolted on to try to reduce that disparity. So be it.
> 
> ...



Again, conflation of open access with equal opportunity. 

I went on several SkyRides when I first started cycling. Lots of wobbly children. Lots of stops and starts. Lots of crashes. Maybe that's not typical of all SkyRides but frankly my arthritic knees could not take the stress and worry. Nor could my arthritic head.

I just want a quiet life, honest.


----------



## Kookas (26 Jan 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> Hence I posed questions. Hence the question marks. This interwebs lark isn't as hard are you are making out.
> 
> Now if you want to claim that you have never ever experienced those things when riding with men, go ahead.



But that's just a characteristic of people you don't like. It's not something that means you'll hate every man, because not every man has those characteristics. There's no guarantee you'll like every woman on a woman only ride, either.


----------



## StuAff (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> Again, conflation of open access with equal opportunity.
> 
> I went on several SkyRides when I first started cycling. Lots of wobbly children. Lots of stops and starts. Lots of crashes. Maybe that's not typical of all SkyRides but frankly my arthritic knees could not take the stress and worry. Nor could my arthritic head.
> 
> I just want a quiet life, honest.


The London Freewheels (as they were first named) were the same. Nobbers who should have been elsewhere, if not on the road at all, weaving all over the road and around little kids at high speed. People deciding to stop in the middle of the road with no reason. Marshals who seemed determined to cause as many logjams as possible but not deal with aforementioned nobbery. And so on. I had fun a couple of times, but the last one was too much stress and too little fun.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> Again, conflation of open access with equal opportunity.



I thought I was taking open access and equal opportunity as good and the unequal uptake as the problem. Am I right in thinking that you're taking the unequal uptake on Sky rides as an indication that there was never genuinely open access in the first place? For me, I'd rather positive action to promote women as both participants and leaders within the Sky ride framework - both genders doing the same work for the same nominal amount of money - without the risk of a Breeze ghetto.


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> the question was this - are sky/bcbeing sexist. answer NO. because whether the sky ride leader is male or female they both get paid the same and both get training and given routes.
> 
> breeze is a totally different event/activity being funded by a different funding stream (public purse), therefore even though its being actuvely publicised by sky/bc its not their place to fund it.



The issue of funding behind the scenes is completely irrelevant. Both rides are run and marketed by British Cycling & Sky, with a common aim of getting people out and about on bikes. The fact that one has a more targeted audience isn't the issue. 

If you worked in a widget factory making widgets, alongside a woman taken on at the same time as you, yet the woman gets paid far more than you, presumably you wouldn't have any issues with that?


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> I thought I was taking open access and equal opportunity as good and the unequal uptake as the problem. Am I right in thinking that you're taking the unequal uptake on Sky rides as an indication that there was never genuinely open access in the first place? For me, I'd rather positive action to promote women as both participants and leaders within the Sky ride framework - both genders doing the same work for the same nominal amount of money - without the risk of a Breeze ghetto.



I'd say the open access on SkyRides is equal, but the opportunity isn't really, because as long as the group is mixed, some women will decide not to go or go once and never again. You may say that's an uptake, not opportunity, issue but, whatever the organisers' official access and opportunity policies may be, the physical reality is one and the same. The access and opportunity aspects to a ride present a barrier, a psychological if not physical one. The result is low uptake.

I've gone into a lot of detail already about how women think, when they're beginning cyclists.

Is the reverse true, i.e. that if women are allowed on some rides, some men will decide not to go?

I am of course deliberately leaving children out of the equation. I do think where SkyRides succeed is with family rides. So of course there are women -- as well as men -- who will cycle for the sake of the children and go on SkyRides regularly. But the men on those rides who are themselves at beginner level are more likely to take it further and become skilled cyclists in mixed groups than women. Beginner women cyclists feel intimidated by mixed groups. That's where Breeze comes in.

"Breeze ghetto"?! (Where do you get this stuff??!) Breeze is the building block. Women who use it to "discover" cycling and continue to improve (and this is most) actually "outgrow" it quite quickly and will move onto mixed groups and clubs, provided the "atmosphere" is supportive. Breeze "membership" is very much a rolling one, as new women join all the time and women who've gained more ability and confidence move on.

ETA: I've crossed posts with TMN, who has made several of the same points but more concisely!


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

User13710 said:


> That is such a good point, well made. I believe that many, if not most, men will find that idea so outlandish they will give it no credence. But it is true. Once more guys really accept that that is how many women feel, we might get somewhere.



I've edited that post, TMN - does the point still come across? or have I muddied the waters?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2014)

User13710 said:


> That is such a good point, well made. I believe that many, if not most, men will find that idea so outlandish they will give it no credence. But it is true. Once more guys really accept that that is how many women feel, we might get somewhere.


Wouldn't a greater female presence as Sky ride leaders help towards reducing that self-segregating?


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> The issue of funding behind the scenes is completely irrelevant. Both rides are run and marketed by British Cycling & Sky, with a common aim of getting people out and about on bikes. The fact that one has a more targeted audience isn't the issue.
> 
> If you worked in a widget factory making widgets, alongside a woman taken on at the same time as you, yet the woman gets paid far more than you, presumably you wouldn't have any issues with that?


both skyride leaders get paid the same - whats your issue????

the breeze ride is for women ONLY, so who is being delibrately sexist here - breeze or sky/bc 

if your segregating yourself from the skyrides then you can't then pull out the equalities card.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Wouldn't a greater female presence as Sky ride leaders help towards reducing that self-segregating?



Psychological barrier, remember? 

Yes, if there were more women leaders, maybe the barrier would lessen if not disappear. But there's still the issue of the rides themselves being mixed groups. A woman ride leader isn't going to make much difference here.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> both skyride leaders get paid the same - whats your issue????



Lots of people work in partnership organisations, doing the same work under the same "brand" if you like, but being funded from different revenue streams. This is the case with SkyRides and Breeze rides.

This has nothing to do with male and female SKYRIDE leaders.

Do you get it now? (Phew!)

And it appears the difference between "positive action" and "discrimination" (discussed above) is also passing you by.


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> Lots of people work in partnership organisations, doing the same work under the same "brand" if you like, but being funded from different revenue streams. This is the case with SkyRides and Breeze rides.
> 
> This has nothing to do with male and female SKYRIDE leaders.
> 
> Do you get it now? (Phew!)


the question was - are sky/bc being delibrately sexist. 

answer - NO


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

User13710 said:


> Yes quite probably. I wonder what the male/female split is? If there are fewer female leaders, why is that? Would as many men go on a ride led by a woman as readily as they would one led by a man?


the club ride i go on every week is led by a female rider - does that answer the question.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> the question was - are sky/bc being delibrately sexist.
> 
> answer - NO



Okay, nice to know where you stand.


jowwy said:


> the club ride i go on every week is led by a female rider - does that answer the question.



Are these rides aimed at beginners?


----------



## Flying Dodo (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> both skyride leaders get paid the same - whats your issue????
> 
> the breeze ride is for women ONLY, so who is being delibrately sexist here - breeze or sky/bc
> 
> if your segregating yourself from the skyrides then you can't then pull out the equalities card.



I'd say you're living in the past, in more ways than one. Look at post #22 about positive action.

