# British Cycling and HSBC (and diversity in cycling)



## coffeejo (18 Sep 2016)

British Cycling has announced that HSBC UK is to become its new lead partner for the next eight years commencing from January 1.

The two will work across the sport from participation at grassroots level and major organised cycling events through to the highest level of performance with the Great Britain Cycling Team.

"This is a huge moment for cycling in Great Britain," British Cycling chief executive Ian Drake said.

"Working together with HSBC UK, we will provide the encouragement and opportunities to make cycling the most popular activity and sport of choice in Great Britain.

"We want to help transform an increasingly inactive and unhealthy nation through cycling."

http://www.itv.com/news/update/2016-09-18/british-cycling-signs-hsbc-deal/


----------



## S-Express (18 Sep 2016)

New kit for the academy riders - awesome


----------



## raleighnut (18 Sep 2016)

So what will they call the 'Skyride's


----------



## Hill Wimp (18 Sep 2016)

Shanghi rides i expect.


----------



## SWSteve (18 Sep 2016)

So will they become the Hong-Kong Shanghai Bicycling Company?


----------



## brommers (18 Sep 2016)

So they'll have HSBC's money, but not Sky's knowledge and expertise at the top level. I think that elite cyclists will suffer from this.


----------



## S-Express (18 Sep 2016)

brommers said:


> So they'll have HSBC's money, but not Sky's knowledge and expertise at the top level. I think that elite cyclists will suffer from this.



What knowledge and expertise are you thinking of?? Sky puts up the money - it doesn't provide the coaching or rider development. It's called 'sponsorship'.


----------



## SWSteve (18 Sep 2016)

brommers said:


> So they'll have HSBC's money, but not Sky's knowledge and expertise at the top level. I think that elite cyclists will suffer from this.



BSKYB Ltd sponsor British Cycling, as well as Tour Racing Ltd. now HSBC will sponsor BC.


----------



## rich p (18 Sep 2016)

Hill Wimp said:


> Shanghi


Wasn't that the dopey one in Scooby Doo?


----------



## oldroadman (18 Sep 2016)

So it looks lie this to me. Sky keep their pro team - nothing to do with the BC sponsorship - for as long as they think it's a business proposition. Sky stop with BC (at the end of 2016?). HSBCUK (they have rebranded the UK retail bank and separated it from the investment division, I have read somewhere) will sponsor BC for 8 years. No conflict so far as I can see. BC and Sky pro team are separated anyway, despite the impression some people have tat they are one and the same, which they are not. The marketing people at BC must have worked their backsides off to pull in a sponsor at this level, a job well done I think. Who would have thought going back in time that a "little" sport in Britain would end up having it's governing body sponsored by what is probably the biggest back in the world? Quite a result. No doubt there will be some "knockers" somewhere, who will want to cry sell out or something similar. They are unimportant, what is important is the rise and rise of the sport into the mainstream, and backing by a huge multinational can only help that.


----------



## S-Express (18 Sep 2016)

oldroadman said:


> The marketing people at BC must have worked their backsides off to pull in a sponsor at this level



Who is to say that they were not in discussion with several other major potential sponsors, before agreeing terms with HSBC? My guess is that other organisations would have been interested in taking over from Sky.


----------



## oldroadman (18 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Who is to say that they were not in discussion with several other major potential sponsors, before agreeing terms with HSBC? My guess is that other organisations would have been interested in taking over from Sky.


There probably were, at least anyone would hope so, and the reference to the work would include ALL the work with ALL the prospects of course. From past experience, the hardest bit is getting over the line with one of them, the old 80/20 rule. Nothing settled until the papers are signed. I guess the only thing closed to BC would have been another media organisation.


----------



## S-Express (18 Sep 2016)

oldroadman said:


> I guess the only thing closed to BC would have been another media organisation.



I don't see why, really. Once Sky's contract ends, so does BC's obligation. Another media organisation (I can't think of a suitable one, offhand) would have been fair game.


----------



## oldroadman (19 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I don't see why, really. Once Sky's contract ends, so does BC's obligation. Another media organisation (I can't think of a suitable one, offhand) would have been fair game.


You have clearly never worked in the marketing area, with all it's contract tie ins and even in that arena, a simple bit of common courtesy. When a big deal like this ends on friendly terms (which it appears to be the case with BC/Sky) you don't spit in their face by going to, for example, Virgin Media. For one the reputation of BC as a reliable and professional partner would be down the tube, for two no big player would be interested in any organisation that operated in such an unprofessional way.
Hence BC have moved sectors (a good commercial move which enhances reputation) and got themselves a deal with another very big player.
Still I guess you can't please all the people all the time.


----------



## S-Express (19 Sep 2016)

oldroadman said:


> You have clearly never worked in the marketing area, with all it's contract tie ins and even in that arena, a simple bit of common courtesy.



Oh, man - I've been in marketing for 30 years. Been there, done that, seen it all. Anyway, this is not about marketing, it's about contract law. I would be very surprised if BC's lawyers would have been daft enough to sign a contract containing what amounts to a restrictive covenant. Such a covenant would ring massive alarm bells for any half-decent corporate lawyer. 

Either the contract ends - in which case Sky has no further claim on BC - or it doesn't. I would have no issue with replacing Sky with Virgin (for example). If Sky has an issue with it, then simply extend the contract.


----------



## raleighnut (19 Sep 2016)

Marketing and ethics never really went 'hand in hand' did they. 

"You're never alone with a Strand".


----------



## S-Express (19 Sep 2016)

What's not ethical? Contract with one sponsor runs out, gets replaced with another sponsor. The new sponsor is in banking, not telecoms, but could quite easily have been another telecom company, if one had stepped up. That's how things work.


----------



## G3CWI (19 Sep 2016)

HSBC and cycling, a clean bank and a clean sport. The perfect alignment.