It's quite simple - Sky and British Cycling are promoting 2 lots of similar rides under their collective banners - to run one version, they pay people a bit of cash for, to run the other one they don't, yet they expect the volunteer to do far more work for nothing.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> I'd say you're living in the past, in more ways than one. Look at post #22 about positive action.
> 
> It's quite simple - Sky and British Cycling are promoting 2 lots of similar rides under their collective banners - to run one version, they pay people a bit of cash for, to run the other one they don't, yet they expect the volunteer to do far more work for nothing.



That's the original "question" in a nutshell.

...followed by nearly four pages of smokescreen that digress, divert and distract, posted by various people (all men?) arguing that Breeze rides should not be allowed to exist at all.

@totallyfixed was right. Sexism is alive and well. Long live sexism.


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> Okay, nice to know where you stand.
> 
> 
> Are these rides aimed at beginners?


the OP asked a simple question - are sky/bc being delibrately sexist?? in the detail of the post she mentioned 2 rides being promoted by sky/bc

1. Skyride - organised and funded by sky/bc with trained/qualified leaders who are paid to lead an organised ride.

rides are undertaken by all ages, sex, nationality whatever the level of expertise in rider

2. Breeze - Rides that are funded by the public purse, but promoted by sky/bc using their marketing expertise.

the funding is very limited and the rides are aimed at female cyclist trying to get into the enjoyment of group cycling or cycling by any nature, as the rides are funded by the public purse and therefore have limited cash, the rides are run by Volunteers.

now heres the kicker, they are two totally different events and are funded by two totally different sources of funding andtherefore have to totally different ways of being run.

now - if sky/bc were paying their male/female ride leaders of their skyrides different levels of pay, then YES i would agree that sky/bc were being sexist.

but in the case given by the OP i personally don't believe they are.


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (26 Jan 2014)

User13710 said:


> Yes quite probably. I wonder what the male/female split is? If there are fewer female leaders, why is that? Would as many men go on a ride led by a woman as readily as they would one led by a man?


It's not possible to see who's leading which rides so I can't say what the mix of leaders is. But, without positive action, I'd assume that it wouldn't be far off the general proportion of men to women that we see cycling on the roads. 

I'm sure that many men who are competitively orientated would prefer club runs with their peers to open access Sky rides. But those who aren't in it for competition shouldn't have an issue with it - unless they already have an issue with women.... Besides, the problem is not about a lack of male uptake. And, my guess is that an increased presence of women leaders would also tame a few men's need for speed.


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> That's the original "question" in a nutshell.
> 
> ...followed by nearly four pages of smokescreen that digress, divert and distract, posted by various people (all men?) arguing that Breeze rides should not be allowed to exist at all.
> 
> @totallyfixed was right. Sexism is alive and well. Long live sexism.


having read all four pages - i read nowere that stated the breeze rides shouldnt exist


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Jowwy, I think we all understood your explanation for your view. You're absolutely entitled to that view and I support your right to express it. But you still misunderstood the OP (written by... gulp.. a _man_!) and you've continued to misconstrue every further bit of, let's call it "clarification".

So no one had the guts to come right and use those words "Breeze rides shouldn't exist". But you and at least one other have made it clear that you believe that (a) Breeze Rides discriminate against men, and (b) That Is Wrong.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/discrimination

Oxford dictionary states discrimination is :-


> the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of race, age, or sex:



I am prevented from signing up to a breeze ride at this time, not based upon my cycling ability or knowledge of the highway rules, or my cycle insurance, but because I am male. As such i am disadvantaged due to my sex. This from my understanding pretty much fits the dictionary description of discrimination.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/discrimination
> 
> Oxford dictionary states discrimination is :-
> 
> ...



Hmm, your definition of "disadvantaged" must be considerably different from mine. 

My analogy above still stands. Why would a male want to join a ride specifically tailored to the psychological needs of females?


----------



## 400bhp (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/discrimination
> 
> Oxford dictionary states discrimination is :-
> 
> I am prevented from signing up to a breeze ride at this time, not based upon my cycling ability or knowledge of the highway rules, or my cycle insurance, but because I am male. As such i am disadvantaged due to my sex. This from my understanding pretty much fits the dictionary description of discrimination.



Careful sir, depends whether you believe it's unjust of prejudicial.


----------



## jowwy (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> Hmm, your definition of "disadvantaged" must be considerably different from mine.
> 
> My analogy above still stands. Why would a male want to join a ride specifically tailored to the psychological needs of females?


disadvantaged in the context its written by the fact he's male - and not disavantaged by his ability.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> disadvantaged in the context its written by the fact he's male - and not disavantaged by his ability.



But where's the disadvantage? He is spoiled for choice. In fact, I'd say he has every advantage. Whereas women, without something like Breeze, have none (in this context). 

Are you saying men (because you do insist on making this all about gender) must have access to _everything_?


----------



## srw (26 Jan 2014)

The time when women-only events should stop is the time when everyone realises why they exist. Judging by this thread alone there's a very long way to go to get there.


----------



## srw (26 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> I'd say you're living in the past, in more ways than one. Look at post #22 about positive action.
> 
> It's quite simple - Sky and British Cycling are promoting 2 lots of similar rides under their collective banners - to run one version, they pay people a bit of cash for, to run the other one they don't, yet they expect the volunteer to do far more work for nothing.


As a subscriber to the cock-up theory of history, my best guess is that it's not _deliberate_ sexism, but that someone just hasn't put two and two together. It's clearly sexist, and I suspect if it was pointed out to the right person the sexism would be excised.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

jowwy said:


> disadvantaged in the context its written by the fact he's male - and not disavantaged by his ability.



:lightbulb:

Oh you mean disadvantaged by the fact that he's not a woman!

(No offence intended to any biological males out there who are psychologically women and may thus be in need of something like Breeze.)


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

srw said:


> As a subscriber to the cock-up theory of history, my best guess is that it's not _deliberate_ sexism, but that someone just hasn't put two and two together. It's clearly sexist, and I suspect if it was pointed out to the right person the sexism would be excised.



That's exactly it.

It's akin to what in employment law is called "indirect discrimination". The policies appear equal and their effect is intended to be equal (or at least not deliberately unequal) but when applied to real people in real life situations, the end result is discrimination on the basis of some aspect that the policymakers hadn't envisaged. Rightly or wrongly. Deliberately or accidentally. Effect is the same = discrimination.

And in tribunal cases on discrimination, it's EFFECT that counts.


----------



## totallyfixed (26 Jan 2014)

I'm going to stick my oar in again, mostly because I have come across the attitude shown by some males on here many times. I would offer a wager that SKY/BC have no idea they are being discriminatory, it's just the way it has always been and until someone vociferously points it out "they" are usually simply not aware. In a way this is worse because it also implies a level of ignorance that in this day and age ought to be unacceptable. Unfortunately most things in life are run by men, and usually old ones at that many of whom still believe a woman's place is in the kitchen.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

totallyfixed said:


> Unfortunately most things in life are run by men, and usually old ones at that many of whom still believe a woman's place is in the kitchen.



Or "at home with the kids" (cf. post #14).


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> My analogy above still stands. Why would a male want to join a ride specifically tailored to the psychological needs of females?



I purchased my step daughter a dogma think2 giro in nice girly pink and black (she picked it) to encourage her to keep fit and hopefully spend some quality time with me. She is not confident on the roads and found out about the local breeze ride however she does not want to turn up to meet a group of strangers alone and asks me to go along. I enquire about this and am prevented from doing so.
The step daughter is still not riding due to not wanting to ride with my friends and although cycling with other ladies appeals to her she does not wish to meet strangers alone and she would like me to go with her.

I would personally like to attend a breeze ride to encourage and support getting my step daughter to cycle and am prevented from doing so. This is a shame.


----------



## theclaud (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> http://www.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/english/discrimination
> 
> Oxford dictionary states discrimination is :-
> 
> ...



There are few things less edifying than the spectacle of white middle class men asserting their "right" to barge into the few social and cultural spaces that have been set up precisely to counteract their dominance of all the other ones. Surprise surprise, men demonstrate that their sense of entitlement extends not only to the events or spaces themselves, but to the discourses which construct them, and speak shamelessly of being disadvantaged due to their sex - which is the opposite of the truth. I should be amazed that people are able to type this stuff with a straight face, but one comes to anticipate the backlash against even very modest actions to promote equality.

I've not looked into this specific issue before, as I have an aversion to things connected with Sky, an affiliation with the CTC at the expense of British Cycling, and an entirely selfish preference for being surrounded by as many men as possible on group rides. Nor do I believe that there is anything called "female psychology" that accounts for how some women feel about their exclusion from some or all types of cycling. But it remains the case that, for many reasons, some women require this female-only space in order to overcome the barriers to their participation. I think there is something in the argument that the Breeze and Sky Rides are not parallel events in all senses, and I've nothing against a strategy of mobilizing volunteers. But then the branding, sub-branding and status attached to corporate sponsorship tends toward the baroque, at a glance it certainly looks as if organization and leadership of the Breeze rides is not taken as seriously as that of the Sky Rides - as something worth the organizer's remuneration. I don't see why getting more women cycling should not be approached within the same framework as other strategies to increase participation.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> I purchased my step daughter a dogma think2 giro in nice girly pink and black (she picked it) to encourage her to keep fit and hopefully spend some quality time with me. She is not confident on the roads and found out about the local breeze ride however she does not want to turn up to meet a group of strangers alone and asks me to go along. I enquire about this and am prevented from doing so.
> The step daughter is still not riding due to not wanting to ride with my friends and although cycling with other ladies appeals to her she does not wish to meet strangers alone and she would like me to go with her.
> 
> I would personally like to attend a breeze ride to encourage and support getting my step daughter to cycle and am prevented from doing so. This is a shame.



How old is your step-daughter?
And - idle curiosity - does her mother cycle?

ETA:
Also - sounds like she wants two different things: quality time with you, and cycling with other women. She could have both (separately). Or if she doesn't want to meet strangers, she could choose one for the time being: riding with you. Over time, she'll probably meet a few other women cyclists and perhaps not feel so nervous about strangers?

Has she said why "cycling with other ladies appeals" to her? (I'll bet one reason is to make new friends!  )

Topic for a new thread, I think.


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> How old is your step-daughter?
> And - idly wondering - does her mother cycle at all?



Mother has no interest at all in going near a bike.
Step daughter is considered by all means an adult and this was partly the reasoning behind them not permitting me to come along. There was no question regarding why my support was needed/requested/desired.

Laura Trott, Joanna Rowsell, Dani King inspired her and got her interest going after the Olympics but the support and encouragement after did not build on this so the interest faded, very sad imho


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

theclaud said:


> There are few things less edifying than the spectacle of white middle class men asserting their "right" to barge into the few social and cultural spaces that have been set up precisely to counteract their dominance of all the other ones. Surprise surprise, men demonstrate that their sense of entitlement extends not only to the events or spaces themselves, but to the discourses which construct them, and speak shamelessly of being disadvantaged due to their sex - which is the opposite of the truth. I should be amazed that people are able to type this stuff with a straight face, but one comes to anticipate the backlash against even very modest actions to promote equality.
> 
> I've not looked into this specific issue before, as I have an aversion to things connected with Sky, an affiliation with the CTC at the expense of British Cycling, and an entirely selfish preference for being surrounded by as many men as possible on group rides. *Nor do I believe that there is anything called "female psychology" that accounts for how some women feel about their exclusion from some or all types of cycling. *But it remains the case that, for many reasons, some women require this female-only space in order to overcome the barriers to their participation. I think there is something in the argument that the Breeze and Sky Rides are not parallel events in all senses, and I've nothing against a strategy of mobilizing volunteers. But then the branding, sub-branding and status attached to corporate sponsorship tends toward the baroque, at a glance it certainly looks as if organization and leadership of the Breeze rides is not taken as seriously as that of the Sky Rides - as something worth the organizer's remuneration. I don't see why getting more women cycling should not be approached within the same framework as other strategies to increase participation.



I agree with just about everything you've said there, TC. When I used the term "female psychology", I knew it was a bit of a cop-out, which I hoped would be forgiven, given the context and audience here! But I do think that women (many, if not all) have a tendency to take responsibility for the happiness/satisfaction of those around them, even if it involves blaming themselves. In the context of cycling, a number of women admit to thinking "everybody else would be having a better time if I wasn't holding them up" whenever they're struggling up hills. I'm not aware of this being a common thought pattern for men. Hence my use of "female psychology" as a kind of shorthand to distinguish between the way women and men view _them_selves when taking up a brand new activity in a mixed group. (cf post#16)


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Mother has no interest at all in going near a bike.
> Step daughter is considered by all means an adult and this was partly the reasoning behind them not permitting me to come along. There was no question regarding why my support was needed/requested/desired.
> 
> Laura Trott, Joanna Rowsell, Dani King inspired her and got her interest going after the Olympics but the support and encouragement after did not build on this so the interest faded, very sad imho



That is really sad. Scope for exploring possible solutions, but this is not the thread. Do you want to start a new one asking for women's input on what might be helpful to your step-daughter?


----------



## Mr Haematocrit (26 Jan 2014)

Never thought of that, wonder why.
I might get her to start one to ensure her concerns are expressed correctly.

Thx for the suggestion.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Never thought of that, wonder why.
> I might get her to start one to ensure her concerns are expressed correctly.
> 
> Thx for the suggestion.


Any time. I hope she does. I'd be more than happy to listen to her and see how I can help, and I'm sure a lot of other women on CC would as well.


----------



## StuAff (26 Jan 2014)

Some of these arguments reminded me of a thread or two over on BR forums, particularly referring to the (paid) Cycletta events. Those strike me as a rather strange combination of Breeze-type social for ladies on the one hand, and sportive on the other, only the (not) freebies include a 'spa', feminine wipes in the goody bag, and they insist on calling feed stations 'treat stops'- some of the female contributors, including those who'd done them, felt that such elements were cringe-making if not downright patronising. Others disliked the whole idea of women-only rides. One, a friend of mine, said "by segregating women in any way, for harm or good, you're pushing back genuine equality". Another contributor I've met in the past said "Part of me thinks it's great - encouraging more people to take exercise is a good thing. And it's a safe, encouraging environment which might make people want to do it again. But similarly, I find all this girls-together stuff a bit patronising and annoying. We're just people" and "I think we need to encourage women to try cycling at normal events, rather than generate specific events for them. Evans sportives have a higher percentage of women and of beginner cyclists than sportives organised by road clubs, for example, partly because they strive to have courses at all levels and advertise to a wide section of the public. More of those kind of events, perhaps with the addition of some on traffic free roads, would attract all kinds of starting-out-cyclists, which I think is emphatically A Good Thing".