----------



## rich p (19 Sep 2016)

I'm absolutely gobsmacked (I'm not really!) that anyone gives a toss.


----------



## oldroadman (19 Sep 2016)

Well if I was running BC and a huge corporate offered substantial sums to associate with what appears to be seen as the most successful national governing body (not my words, others) in British sport, then why would I concern myself with anything but how good the deal is for BC and the sport in general. Never did rugby any harm. From what I can see HSBC are rebranding their retail UK operations and distancing it from the investment side. What better opportunity to get their name into the public eye in association with something that the public see as a success following the Olympics. I just hope it will be a real opportunity for BC to build on what they have already achieved.
For the record, I respect other people's point of view but I can't agree with S-Express, to move for example from one Media corporate to another would not be correct. Maybe 8 years down the road when HSBC ends, then would be the time, after the dust settles, but not now. Then again, we have different opinions, both can be respected, no problem with that.


----------



## S-Express (19 Sep 2016)

oldroadman said:


> to move for example from one Media corporate to another would not be correct.



Why not? A couple of years ago, Ford ended their sponsorship of the Champions League and were replaced with........wait for it.......Nissan! Guess what - they both make cars. Nobody cared.


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (19 Sep 2016)




----------



## S-Express (19 Sep 2016)

Yeah great pic - but I'm just interested in why you think it would not be correct to replace one media organisation with another. I thought this was a discussion forum?


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (19 Sep 2016)

Banks at both ends of the track not enough? We now get one in the middle...


----------



## S-Express (19 Sep 2016)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> Banks at both ends of the track not enough? We now get one in the middle...




View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObpcGNCU944


----------



## deptfordmarmoset (19 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> View: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ObpcGNCU944



 (I thought I was going to get TMNed there. It's such a satisfyingly awful play on words that I felt sure someone would have already done it.)


----------



## coffeejo (19 Sep 2016)

deptfordmarmoset said:


> (I thought I was going to get TMNed there. It's such a satisfyingly awful play on words that I felt sure someone would have already done it.)


No. You're the only one who went there...


----------



## Pro Tour Punditry (19 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I'm just interested in why you think it would not be correct to replace one media organisation with another.



I don't.


----------



## HF2300 (19 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> What's not ethical? Contract with one sponsor runs out, gets replaced with another sponsor. The new sponsor is in banking, not telecoms, but could quite easily have been another telecom company, if one had stepped up. That's how things work.



Generally, but Sky are continuing their sponsorship of the WT team and other cycling events. Given that and the close, sometimes blurred relationships between the WT team, Team GB and some aspects of BC, one could see how having a competing media organisation involved might be a bit messy.


----------



## S-Express (19 Sep 2016)

HF2300 said:


> Generally, but Sky are continuing their sponsorship of the WT team and other cycling events. Given that and the close, sometimes blurred relationships between the WT team, Team GB and some aspects of BC, one could see how having a competing media organisation involved might be a bit messy.



The 'arms length' relationship between BC and Team Sky/Sky Pro Cycling is only blurred if you don't understand it. Anyway, that's why you have highly-paid laywers, to sort all that stuff out. 

Hypothetically, a deal with Virgin, Talk-Talk, EE, Vodafone, O2 or similar may have seemed 'messy' to some, but BC's contract with BSkyB would not have precluded such a thing from happening if it came to it, I would have thought. I doubt there would have been any obvious legal barrier to prevent it from happening.


----------



## Bollo (19 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> The 'arms length' relationship between BC and Team Sky/Sky Pro Cycling is only blurred if you don't understand it. Anyway, that's why you have highly-paid laywers, to sort all that stuff out.
> 
> Hypothetically, a deal with Virgin, Talk-Talk, EE, Vodafone, O2 or similar may have seemed 'messy' to some, but BC's contract with BSkyB would not have precluded such a thing from happening if it came to it, I would have thought. I doubt there would have been any obvious legal barrier to prevent it from happening.


Putting on my Tim Farron hat (it's ginger and makes you invisible) I can see both sides. Joe and Joanna public probably don't know or care about the distinctions between Team Sky, the GB Track cycling team and, if they've heard of it at all, British Cycling. The branding has been very effective at creating the appearance of a single, monolithic British success machine. By muddying the branding waters, it might confuse and dilute the message.

On the other hand, BC and Sky are commercial entities and are entitled to renew, renegotiate or expire contracts as they see fit. There's no history or tradition to stomp over. It's not like they're trying to rebrand ManU as Yanmar Tractor Allstars.


----------



## S-Express (19 Sep 2016)

Bollo said:


> On the other hand, BC and Sky are commercial entities and are entitled to renew, renegotiate or expire contracts as they see fit. There's no history or tradition to stomp over. It's not like they're trying to rebrand ManU as Yanmar Tractor Allstars.




Agreed - although the way things are panning out for MUFC, it's only a matter of time...


----------



## livpoksoc (21 Sep 2016)

Whilst I am obviously biased, working in the marketing team at HSBC (though not on this team), I know the work we have done with Golf and Rugby has been excellent. The fan parks at events like the 7s and the Open have been well staffed and organised, so I would expext the same for BC events from 2017.


----------



## dellzeqq (21 Sep 2016)

livpoksoc said:


> Whilst I am obviously biased, working in the marketing team at HSBC (though not on this team), I know the work we have done with Golf and Rugby has been excellent. The fan parks at events like the 7s and the Open have been well staffed and organised, so I would expext the same for BC events from 2017.


do you think your colleagues might shoehorn some non-white faces on to the BC website? I'd hate HSBC to be tarnished by association.


----------



## S-Express (21 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> do you think your colleagues might shoehorn some non-white faces on to the BC website? I'd hate HSBC to be tarnished by association.



Might be useful to clarify what you mean by that?


----------



## coffeejo (21 Sep 2016)

The BC and HSBC websites don't just have white backgrounds...