Certain posters in this thread might think those arguments reinforce their views against such events. I would disagree. Those two ladies I quoted are both experienced and strong riders with personalities to match. Faster than a lot of blokes on here for certain. But I doubt either of them would deny that there is a problem with many women feeling unable to ride events, or at all, for whatever reason. And I'm absolutely certain that they wouldn't want a man deciding that women-only events were wrong. If women don't want to ride in Breeze or Cycletta or AN Other ladies-only event, well that's a choice women should make. Not men........


----------



## 400bhp (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> .* In the context of cycling, a number of women admit to thinking "everybody else would be having a better time if I wasn't holding them up" whenever they're struggling up hills. I'm not aware of this being a common thought pattern for men*.



I'm not sure I'd agree with that?

That has definately been me in the past. 

There's a few of the blokes who I cycle with think the same too.


----------



## Pat "5mph" (26 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> I purchased my step daughter a dogma think2 giro in nice girly pink and black (she picked it) *to encourage her to keep fit and hopefully spend some quality time with me.* She is not confident on the roads and found out about the local breeze ride however she does not want to turn up to meet a group of strangers alone and asks me to go along.* I enquire about this and am prevented from doing so.*
> The step daughter is still not riding due to not wanting to ride with my friends and although cycling with other ladies appeals to her she does not wish to meet strangers alone and she would like me to go with her.
> 
> *I would personally like to attend a breeze ride to encourage and support getting my step daughter to cycle and am prevented from doing so. This is a shame*.


Sorry Mr. H, ime a cyclist at your level spending time riding with a family member complete beginner will only lead to a frustrating time for her and eventually for you.
The sentiments are good, in reality it will take some time until you can take your step daughter out on a ride you will both enjoy.
What about starting by getting to the breeze ride a bit earlier with her, take 15 minutes to have a chat with the participants and the leader, give her time to introduce herself, then wait for her at the end of the ride?
Us girls always have a wee natter before (and during ) a ride: must say it drives mad the man that sometimes leads us


----------



## 400bhp (26 Jan 2014)

StuAff said:


> Those two ladies I quoted are both experienced and strong riders with personalities to match. Faster than a lot of blokes on here for certain.



Is that more "because of" rather than "in spite of" though?


----------



## 400bhp (26 Jan 2014)

My OH went on her first club ride last week.

Manc Wheelers "women's only" ride.

She loved it and I can see it has inspired her to do more.

Nuff said - respect to Manchester Wheelers for doing such rides and a thank you to one person on here in particular.


----------



## StuAff (26 Jan 2014)

400bhp said:


> Is that more "because of" rather than "in spite of" though?


I can say with absolute certainty that I'd leave that to them to answer....


----------



## zizou (26 Jan 2014)

It does seem a bit unfair, but i think it is partly to do with funding and sponsorship - the relationship with Sky as a sponsor and British Cycling is a complicated one because they also sponsor Team Sky - there is obviously a crossover between Team Sky and British Cycling but it isnt that straightforward. I think with this Sky sponsor the Sky rides and that is how the ride leaders get paid, whereas Breeze is funded differently (although it is on the skyride website it doesnt seem to have the sky logo on the header)

The majority of people who contribute to cycling either through route planning and ride leading, widening access/ encouraging new riders, coaching, marshalling events etc do so outwith skyrides or breeze rides and they do so out their own pocket without getting paid for it or getting free kit and other perks. The benefits that Skyride leaders get (and to a lesser extent Breeze leaders too) is an anomaly and British Cycling should not IMO be involved with paying those who lead social rides unless they are being funded by a third party in some way. 


On a related issue of women and cycling - At Go-Ride level there are alot of girls riding alongside the boys these days hopefully in a few years time when they become adults then this will carry through into cycling more generally.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

400bhp said:


> I'm not sure I'd agree with that?
> 
> That has definately been me in the past.
> 
> There's a few of the blokes who I cycle with think the same too.



I'm sure it's not gender-exclusive! I note that you and your mates didn't let those thoughts beat you. 

For a lot of women, the negative thoughts win at a very early stage.


----------



## 400bhp (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> *I'm sure it's not gender-exclusive! I note that you and your mates didn't let those thoughts beat you.*
> 
> For a lot of women, the negative thoughts win at a very early stage.



Well, it wasn't a binary cycle/don't cycle thing.

For me it was a "I don't want to hold up a certain club group ride so I won't go on it" (in fact now I'd more than hold my own) and just did my own thing. Even this weekends ride I went out on my own as I didn't want to hold any of my regular ride bussies up.

Perhaps it's a bit of an age thing with us, more mature and a bit more life experience. Might have been different at 18 years of age?


----------



## GrumpyGregry (26 Jan 2014)

Kookas said:


> But that's just a characteristic of people you don't like. It's not something that means you'll hate every man, because not every man has those characteristics. There's no guarantee you'll like every woman on a woman only ride, either.


It's not a characteristic of people I don't like. I like plenty of people despite those characteristics and a whole pile of other faults too.

At no point have I or anyone else said ALL men have those characteristics. 

But to make out that amongst male cyclists these behaviours, particularly when directed to female riders, or others perceived as 'weaker', are as rare as hens teeth, is utterly disingenuous.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (26 Jan 2014)

User13710 said:


> There are reasons for unequal uptake. It is really hard for many women to find group rides that suit them, much harder than it is for most men I think. Even as an experienced cyclist living in a city very well-served by cycling clubs I am a bit disheartened by the lack of choice for me - lots of clubs that claim to be inclusive until you look closely at their websites or talk to club members, then you find they are male-dominated, very fast and very competitive. At the other end of the scale are over-cautious 'social' rides, some aimed exclusively at women and beginners it's true, that are just too slow and not free-flowing enough. I fall back on the CTC, which many people scorn, but they cater for all levels of rider, are very friendly and non-judgemental, and none of the ride leaders are paid a penny.


Come and ride with Horsham Cycling. You'd be a shoe in for the intermediates.


----------



## Kookas (26 Jan 2014)

GrumpyGregry said:


> It's not a characteristic of people I don't like. I like plenty of people despite those characteristics and a whole pile of other faults too.
> 
> At no point have I or anyone else said ALL men have those characteristics.
> 
> But to make out that amongst male cyclists these behaviours, particularly when directed to female riders, or others perceived as 'weaker', are as rare as hens teeth, is utterly disingenuous.



I never used the phrase, or anything like it. But it feels like you're implying that those characteristics apply to most men, when actually, it is simply 'some'.


----------



## velovoice (26 Jan 2014)

Kookas said:


> I never used the phrase, or anything like it. But it feels like you're implying that those characteristics apply to most men, when actually, it is simply 'some'.


Since when does "not rare" mean "most"??


----------



## GrumpyGregry (26 Jan 2014)

Kookas said:


> I never used the phrase, or anything like it. But it feels like you're implying that those characteristics apply to most men, when actually, it is simply 'some'.


It has been a subject of heated debate within my cycling club, my running club, my rugby club, et cetera. 

Funnily enough the guys all say "it's only a small minority though isn't it, love" and the girls say something quite different.


----------



## Kookas (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> Since when does "not rare" mean "most"??



Clearly, you don't know what implication is.


----------



## srw (26 Jan 2014)

400bhp said:


> I'm not sure I'd agree with that?
> 
> That has definately been me in the past.
> 
> There's a few of the blokes who I cycle with think the same too.


Like everything psychological it's statistical. There's a common pattern of thought which tends to cluster around women, and different comon pattern of thought which tends to cluster around men. That's not to say there's no overlap, and I'm not going to put my neck out and say how strong the clustering is or why it exists (though I'd hazard a guess a large part of it is nurture not nature).

Disclaimer: I'm no psychologist, although I do know one or two things about statistics.


----------



## ComedyPilot (26 Jan 2014)

I think this thread links (in a fashion) to the 'Helmets in the press' thread in the way people (men and women) in the UK are propaganda'd to by the press/BC etc...

Not all women like the idea of being left for dead by some 'boy's own racing club'

Well I've got news for you, a lot of men don't like it either.

A lot of people (with or without penises) prefer to ride alone at their own pace as opposed to feeling like they're letting people down/being too slow - as can and DOES happen at club level. Much as they try to be accomodating to new members, they are out and out racing clubs, and with decades of friendships formed between riders, entering that paradigm as a newbie is daunting enough to be off-putting.

A quick look at the corporate/helmet pushing/Hi-viz tabbard Sky Ride/muscles-in-their-spit sporty side of BC makes an organisation like CTC seem all the more appealing to me. I just want to ride a bike. I have ZERO aspirations of being the next ANYTHING let alone giving Chris Froome sleepless nights - although I might if he saw 'me' riding his bike.....

I know researching cycling as a new rider can be a bit of a minefield, but were I to be a potential cyclist, and Googled 'cycling' only to be met with BC as the number one resource - I would find it sufficiently off-putting not to bother going any further.....

Just sayin'..........


----------



## theclaud (26 Jan 2014)

srw said:


> I do know one or two things about statistics.



I'd not noticed.


----------



## summerdays (26 Jan 2014)

velovoice said:


> But I do think that women (many, if not all) have a tendency to take responsibility for the happiness/satisfaction of those around them, even if it involves blaming themselves. In the context of cycling, a number of women admit to thinking "everybody else would be having a better time if I wasn't holding them up" whenever they're struggling up hills.


I have to admit to having those thoughts, even when I've cycled with an ex colleague who was a really fast cyclist and didn't show any sign of irritation at going my speed on a hill, those thoughts were still there that he was only cycling at that speed out of politeness.


----------



## Glow worm (26 Jan 2014)

ComedyPilot said:


> I think this thread links (in a fashion) to the 'Helmets in the press' thread in the way people (men and women) in the UK are propaganda'd to by the press/BC etc...
> 
> Not all women like the idea of being left for dead by some 'boy's own racing club'
> 
> Well I've got news for you, a lot of men don't like it either.



I certainly don't. The folks who like to ride around the place as if their ar$es are on fire may as well be another species as far as I'm concerned. This thread is quite depressng really, with all the 'Sky Rides' (shudder), 'female psychology' and 'testosterone' cobblers. I can't imagine anything more depressing than a group ride with that lot - is it any wonder 'normal' folk in the UK see cycing as something for the weirdos and fitness freaks? Seems crazy to me.


----------



## mcshroom (26 Jan 2014)

I don't ride with either of the local clubs because I'm sure I would just hold them up, and it's a constant worry for me when I try to do different rides. One of the reasons I started audaxing was because the challenge was totally against myself, and I wouldn't affect anyone else's enjoyment of the event (on my first audax ride I was never going to finish in time, and distinctly remember ringing up and persuading the org to not hang around and wait for me as I didn't want to inconvenience him). In my experience of meeting and riding with different people I would say there are a lot more men out there who are in a similar situation who would benefit from a 'Breeze' style ride as much as women with a similar outlook, and this might even dilute the stereotypical 'testosterone fuelled' male cyclist image. As it is, though, with women vastly under-represented in cycling numbers, it makes far more sense on concentrating on that challenge first.

There are obviously other barriers that seem to prevent women from pursuing the same loner style of cycling I followed otherwise the number of female cyclists overall would be closer to that of men. Some of these may be psychological, but I would suggest many of them based around the societal attitudes* towards things such as women exercising, the way women should look, and the way too many men feel they are allowed to behave around women. That's where, as an outsider to the rides, I see the real benefit of female only group rides, as a space for unconfident female cyclists to get used to regular cycling in an environment that is (or is perceived by the potential new rider to be) more supportive of female cyclists.

Coming back to the OP, do I think they are being sexist. Not really, assuming that potential female Sky ride leaders are not being pushed to run Breeze rides instead. As has been pointed out, ride leaders for the compensated rides is open to male and female organisers equally (regardless of the uptake, the remuneration goes to the man/woman organising). On the other hand, I would very much like Breeze rides to be funded better and encouraged more, and that could be sorted completely independently to the mixed rides.


* As an engineer - venturing into sociology is something I do very warily


----------



## Sara_H (26 Jan 2014)

I applied to be a Breeze leader but withdrew my application after learning that helmet use for leaders was mandatory.


----------



## uclown2002 (27 Jan 2014)

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


----------



## Dan B (27 Jan 2014)

"Your opinions are worth less than my lack of opinion"


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (27 Jan 2014)

uclown2002 said:


> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


Generation Z thread this way - http://www.cyclechat.net/threads/help-me-understand-generation-z.148269/unread


----------



## TheJDog (27 Jan 2014)

Are women avoiding these rides because of men on the rides, or because they think they won't keep up?

Do Sky/Whotheflipever just need to stratify the rides into differing abilities, make it obvious what those levels are, and let whoever wants to join them, join them?

Or do they need to also explicitly state somewhere that these are mixed rides and demeaning and sexist behaviour won't be tolerated at all?

And try to encourage more women to be paid leaders of rides of all types?

(I tried reading the thread, and got bored at page 5 with the same arguments being repeated on both sides)


----------



## GrumpyGregry (27 Jan 2014)

[QUOTE 2894854, member: 1314"]I’d like to put the debate into the concept of the debates that have been happening around the gross BME under-representation in the Met; in the acting caste, and in the echelons of power in this small rock off the coast of mainland Europe.

I’m not sure whether the sense of that (old) white middle class male entitlement expressed as dismissal of any critique, as sense of persecution, and as fear of losing control is Brobdingnagian or Lilliuputian. My personal thoughts are that the old guard probably just need to pass on (harsh but true); but that in the meantime positive action can be taken until such passing on is complete.

As with BME recruitment in the Met, of course positive action should take place within BC to support greater inclusion of women in greater numbers, with the rides given exactly the same support as other rides.

Have BC got an access/equalities officer, and if not, why not? Even the supposedly macho world of the English RFU is doing great stuff with dedicated female junior rugby coaches. (Personal aggrandisement moment alert - have I mentioned I coached Brian Moore’s daughter at minis level? When she plays for England it will have been because of me.)

TC will have seen the interesting article in the Guardian today about how Black British actors are finding success in the States rather than in the UK because of the affirmative programme that occurred there 2 or 3 decades ago. (TC will find this of interest of course following the question that was posed when receiving white applicants when the JD specifically asked for Black actors, reflecting that sense of white middle class entitlement.)

innit[/quote]
Iz it coz I iz fick, innit?