----------



## livpoksoc (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> do you think your colleagues might shoehorn some non-white faces on to the BC website? I'd hate HSBC to be tarnished by association.





S-Express said:


> Might be useful to clarify what you mean by that?



Huh?


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

Are you asking me to clarify my request for clarification?


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Are you asking me to clarify my request for clarification?


I think he might be asking me to clarify your request for a clarification. Or something.

Anyroadup - BC's website, along with the CTC mag and any number of cycling publications, both electronic and print, is remarkably short of black faces. Compare and contrast with the Wiggle ads on TV. 

Now HSBC puts a lot of effort in to portraying itself with people - customers, people who work for them and so on. It thinks about the mix of people that are shown on print, on the telly, and on the internet. Somebody, probably a colleague of livpoksoc, is going to look across and see a bit of a deficit.

I'm surprised that Sky didn't lean on BC - whatever I think of Sky they are no less careful than HSBC.


----------



## coffeejo (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> I think he might be asking me to clarify your request for a clarification. Or something.
> 
> Anyroadup - BC's website, along with the CTC mag and any number of cycling publications, both electronic and print, is remarkably short of black faces. Compare and contrast with the Wiggle ads on TV.
> 
> ...


TMN to me, though you used more words.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> TMN to me, though you used more words.


to be fair I've been banging on about this for years. I sat on the CTC Council from 2005-2008 and I'm telling you, coffeejo, they simply did not get it. At all.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> I think he might be asking me to clarify your request for a clarification. Or something.
> 
> Anyroadup - BC's website, along with the CTC mag and any number of cycling publications, both electronic and print, is remarkably short of black faces. Compare and contrast with the Wiggle ads on TV.
> 
> ...



I can assure you that inclusion, equality and equal opportunity are at the very heart of everything BC does at grass roots level, if that helps. Perhaps a few more token BAME pics may help restore the balance among those who only see things superficially.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I can assure you that inclusion, equality and equal opportunity are at the very heart of everything BC does at grass roots level, if that helps. Perhaps a few more token BAME pics may help restore the balance among those who only see things superficially.


While I entirely accept that BC are in any way unique in this respect, I simply don't believe you. 
https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/m...ntst-Regional-Events-Officers-Contacts-0?c=EN 
By my count 19 men and 4 women. And that's an improvement.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> While I entirely accept that BC are in any way unique in this respect, I simply don't believe you.
> https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/m...ntst-Regional-Events-Officers-Contacts-0?c=EN
> By my count 19 men and 4 women. And that's an improvement.



Well, I'm involved with BC at grass roots level and have sat on various regional committees as a volunteer. What have you done for them?

Just to be clear - I thought we were talking about ethnic minority representation? Because you now seem to have moved on to gender representation instead.

Not sure what a random gender analysis of the regional events officers actually proves either way, to be honest. Such a role is completely agnostic to gender in any case. A perfect gender balance in such a role would achieve nothing. Unless your only purpose is to make vacuous gender points.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Just to be clear - I thought we were talking about ethnic minority representation? Because you now seem to have moved on to gender representation instead.
> 
> Not sure what a random gender analysis of the regional events officers actually proves either way, to be honest. Such a role is completely agnostic to gender in any case. A perfect gender balance in such a role would achieve nothing. Unless your only purpose is to make vacuous gender points.


No - I'm saying that I don't believe that BC is inclusive. In any way. That's not unique in cycling, but it's the case nonetheless.

I'm not a member of BC. I did once discuss affiliating a club to BC, and I have to say that the people I corresponded with were very helpful (and agreed that the CTC offer was the better deal), but, in a general way, I've no reason to join.


----------



## coffeejo (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> to be fair I've been banging on about this for years. I sat on the CTC Council from 2005-2008 and I'm telling you, coffeejo, they simply did not get it. At all.


I've never understood why some organisations get it and some just don't. The person or people who can influence the latter deserve medals for patience and perseverance.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> No - I'm saying that I don't believe that BC is inclusive. In any way. That's not unique in cycling, but it's the case nonetheless.



It's not the case though. You appear to have no basis for such a claim, and I am telling you (as someone who has been a member/volunteer with BC since the early 90s) that you clearly do not appear to know what you are talking about. I'm not here to defend BC, but I will happily call out BS when I see it.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> It's not the case though. You appear to have no basis for such a claim, and I am telling you (as someone who has been a member/volunteer with BC since the early 90s) that you clearly do not appear to know what you are talking about. I'm not here to defend BC, but I will happily call out BS when I see it.


We'll agree to disagree, then. And I'll hope for better days - and, by way of a correction, I've been told that there has been a change in the website since the last time this was discussed, which was about six weeks ago.

https://www.cyclechat.net/threads/shane-sutton.199478/#post-4249142

I'd be interested to see the membership figures broken down, though. Are these to hand?


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> I'd be interested to see the membership figures broken down, though.



Google is your friend - or get in touch with Sport England, or BC directly - I'm sure they'd be glad to help.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/k...114-How-to-get-into-road-racing---Racesmart-0 - another completely random insight


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/k...114-How-to-get-into-road-racing---Racesmart-0 - another completely random insight



I'm confused, what point are you trying to make?


----------



## coffeejo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I'm confused, what point are you trying to make?


As a white woman, that page doesn't speak to me.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> As a white woman, that page doesn't speak to me.



Are you serious? It's an instructional video on safe bunch-riding skills. The skills are not gender-dependent and neither is the message.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> As a white woman, that page doesn't speak to me.


if you were a non-white man it would be no better


S-Express said:


> Are you serious? It's an instructional video on safe bunch-riding skills. The skills are not gender-dependent and neither is the message.


Blimey!


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> if you were a non-white man it would be no better



I suspect this is a wind-up, but I'll indulge you both for now...

Let's say you were learning to drive - would you only accept instruction from someone of the same gender and ethnicity? If the answer is 'no' - (and I'm going to assume it would be), then you can have no basis for disregarding an instructional video on bunch riding skills for the same reason.