----------



## buggi (27 Jan 2014)

Mr Haematocrit said:


> Are female only rides not sexist in themselves.. What is wrong with male cyclists to warrant exclusion?


 not sexist, no. Some women are embarrased about their capabilities and less inclined to join a ride with males on it for this reason. So they promote women only rides to get the women on it, in the hope they will gain confidence. Men don't have the same confidence issues so there is no need to tailor a ride in this way.


----------



## saoirse50 (27 Jan 2014)

In a world where, riding out in Kent this past Saturday I was one of possibly 5 other women I saw riding round those hills amongst so many men I lost count, where we still witness, every road racing season, the (to my mind anyway) gross and offensive spectacle of podium girls, where major women's road racing events struggle to find sponsors despite the talent that is out there, where we were told ad nauseam in 2012 that one (male) Bradley Wiggins was the first Brit ever to win the Tour de France (still says that in Wikipedia) despite one (female) Nicole Cooke winning the women's event twice before, and another, Emma Pooley, winning it once, again before a Brit male got near winning theirs, I am just gobsmacked that some of you still question why we might need women only rides now and again. And even more gobsmacked that some of you might suggest that holding such a ride might be sexist! 

The examples I have given above are merely a few showing how cycling becomes seen as something that most women don't and even shouldn't do and women who do cycle well and achieve highly are hidden. Cycling for women is perhaps swanning around on a Dutch style bike with a wicker basket on the front in a flowing skirt and blonde hair drifting in the breeze (like an old Harmony hairspray ad) and nothing more. The more women only rides around where women get to see that all kinds of women cycle, at all kinds of levels, the more level the playing field (or maybe equal the gradient) becomes between the sexes.


----------



## saoirse50 (27 Jan 2014)

And with reference to the OP, I am a Breeze ride leader. I don't know the ins and outs of why Sky ride leaders are paid and we are not and why we have to do all our publicising etc. I am guessing it's bureaucratic minutiae rather than overt sexism. But, do you know what, in the context of the kind of stuff I printed above, in the context of my life as a woman and all the sexist rubbish I have experienced in my life both on and off the bike, well, it absolutely does FEEL sexist. Now, I don't expect some of you to even begin to understand that. But some of you will, absolutely.


----------



## Leodis (28 Jan 2014)

If I wear my Wiggle Honda team kit does it make me less sexist?


----------



## saoirse50 (28 Jan 2014)

No, but that comment in this context, makes you more so.


----------



## mr_cellophane (28 Jan 2014)

I have read half way through this and there are so many things wrong that I can't be bothered to read the rest before replying.

I am a Skyride leader and like most of the other leaders I know, I am also a route planner Skyrides are planned to a schedule laid down, in the majority of areas, by the local authority who also provide some finance and can dictate route and dates. Breeze rides are much looser and range from 30+ miles (not many of those admittedly) to one around Epping Forest that is more of a book club with some cycling. 
Many Breeze leaders are also Skyride leaders.
There are now social rides which can be organised by people with no training what so ever. These organisers, male or female, don't get paid for this either.


----------



## saoirse50 (29 Jan 2014)

What do you mean, Breeze rides are much looser? Some of the council funded Skyrides in our borough looked pretty loose to me, if by that you mean short wanders along a traffic free cycle path.


----------



## mr_cellophane (29 Jan 2014)

saoirse50 said:


> What do you mean, Breeze rides are much looser? Some of the council funded Skyrides in our borough looked pretty loose to me, if by that you mean short wanders along a traffic free cycle path.


 No I meant the Breeze champion chooses the route, start time, numbers etc. For many Skyride routes the local council chooses the route, when and how often it is run through the season. The Skyride route planner gets a level and points the route should pass and has to work out the best way from that.


----------



## mr_cellophane (29 Jan 2014)

Sara_H said:


> I applied to be a Breeze leader but withdrew my application after learning that helmet use for leaders was mandatory.


 That is not a rule that is enforced (how can it be) I know several leaders who won't wear one. It just makes it easier to enforce the rule for children.

BTW, I lead a Skyride ride up Boxhill and finished last. Beaten to the cafe by males and females


----------



## saoirse50 (29 Jan 2014)

mr_cellophane said:


> BTW, I lead a Skyride ride up Boxhill and finished last. Beaten to the cafe by males and females


I lead several rides every year around the Surrey Hills, Box Hill is one of the easier, earlier hills on the routes I do. I too am regularly beaten to the top of the Box and all the other hills.......not sure what relevance that has to this thread, though.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (29 Jan 2014)

mr_cellophane said:


> I have read half way through this and there are so many things wrong that I can't be bothered to read the rest before replying.


I read halfway through your post and there are so many things wrong with the first sentence that I can't be bothered to read the rest before replying.

Thus badly informed and without understanding the argument you are putting forward at all I'll just say it is tosh. Complete and utter.


----------



## thom (29 Jan 2014)

2898718 said:


> Someone on a Pinarello scalped me over the Col de Ponte de Lambeth yesterday evening. That wasn't relevant either


Must have been a hair-raising experience though


----------



## Flying Dodo (29 Jan 2014)

mr_cellophane said:


> No I meant the Breeze champion chooses the route, start time, numbers etc. For many Skyride routes the local council chooses the route, when and how often it is run through the season. The Skyride route planner gets a level and points the route should pass and has to work out the best way from that.



The Sky Ride leader I chatted to the other week (on a Sustrans ride I was running, funnily enough) said he didn't have to do any planning, and was simply emailed a list of planned rides starting at various points in the next few months and was asked which ones would he be able to lead.


----------



## mr_cellophane (29 Jan 2014)

Flying Dodo said:


> The Sky Ride leader I chatted to the other week (on a Sustrans ride I was running, funnily enough) said he didn't have to do any planning, and was simply emailed a list of planned rides starting at various points in the next few months and was asked which ones would he be able to lead.


That's odd because he is supposed to select the rides he would like to lead from the leaders portal on their website. Not all Leaders are route planners.


----------



## mr_cellophane (29 Jan 2014)

2898847 said:


> Is any of this addressing the core issue here?


There is no core issue. BC aren't being sexist because you are comparing two different "products". If the Breeze Champions don't like the rules, then they don't have to do it, they can just become Skyride leaders and get paid.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (29 Jan 2014)

2898865 said:


> No, I am not seeing much difference between being a ride leader and being a ride leader. I appreciate that I might be being a bit thick here but the subtle distinction is lost to me.


It is rather like thinking you and I could be identical twins.


----------



## Flying Dodo (29 Jan 2014)

mr_cellophane said:


> There is no core issue. BC aren't being sexist because you are comparing two different "products". If the Breeze Champions don't like the rules, then they don't have to do it, they can just become Skyride leaders and get paid.



It's just a shame then that if a Breeze Ride leader wants to nurture and encourage women riders on a women only ride, they're expected to do it as a volunteer.


----------



## Rob3rt (29 Jan 2014)

Why not just join a club and set yourself to work on establishing a regular women's ride and/or encouraging women to join said club. This will provide a lasting solution...


----------



## Spinney (29 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> Why not just join a club and set yourself to work on establishing a regular women's ride and/or encouraging women to join said club. This will provide a lasting solution...


A lasting solution to Sky & BC being sexist??