Ironically, your attitude serves to reinforce inequality, not remove it.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> if you were a non-white man it would be no better
> 
> Blimey!


Although on the plus side, they ban mudguards!


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I suspect this is a wind-up, but I'll indulge you both for now...
> 
> Let's say you were learning to drive - would you only accept instruction from someone of the same gender and ethnicity? If the answer is 'no' - (and I'm going to assume it would be), then you can have no basis for disregarding an instructional video on bunch riding skills for the same reason.



You don't get it do you. It's not about disregarding the video, it's looking at the bigger picture about how to properly represent BC as an open organisation. Seeing pictures of 100's of young white males racing along is not going to attract anyone from outside that demographic.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> Although on the plus side, they ban mudguards!


but require helmets (and, before anybody takes offence, I have no problems with the helmet rule for racing - I'm a little saddened that you have to wear a helmet on the Ipswich club rides, but, hey, it's their club, not mine)


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> You don't get it do you. It's not about disregarding the video, it's looking at the bigger picture about how to properly represent BC as an open organisation. Seeing pictures of 100's of young white males racing along is not going to attract anyone from outside that demographic.



I do get it - I suspect it is probably you that doesn't. There are already participants (I don't know how many, but enough to know that the inclusivity work is effective) within the go-ride and youth structure from outside the 'white' demographic nationally, and if you spent any time at grass roots level you would see that. You simply cannot take an instructional video out of context (one not even made by BC, incidentally) and extrapolate that BC is not inclusive, simply because the instructional video does not include anyone from a BAME background, it's simply absurd.


----------



## iLB (22 Sep 2016)

I don't think anyone is saying that BC is 100% made up of young white males.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I do get it - I suspect it is probably you that doesn't. There are already participants (I don't know how many, but enough to know that the inclusivity work is effective) within the go-ride and youth structure from outside the 'white' demographic nationally, and if you spent any time at grass roots level you would see that. You simply cannot take an instructional video out of context (one not even made by BC, incidentally) and extrapolate that BC is not inclusive, simply because the instructional video does not include anyone from a BAME background, it's simply absurd.



If BC didn't even make the video, then that doesn't absolve them from trying to portray a more inclusive organisation. Note I haven't actually said BC isn't inclusive, but made the simple case that it doesn't make them attractive to anyone who doesn't fit that young, white male image portrayed in the video.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

well, the point I made at the beginning about representation still stands. And, forgive me, but whether the video is made by BC or not, it's the video on the BC website.

Now...BC is in receipt of public money, which binds them to the charter for sports governance, which, in turn, sets out a programme for diversity. The figures for women's membership was on the website six weeks ago, but I can't find it now - but from memory, it's about 15%. I can't find a figure in the 2015 annual report and I can find no mention of non-white membership - although there are plenty of photographs both in the report and on the website that suggest that is not so very large.......





Now...since I have the link, people might want to whizz through the 2015 annual report. Women, even if they constitute a small proportion of the membership, are very well represented - so that's good. And...there's a sikh man on the Bradford ride and the story of Maryam is heartwarming, but, then again, it's not exactly good.

https://www.britishcycling.org.uk/zuvvi/media/bc_files/corporate/BC_Annual_Report_2015.pdf

BC needs to work this one out. As does the CTC, which, judging by the photographic representation in the Mag is pretty much all white.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> Note I haven't actually said BC isn't inclusive, but made the simple case that it doesn't make them attractive to anyone who doesn't fit that young, white male image portrayed in the video.



My point is that such a video does not preclude anyone from a BAME background from buying a racing licence and going racing. It never has. If someone wants to do it, then they will. The important thing is that there are no barriers for anyone to get involved - and there aren't. Adding a bit of token BAME content is just patronising and pandering to armchair critics who have never actually got off their arses to get involved in the first place.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

I think from memory women make up around 50% of the UK population. Clearly BC didn't realise that.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> My point is that such a video does not preclude anyone from a BAME background from buying a racing licence and going racing. It never has. If someone wants to do it, then they will. The important thing is that there are no barriers for anyone to get involved - and there aren't. Adding a bit of token BAME content is just patronising and pandering to armchair critics who have never actually got off their arses to get involved in the first place.



The point is that a lot of less confident people *won't* take the first step, as they're being subconsciously put off. In the same way that in a job interview you can gauge within the first minute or so exactly what sort of character the person has, things like web sites and videos give an overview. You only get one chance to make a first impression.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> The point is that a lot of less confident people *won't* take the first step, as they're being subconsciously put off.



My point is that in areas with a high concentration of BAME groups, they are already well-represented at club level and there are no barriers to anyone becoming involved. The real work is done by the local youth development officers and regional coaches. But you don't want to hear that. You only want to complain about there not being enough BAME representation on the BC website and concluding that BC is somehow not inclusive because of it. Well that's bullsh1t.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

But yet again, nowhere have I said that BC isn't inclusive and wouldn't welcome women/non whites who turn up with open arms. It's the first impressions thing you seem to have a problem grasping


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

well, just to be clear. In my days running the Fridays we had 27% women participation on our rides - taken over each year. It did go up to 30% one year. We had about 10% non-white participation. And, although I didn't keep the numbers for this, we had getting on for 20% lesbian, gay, bisexual and transexual participation. I don't know what the level of PhD participation was, but I do know that FD and I were not the smartest items on the block, no sirreeeeee.

Now, the first figure was pretty darn depressing, and, as some on here know, a lot of thought was given to how it might be increased. That we didn't do better was a great disappointment.

Notwithstanding that, being told that we're _armchair critics who have never actually got off their arses to get involved in the first place_ is just a bit silly.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> It's entirely your prerogative to make childish comments. But yet again, nowhere have I said that BC isn't inclusive and wouldn't welcome women/non whites who turn up with open arms. It's the first impressions thing you seem to have a problem grasping.