----------



## Rob3rt (29 Jan 2014)

Spinney said:


> A lasting solution to Sky & BC being sexist??



A lasting solution to getting more women on bikes and cycling, with others!


----------



## Flying Dodo (29 Jan 2014)

mr_cellophane said:


> That's odd because he is supposed to select the rides he would like to lead from the leaders portal on their website. Not all Leaders are route planners.


Could be - he simply said he was given a list, which I'd assumed was emailed. Anyway, as Adrian says, it's not relevant to the core issue.


----------



## mcshroom (29 Jan 2014)

Just to point out the core issue seems to have moved. The title says 'deliberately sexist'. Whether people feel the situation is or isn't sexist, I doubt many believe any sexism would be deliberate.


Now to go slightly back OT - Considering most of the 'organised riding' I do, I would actually suggest that the Skyride leaders being paid are the anomalies. The vast majority of organisers (for clubs, audaxes, forum rides, fnrttcs, etc.) are volunteers. This doesn't mean that it wouldn't be better to actually fund Breeze ride leaders and support them better, but just to point out that the Sky rides seem to be the unusual ones.


----------



## Rob3rt (29 Jan 2014)

2898961 said:


> The same could apply to the sky rides as well.



I agree and IME, people who come to our club after doing Sky rides generally arrive at a level we would deem beginners, i.e. group riding skills are poor to non-existent and fitness is low. The reasons why, I do not know (I don't actually know what goes on, on Sky rides). The solutions to these unknown reasons, I do not know. We have seen a few Sky Ride advanced (or whatever they call it now) turn up and go off the back of an easy ride within a mile. So I do wonder what they actually do to develop riders in any way. But of course any payment given to these ride leaders is going to attract people to do that role.

If you consider the entirely voluntary basis of this Breeze initiative, then the people volunteering to do it may well be better off investing the time and energy in building female membership in a local club. The role would be near identical, but the results sustainable and lasting as people can be shuttled off into appropriate channels as they progress. IMO it would also feel more like a community (I have no basis for saying this other than how I feel regarding my club and what I observe others saying).


----------



## Rob3rt (29 Jan 2014)

2899040 said:


> You don't appear to be addressing the issue here, the fact that *chalk and chalk are being treated differently*.



But are they? Sky Ride leaders can be male or female, in the case someone leads a Sky Ride, they are paid. This has been posted several times throughout this thread.

Breeze is "something else".


----------



## Rob3rt (29 Jan 2014)

2899069 said:


> Sky ride leaders are paid justifies the fact that sky ride leaders are paid but breeze ride leaders are not. Interesting.



I personally fail to see the relevance of the comparison between Sky Ride and Breeze. Given that Sky ride pays either male or female riders to lead the rides that is clean and easy and for me removes it from the equation.

Breeze is "something else". A different initiative etc.

If Breeze existed without the Sky Ride existing would people be complaining it was not a paid position?


----------



## Rob3rt (29 Jan 2014)

Similar but not the same.

Ultimately, my opinion on any sexist issues is swamped by my opinion of the initiatives in general.


----------



## mcshroom (29 Jan 2014)

@Rob3rt - If you have riders falling off the back of an 'easy' ride, then maybe you might consider the definition of 'easy'. Would it not be beneficial to try and bridge the gap well (and train these people how to ride in groups etc) so they are more likely to move over into being club members?


----------



## Rob3rt (29 Jan 2014)

mcshroom said:


> @Rob3rt - If you have riders falling off the back of an 'easy' ride, then maybe you might consider the definition of 'easy'. Would it not be beneficial to try and bridge the gap well (and train these people how to ride in groups etc) so they are more likely to move over into being club members?



I'd say a ride looking to average 13-15 mph for 30 miles is suitably defined as easy (you could flip your comment and say maybe Sky ought to re-think what they call advanced, I certainly would not consider someone who struggles to ride at 13-15 mph average as advanced). Also, these rides are exactly aimed at teaching people group riding skills and learning about and hopefully joining the club (given that out membership is very large and growing at a fast rate, they appear to be working very well. We also have a fast growing womens membership)!

The main issue being, you can not accommodate everyone, especially with limited resources. Which is exactly why I said that people would likely be better off investing their time and energy into volunteering in a club to help implement such a thing than running Sky rides etc. However if Sky insist on paying people to lead rides...


----------



## totallyfixed (29 Jan 2014)

All these discussions about Sky / BC / Breeze are all of course symptomatic of a much bigger issue, gender inequality. The wife of a friend of mine, competing in a TT told how the quickest man won a carbon TT frame and the fastest woman won a pair of shorts.
My better half doesn't do the local rides that are run by men because they can't keep up. Just adding a bit of balance .


----------



## mr_cellophane (29 Jan 2014)

Why all these comments about getting people to join clubs ? The point of Skyrides is to get people cycling regularly, not to get them to a level where they fell comfortable in joining a club.
BTW one female leader now runs her own club in south London for those who cycle for leisure and not to build themselves up to 13mph runs.


----------



## mr_cellophane (29 Jan 2014)

2899995 said:


> No idea, perhaps it was covered in a bit you couldn't be arsed to read.


I did read all the posts eventually and utter tosh most of them were


----------



## srw (29 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> I'd say a ride looking to average 13-15 mph for 30 miles is suitably defined as easy.


You're wrong. It's not. It's quite fast.


----------



## StuAff (29 Jan 2014)

13-15 mph is not an easy pace for most people by any means.


----------



## mr_cellophane (30 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> I'd say a ride looking to average 13-15 mph for 30 miles is suitably defined as easy (you could flip your comment and say maybe Sky ought to re-think what they call advanced, I certainly would not consider someone who struggles to ride at 13-15 mph average as advanced).


If you consider that as "Easy" what would you classify a ride of 10 miles at 8-10mph, or even a 3 mile ride around the local park at 5 mph ?


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Jan 2014)

srw said:


> You're wrong. It's not. It's quite fast.



I enjoy your conviction!



StuAff said:


> 13-15 mph is not an easy pace for most people by any means.



Whilst 13-15mph may be a challenge for some people, on a spectrum of ride levels where you have anything ranging from a 13mph ride to a 22+mph chaingang, then you have to differentiate and in this case, the 13mph end of the spectrum is easy! There is no expectation that everyone will find it easy, it is simply a term used to differentiate it from other rides with a higher level of difficulty. It could equally be called "Level A" where a B, C, D ride are harder!


IME, people vastly underestimate peoples ability, including their own!


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Jan 2014)

mr_cellophane said:


> If you consider that as "Easy" what would you classify a ride of 10 miles at 8-10mph, or even a 3 mile ride around the local park at 5 mph ?



The former, sub-recovery pace, an absolute crawl, the latter.... walking pace!


----------



## Dusty Bin (30 Jan 2014)

mr_cellophane said:


> If you consider that as "Easy" what would you classify a ride of 10 miles at 8-10mph, or even a 3 mile ride around the local park at 5 mph ?



A walk?


----------



## Spinney (30 Jan 2014)

The last few posts are a fine example of what puts many people off clubs etc. I can average about 12 mph fairly comfortably, but no more, and on a long ride my average drops to nearer 10. But I've been cycling for a few years now. Anyone less fit (and most of you club cyclists would probably not describe _me_ as cycling fit), or me after a winter with less riding, would not find 13-15 mph 'easy' , and many would not find 30 miles easy either, let alone both at once.