I'm saying that most new rider recruitment comes via local schools, clubs and other grass roots initiatives - not via the BC website. If you'd ever volunteered, you'd understand that.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> well, just to be clear. In my days running the Fridays we had 27% women participation on our rides - taken over each year. It did go up to 30% one year. We had about 10% non-white participation. And, although I didn't keep the numbers for this, we had getting on for 20% lesbian, gay, bisexual and transexual participation. I don't know what the level of PhD participation was, but I do know that FD and I were not the smartest items on the block, no sirreeeeee.
> 
> Now, the first figure was pretty darn depressing, and, as some on here know, a lot of thought was given to how it might be increased. That we didn't do better was a great disappointment.
> 
> Notwithstanding that, being told that we're _armchair critics who have never actually got off their arses to get involved in the first place_ is just a bit silly.



Depends on your goals I suppose. Was your objective to _'get people cycling'_ - or was your objective to _'get a statistically-representative cross section of the population'_ cycling? Personally, I'd choose 'people' every time.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Depends on your goals I suppose. Was your objective to _'get people cycling'_ - or was your objective to _'get a statistically-representative cross section of the population'_ cycling? Personally, I'd choose 'people' every time.


my goal was to create a club that was a nice place to be by making it as welcoming to all as I could. And, with a lot of help from people like Flying Dodo it did become that. You could turn up on a shopper or a carbon fibre racing bike, or a Brompton (sigh), you could be 15 (if you had a letter from your mum) or you could be something over 70, you could be unemployed or secretary of one of the biggest banks in the country, as long as you paid your two quid a year (and, sometimes we looked the other way on that, _and_ paid their CTC subs for them).

And one of the ways we did that was to show all sorts of people on the webthingy. It wasn't superspiffy as these things go, but it got the message across. So....not so much of the armchair critic nonsense, please.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I'm saying that most new rider recruitment comes via local schools, clubs and other grass roots initiatives - not via the BC website. If you'd ever volunteered, you'd understand that.



And yet the video is surely an advert to entice people to participate? After all, immediately below it, it states
_"If you love riding your bike and want to take the next step to racing, we've put together a quick guide on how to get into racing"._

So it's just one source. If the local school, clubs and other grass roots initiatives are welcoming as you say they are, why not the video?

It's a simplified analogy, but there's quite a few places I wouldn't go to if I wasn't a 6' bloke, as I know otherwise I'd be intimidated by what they looked like, and be put off. 

Edit: As an example here in Luton there's an area called Bury Park which is largely Asian. I know some people who would be too scared to walk alone through there. First impressions again.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> And one of the ways we did that was to show all sorts of people on the webthingy. It wasn't superspiffy as these things go, but it got the message across. So....not so much of the armchair critic nonsense, please.



Ultimately, your group failed though - by your own admission - as it was not representative. Perhaps if you had included more BAME content on your website, things might have been different.

I only called you an armchair critic, because you are criticising BC without ever having been a member, or volunteering for them. I don't think that's an unreasonable reference, any more that it is unreasonable for you to criticise BC for being unrepresentative.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

Flying Dodo said:


> Edit: As an example here in Luton there's an area called Bury Park which is largely Asian. I know some people who would be too scared to walk alone through there. First impressions again.



Why? Is it because people are afraid of asians, or afraid of being attacked?


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

PS I forgot to mention I'm a BC member.


S-Express said:


> Why? Is it because people are afraid of asians, or afraid of being attacked?


Why not ask some women or anyone non white if they feel the BC video is inviting and addressed to them?


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Adding a bit of token BAME content is just patronising and pandering to armchair critics who have never actually got off their arses to get involved in the first place.



Either there are women and non whites participating in BC events or there aren't. If you say adding that demographic to the video is just a token effort, then that means you're stating it wouldn't then reflect reality and means you're confirming BC is almost exclusively white and male.

And for the record, I'm a BC member and do lots of volunteering for Cycling UK and Sustrans.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

You are the one who made the link between asians and 'no-go' areas - not me. The only privileged position I hold is the one that enables me to understand what is happening at grass roots level at BC far better than you seem to.



Flying Dodo said:


> Either there are women and non whites participating in BC events or there aren't.



Clearly and obviously there are. What an absurd statement.


----------



## coffeejo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I suspect this is a wind-up, but I'll indulge you both for now...
> 
> Let's say you were learning to drive - would you only accept instruction from someone of the same gender and ethnicity? If the answer is 'no' - (and I'm going to assume it would be), then you can have no basis for disregarding an instructional video on bunch riding skills for the same reason.
> 
> Ironically, your attitude serves to reinforce inequality, not remove it.


My driving instructor was a white man in his 50s. I was 17 and he gave me the creeps. Conversations with other girls my age suggested I wasn't the only one. At the time, I said nothing and stuck with it because, well, people write their PhD theses on the reasons why this happens so I'll simply say that I didn't feel empowered to complain.

Now, for my own reasons, I won't get in a car with a man I don't know. If I were to receive driving lessons, it would most definitely be from a woman. 



Flying Dodo said:


> Why not ask some women or anyone non white if they feel the BC video is inviting and addressed to them?


Already answered!


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

coffeejo said:


> My driving instructor was a white man in his 50s. I was 17 and he gave me the creeps. Conversations with other girls my age suggested I wasn't the only one. At the time, I said nothing and stuck with it because, well, people write their PhD theses on the reasons why this happens so I'll simply say that I didn't feel empowered to complain.
> 
> Now, for my own reasons, I won't get in a car with a man I don't know. If I were to receive driving lessons, it would most definitely be from a woman



I've no idea what point you are trying to make with any of that. It doesn't even relate to my post which you quoted.


----------



## coffeejo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Let's say you were learning to drive - would you only accept instruction from someone of the same gender and ethnicity?





coffeejo said:


> My driving instructor was a white man in his 50s. I was 17 and he gave me the creeps. Conversations with other girls my age suggested I wasn't the only one. At the time, I said nothing and stuck with it because, well, people write their PhD theses on the reasons why this happens so I'll simply say that I didn't feel empowered to complain.
> 
> Now, for my own reasons, I won't get in a car with a man I don't know. If I were to receive driving lessons, it would most definitely be from a woman.





S-Express said:


> I've no idea what point you are trying to make with any of that. It doesn't even relate to my post which you quoted.



Er. You've lost me.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I've no idea what point you are trying to make with any of that. It doesn't even relate to my post which you quoted.



It relates entirely for the reasons we've already stated. The fact that you're not able to understand is exactly the problem.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

Christ, you two are special.

The driving lesson analogy was just that - an analogy. It was meant to underline the fact that the point of the video was the message it contained, not who was delivering it. You two (or is it three) clearly have big problems in separating the two.

I understand perfectly well the need to be unbiased and inclusive, as I'm sure BC does. However, you can't help but get yourselves wound up over an issue which appears to be of your own making. Get over yourselves. I'm out.


----------



## coffeejo (22 Sep 2016)

I have no idea what just happened and I choose to blame a combination of too much coffee and not enough sleep.


----------



## Flying Dodo (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Christ, you two are special.
> 
> The driving lesson analogy was just that - an analogy. It was meant to underline the fact that the point of the video was the message it contained, not who was delivering it. You two (or is it three) clearly have big problems in separating the two.
> 
> I understand perfectly well the need to be unbiased and inclusive, as I'm sure BC does. However, you can't help but get yourselves wound up over an issue which appears to be of your own making. Get over yourselves. I'm out.



As previously pointed out, the video is representing BC - as I've already said, it's an advert. You're the only one who can't see it's sending out a bad message, due to your lack of ability to see things from someone else's point of view. The fact that you've confirmed you can't understand the unease @coffeejo suffered from a creepy driving instructor merely underlines that. I sincerely hope that you're more sympathetic to any women in your life.


----------



## dellzeqq (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Ultimately, your group failed though - by your own admission - as it was not representative. Perhaps if you had included more BAME content on your website, things might have been different.
> 
> I only called you an armchair critic, because you are criticising BC without ever having been a member, or volunteering for them. I don't think that's an unreasonable reference, any more that it is unreasonable for you to criticise BC for being unrepresentative.


there's failure and then there's BC failure. In the first instance you give it a good go and fail, and recognise the fact, and, in the second instance you don't try, do even worse, and don't recognise the fact.

The other question is this - why are there so very few non-white competitive cyclists in this country? We could all name a few from days gone by (including my least favourite bike shop owner) but if you look at the diversity in other sports, starting with football and cricket, going on to athletics and rugby....well, we don't compare well.


----------



## livpoksoc (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> I think he might be asking me to clarify your request for a clarification. Or something.
> 
> Anyroadup - BC's website, along with the CTC mag and any number of cycling publications, both electronic and print, is remarkably short of black faces. Compare and contrast with the Wiggle ads on TV.
> 
> ...





dellzeqq said:


> well, the point I made at the beginning about representation still stands. And, forgive me, but whether the video is made by BC or not, it's the video on the BC website.
> 
> Now...BC is in receipt of public money, which binds them to the charter for sports governance, which, in turn, sets out a programme for diversity. The figures for women's membership was on the website six weeks ago, but I can't find it now - but from memory, it's about 15%. I can't find a figure in the 2015 annual report and I can find no mention of non-white membership - although there are plenty of photographs both in the report and on the website that suggest that is not so very large.......
> 
> ...



Unfortunately I can't really comment on HSBC's plans for the relationship, however what I can say from what I do, is that the HSBC brand has to represent diversity throughout. Whether that filters through to BC from 2017, I don't know as it would depend on the relationship. As I said though, the ads related to the Rugby 7s and Golf are very inclusive. The picture on this article includes a few senior faces. Whilst they are white, the most senior there is female and the CEO of the UK bank (pictured seperately in the article) is LGBT, and the bank is making good strides to ensure diversity at a senior level.


----------



## swansonj (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> ....I don't know what the level of PhD participation was, but I do know that FD and I were not the smartest items on the block, no sirreeeeee.....


I do recall one ride where two people with the same Christian name were cycling together. Wanting to give specific directions to one of them, you called "left, X!" (or whatever the instruction was). Realising that this wouldn't distinguish which of them you meant, you immediately qualified it "left, *Dr* X!". And they still both turned left....


----------



## swansonj (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> *I suspect this is a wind-up*, but I'll indulge you both for now...
> *
> Let's* say you were learning to drive - would you only accept instruction from someone of the same gender and ethnicity? If the answer is 'no' - (and I'm going to assume it would be), then you can have no basis for disregarding an instructional video on bunch riding skills for the same reason.
> 
> Ironically, your attitude serves to reinforce inequality, not remove it.


D'you know, I've read most of this thread desperately hoping that it was you engaged in a wind up,because the alternative, that you genuinely don't "get" the issues, was just too depressing.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

swansonj said:


> D'you know, I've read most of this thread desperately hoping that it was you engaged in a wind up,because the alternative, that you genuinely don't "get" the issues, was just too depressing.



What - the issue that because there is allegedly a lack of BAME riders featured on the website, then BC is therefore institutionally racist?

Or the other issue - that equality and diversity run through pretty much everything that BC does at grass roots level - and rightly so.

Which of those issues are you referring to? I'm effectively standing up for BC against a group of people with literally nothing better to do than pick holes in an NGB website over an issue for which BC has been measured and targeted on by its funding partners for years.


----------



## huwsparky (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> there's failure and then there's BC failure.
> 
> The other question is this - why are there so very few non-white competitive cyclists in this country?