So, for an unfit me or people who have cycled less, to go on an 'easy' ride and fail to keep up is likely to stop them wanting to ride with a club again.

It would be far better, if people _want _to encourage new members, to describe rides in terms of length and speed expectations, and perhaps give letter grades.


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Jan 2014)

Spinney said:


> The last few posts are a fine example of what puts many people off clubs etc. I can average about 12 mph fairly comfortably, but no more, and on a long ride my average drops to nearer 10. But I've been cycling for a few years now. Anyone less fit (and most of you club cyclists would probably not describe _me_ as cycling fit), or me after a winter with less riding, would not find 13-15 mph 'easy' , and many would not find 30 miles easy either, let alone both at once.
> 
> So, for an unfit me or people who have cycled less, to go on an 'easy' ride and fail to keep up is likely to stop them wanting to ride with a club again.
> 
> It would be far better, if people _want _to encourage new members, to describe rides in terms of length and speed expectations, and perhaps give letter grades.



As I said before, you can't cater for everyone, especially with limited resources. Which is why I argued that some of the people involved with Sky Ride etc might be better placed within a club allowing them to offer a more diverse ride profile, this would cater for the people a Sky Ride caters for PLUS it would offer a pathway for progression and a support network and community if people decided they wanted that. As it stands, people outgrow Sky Rides then are "on their own".

To address your last 2 points:

A) Our current system (with its flaws) seems to be doing a good job as it stands, with us being one of the largest clubs, if not the largest club in the North West, with a quickly growing membership including a near 50:50 ratio between male and female NEW members.

B) However, I accept the terms are subjective and in fact, one of the things we are doing at present is redefining these in terms of grade (0-3 is the current proposal, not that I fully agree with the new proposal on various points).


----------



## Spinney (30 Jan 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> As I said before, you can't cater for everyone, especially with limited resources.


Agreed.


> B) However, I accept the terms are subjective and in fact, one of the things we are doing at present is redefining these in terms of grade (0-3 is the current proposal, not that I fully agree with the new proposal on various points).


I do think this would be helpful, as long as people understand what is involved in (say) a grade 0.
It sounds as if your club is getting enough new members. My main point was the loss of confidence involved in not being able to keep up with a ride described as 'easy', and the number grades would help with this.
It may be more of a female thing...??


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Jan 2014)

Spinney said:


> Agreed.
> 
> I do think this would be helpful, as long as people understand what is involved in (say) a grade 0.
> It sounds as if your club is getting enough new members. My main point was the loss of confidence involved in not being able to keep up with a ride described as 'easy', and the number grades would help with this.
> It may be more of a female thing...??



Our easiest ride is currently termed "Intro", not "easy" BTW, I used the word easy as a term to suggest the end of the spectrum I was referring to (of course this was a subjective term).

I have seen many people (male and female) who are essentially complete beginners (even though we aim to cater to people new to club cycling, not cycling in general) turn out to our "easy" ride which is actually termed "Intro" and complete the distance, at the pace with little to no bother. Now they may not have found it easy, it may have been a challenge, BUT they could do it. People often underestimate what people can do, especially in a group with the drafting effect and the encouragement of others.


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Jan 2014)

Are Sky rides and Breeze rides free to attend?


----------



## Rob3rt (30 Jan 2014)

User13710 said:


> *Believe it or not there are people out there who have no interest in upping their average speeds or benefiting from the drafting effect - they just want to potter about on their bikes with a friendly group at 8-10 mph being sociable.* I'm sure you do good work in your club Rob3rt, but I think the milieu has blinkered you a bit.



And different groups cater to them...


----------



## mr_cellophane (30 Jan 2014)

Ride levels are very subjective and personal. Same as skiing - what makes one piste a red and another blue ? I have been on easy reds and testing blues. Problem with skiing thoough, is you can't turn around and go back if it gets too difficult


----------



## mr_cellophane (30 Jan 2014)

Here, no need to do it for free now
https://www.goskyride.com/News/Show...ws+30th+January&dm_i=BM6,25B9Z,690ILH,7RNDV,1


----------



## velovoice (11 Feb 2014)

srw said:


> You're wrong. It's not. It's quite fast.


Agree. I consider myself "experienced" if not "expert". My fitness is well above those on Breeze rides (I do them to help the leader out and to rest, frankly!) but my average -- over all my types of riding whether road cycling, commuting, whatever - runs about 10-11mph.


----------



## Rob3rt (11 Feb 2014)

You can be both experienced and slow!


----------



## velovoice (11 Feb 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> If you consider the entirely voluntary basis of this Breeze initiative, then the people volunteering to do it may well be better off investing the time and energy in building female membership in a local club. The role would be near identical, but the results sustainable and lasting as people can be shuttled off into appropriate channels as they progress. IMO it would also feel more like a community (I have no basis for saying this other than how I feel regarding my club and what I observe others saying).


@Rob3rt, you've posted quite a lot (on a number of points that go OT in different ways!) since I last looked at this thread, so excuse me if I'm lagging behind. I just want to say - the local Breeze ride leader here in Dunstable does exactly this -- encourages her ladies to progress and then lets them know about other groups and rides going on in the area (which some may or may not classify as "clubs"). But this is mainly because she is comfortable with those other groups herself and knows they have the right atmosphere to nurture these ladies' skills and experience even further.

Not every town is so lucky. For many ladies in many areas, there is nothing or next to nothing outside of Breeze without getting into that whole "testerone" thing, cf. my earlier posts on this.


----------



## velovoice (11 Feb 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> You can be both experienced and slow!


So why were you equating "slow" with "not qualified to do anything beyond Sky rides"?


----------



## Rob3rt (11 Feb 2014)

velovoice said:


> So why were you equating "slow" with "not qualified to do anything beyond Sky rides"?



That is not what I said!


----------



## velovoice (11 Feb 2014)

Rob3rt said:


> I agree and IME, p*eople who come to our club after doing Sky rides generally arrive at a level we would deem beginners*, i.e. group riding skills are poor to non-existent and fitness is low. The reasons why, I do not know (I don't actually know what goes on, on Sky rides). The solutions to these unknown reasons, I do not know. We have seen a few Sky Ride advanced (or whatever they call it now) turn up and *go off the back of an easy ride within a mile*.





Rob3rt said:


> _*I'd say a ride looking to average 13-15 mph for 30 miles is suitably defined as easy*_ (you could flip your comment and say maybe Sky ought to re-think what they call advanced, I certainly would not consider someone who struggles to ride at 13-15 mph average as advanced). Also, these rides are exactly aimed at teaching people group riding skills and learning about and hopefully joining the club (given that out membership is very large and growing at a fast rate, they appear to be working very well. We also have a fast growing womens membership).



Then what _were _you saying?


----------



## Longshot (11 Feb 2014)

buggi said:


> Men don't have the same confidence issues



Wow. Sweeping generalisation of the day.


----------



## velovoice (11 Feb 2014)

Longshot said:


> Wow. Sweeping generalisation of the day.


Like you, I detest generalisations. But please note: no one ever said men don't have confidence issues. They're just not the same ones that women have.


----------



## Rob3rt (11 Feb 2014)

velovoice said:


> Then what _were _you saying?



I was saying exactly what I said! Take care to read it again!


----------