Maybe you should be asking why there are so few non-white competitive cyclists world wide. It's pretty obvious to anyone who has a TV that this is the case yet your happy to blame it all at the hands of BC. I've read this thread and I still can't grasp your agenda.

Your not covering yourself in glory here I must say.


----------



## brommers (22 Sep 2016)

dellzeqq said:


> And, although I didn't keep the numbers for this, we had getting on for 20% lesbian, gay, bisexual and transexual participation.


How do you know this? did you ask them to fill out a form, or put their hands up asking them about their sexuality, and if you did why? what relevance has it to do with cycling? How would anyone know the sexuality of another rider unless they disclosed it? Where does the discimmination/prejudice come in to it?


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

brommers said:


> How do you know this? did you ask them to fill out a form, or put their hands up asking them about their sexuality, and if you did why? what relevance has it to do with cycling? How would anyone know the sexuality of another rider unless they disclosed it? Where does the discimmination/prejudice come in to it?



More to the point - who gives a sh1t?


----------



## swansonj (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> More to the point - who gives a sh1t?


Possibly, I would suggest, anyone who really believed:


S-Express said:


> ... that equality and diversity run through pretty much everything that BC does at grass roots level - and rightly so.....


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

To me though (and to a lot of others too, I suspect) equality and diversity are just things that happen while we are busy getting kids on bikes. I suspect that is the position that we should all be aiming for. I personally have no interest in anyone's skin colour or sexual orientation. Maybe you and others here should try looking at it that way.


----------



## swansonj (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> To me though (and to a lot of others too, I suspect) equality and diversity are just things that happen while we are busy getting kids on bikes. I suspect that is the position that we should all be aiming for. I personally have no interest in anyone's skin colour or sexual orientation. Maybe you and others here should try looking at it that way.


And that is what I think it is that you don't get. If you think that I&D are things that "just happen" - then they won't happen.


----------



## S-Express (22 Sep 2016)

swansonj said:


> And that is what I think it is that you don't get. If you think that I&D are things that "just happen" - then they won't happen.



They happen if you have a mindset which sees past disability, colour and other overt signs of 'difference'. Sounds like you still have some way to go, unfortunately.


----------



## swansonj (22 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> They happen if you have a mindset which sees past disability, colour and other overt signs of 'difference'. Sounds like you still have some way to go, unfortunately.


Oh, I readily acknowledge that I have a long way to go on my own I&D journey. But, probably, not in the direction you are suggesting


----------



## velovoice (23 Sep 2016)

brommers said:


> How do you know this? did you ask them to fill out a form, or put their hands up asking them about their sexuality, and if you did why? what relevance has it to do with cycling? How would anyone know the sexuality of another rider unless they disclosed it? Where does the discimmination/prejudice come in to it?


Because we chat? Because we're friends? See each other socially? Meet each other's significant others, children, etc?

No, no one has ever filled out a questionnaire. There are other ways of knowing stuff.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> I'm effectively standing up for BC against a group of people


Personally I don't think you are being very effective at all.


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

Incorrect interpretation of the word 'effective'. Having said that, I don't feel that my assessment of them is inaccurate in any way. You are obviously free to differ.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> More to the point - who gives a sh1t?


I do, for one.

If the Fridays was yet another collection of sinewy blokes droning on about bikes then I wouldn't be a member. Whether @dellzeqq engineered it to work out that way it has, or whether it "just happened" I don't know. But I do care.


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

Dogtrousers said:


> But I do care.



You care about the diversity of the riding group. If it wasn't diverse enough, would you not go with them?


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> You care about the diversity of the riding group. If it wasn't diverse enough, would you not go with them?


I ride with them because it is a brilliant club. 

If it wasn't so diverse it probably would not be much good. It would probably be like some other clubs that I've known - consisting largely of sinewy blokes droning on about bikes. Nothing wrong with that, and (for me at least) not an actually bad experience. But not very interesting.


----------



## coffeejo (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> You care about the diversity of the riding group. If it wasn't diverse enough, would you not go with them?


Sincere apologies if this is a rhetorical analogy if we're not meant to answer but I've done the whole "young woman joins a club and becomes the only female member *and* the only one under fifty to participate* thing and while I've don't have a problem with men over the age of fifty (a good number of them are even my friends), it's not easy being the odd one out. And talking of out, it's also difficult not knowing if you're the only one who is LGBT and what their response will be if you say that you are. (And yes, there have been times when I've had the should I / shouldn't I debate with myself and then heard someone make a homophobic "joke" which nobody condemned, and been grateful that I kept my mouth shut.)


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

No offence, but you two seem obsessed by what divides us, as opposed to what unites us. Cycling clubs are all about cycling (or at least they should be - yours are obviously the exception) - if you are riding a bike, then that should be all thats matters. 

I'm trying hard to sympathise with you, but I can't help thinking that the issues you mention could all be easily be resolved by you simply _'not giving a sh1t what anyone else thinks and getting on with your life in any way you like.'_


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> Cycling clubs are all about cycling (or at least they should be - yours are obviously the exception)


Thanks for educating me on what cycling clubs _*should *_be. It's nice to be able to hear from someone who is an authority on what things should and should not be. I did have some silly ideas about having fun and stuff, but I was clearly wrong.


----------



## swansonj (23 Sep 2016)

Btw,@Dogtrousers , you must tell me, where is that exquisite example of a (I think) L2 D30 pylon in your avatar? Beautiful picture.


----------



## Dogtrousers (23 Sep 2016)

swansonj said:


> Btw,@Dogtrousers , you must tell me, where is that exquisite example of an L2 D30 pylon in your avatar? Beautiful picture.


Thanks.

Its near Swanley on Crockenhill Lane just after the M25 bridge before it drops down to Eynsford . Taken a couple of weeks ago. The whole of the Darent valley was full of early morning mist.


----------



## coffeejo (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> No offence, but you two seem obsessed by what divides us, as opposed to what unites us. Cycling clubs are all about cycling (or at least they should be - yours are obviously the exception) - if you are riding a bike, then that should be all thats matters.
> 
> I'm trying hard to sympathise with you, but I can't help thinking that the issues you mention could all be easily be resolved by you simply _'not giving a sh1t what anyone else thinks and getting on with your life in any way you like.'_


The cycling's fine. It's when some of the people riding the bikes express what they're thinking out loud and it turns out that they think you're a sub-species, a second class citizen, the butt of the joke, and so on and so forth. I can tell myself I don't care and some of the time I may convince myself to swallow that lie but I do care. 

Do you know why? 

Because making someone feel that they are worth less because of their race or gender or sexuality or disability or class or religion isn't a particularly nice thing to do, and the time is long since past when it's ok for for society (and societies - pun intended) to stand by and let it happen. 

You're right, of course. It's not about what people think. It's what they say and what they do. It hurts and it's not right. Furthermore, some people use their fists or other weapons to express their thoughts. There is a link between one person cracking a homophobic "joke" and someone else massacring people in a gay club. It's different ends of the spectrum but it's the same spectrum nonetheless. 

I'm sorry that you seem to lack to empathy to understand why diversity matters, why some of us might lack the confidence that others will accept us for who we are but I guarantee that anyone who expresses this concern has previously been on the receiving end of some kind of abuse, and I doubt it's just once. It's bullying, really, and there comes a point where you lose faith in other people: it's beaten out of you with every jibe, every comment or sideways look, every time someone doesn't want to sit next to you on the bus, or sniffs in disgust, or thinks it's ok to make you the butt of the joke or objectifies you in some other way. Stuff happens and people don't always mean it - but it's especially difficult when you try to explain why it matters and you're dismissed out of hand and told that you're the one with the problem!


----------



## swansonj (23 Sep 2016)

Dogtrousers said:


> Thanks.
> 
> Its near Swanley on Crockenhill Lane just after the M25 bridge before it drops down to Eynsford . Taken a couple of weeks ago. The whole of the Darent valley was full of early morning mist.


Ah. Pylon ZZT041 which is indeed an L2D30. You'll have to forgive me - I feel obliged to live up to the pylon nerd image I've created for myself. But I genuinely do think it's a stunning photo .


----------



## coffeejo (23 Sep 2016)

Oh, by the way, I'm not saying that BC is directly racist as an organisation or that you are a racist person, but rather than we, as a society, are institutionally racist and that feeds into nearly every aspect of every day life. We're also sexist and homophobic and disabilist (is that a word?) and anti-Semitic and Islamophobic and ageist and ... the list is inexhaustible. We're privileged and we look down on those who we view as less than ourselves. Those who can't see this are, I'm afraid, part of the problem.


----------



## GrumpyGregry (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> No offence, but you two seem obsessed by what divides us, as opposed to what unites us. Cycling clubs are all about cycling (or at least they should be - yours are obviously the exception) - if you are riding a bike, then that should be all thats matters.
> 
> I'm trying hard to sympathise with you, but I can't help thinking that the issues you mention could all be easily be resolved by you simply _'not giving a sh1t what anyone else thinks and getting on with your life in any way you like.'_


Do you take lessons in how to be lacking in empathy?


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

User13710 said:


> Wow, you don't see a problem do you? [MOD EDITED] You're denying other individuals' personal experiences, and basically telling them to mtfu [sic] and try harder to fit in. Great advert for BC.



I don't work for BC - my views are my own. Their views are their own. I'm an egalitarian and I'm a libertarian and I believe in treating everyone the same, regardless of skin colour, origin or ability. Where cycling is concerned, there is only one aim - and that is to ride a bike. 

I also believe that routinely highlighting differences like this (as some of you here seem to revel in doing) simply underlines the differences to the point where the differences become the focus, rather than the similarities which we all share.


----------



## coffeejo (23 Sep 2016)

*sigh*


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

User13710 said:


> CoffeeJo has already said that the video you put up doesn't speak to her



Doesn't sound like you've read/understood the thread properly - I didn't put it up.



User13710 said:


> Your approach is mistaken



You forgot to add 'in your opinion' - my own opinion is that I think _your_ approach is mistaken.



User13710 said:


> I don't much like BC's ethos and wouldn't join them anyway. HTH.



What do you think of BC's Breeze initiative? Or have you never heard of it?


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

User13710 said:


> So you didn't, sorry. But you defended it:



I defended an instructional video because it does the job of an instructional video. Let's not over-think it.



User13710 said:


> You are denying people's personal experience again.



I haven't ever denied anyone's experience. The fact that you think I have is part of the problem.



User13710 said:


> I ride with Breeze occasionally. I was only able to do so once BC abandoned their ridiculous insistence on helmets for social rides. I have issues with the training that the ride leaders get though. Some of it starts to try and turn an enjoyable, social cycling experience into a mock chaingang, and shifts responsibility for safety away from each individual rider in a way that I dislike. But this is getting miles away from the thread theme, so I'll leave that one there if you don't mind.



These rides are going great guns in my area, that's why I was asking. Very popular among female riders of all ages. It's such a shame that once again you would prefer to pick holes in such an initiative, rather than support it. But that's been the theme throughout this thread, sadly.


----------



## swansonj (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> ... and I believe in treating everyone the same, regardless of skin colour, origin or ability. ....


I'd suggest that on this thread you are presenting as someone who says that, rather than as someone who actually believes it. I'd suggest that in order to believe that, in our society in our generation, you have to show some engagement with understanding what steps might be necessary. Doing nothing does not treat people equally, it perpetuates the status quo of inequality.


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

swansonj said:


> I'd suggest that on this thread you are presenting as someone who says that, rather than as someone who actually believes it. I'd suggest that in order to believe that, in our society in our generation, you have to show some engagement with understanding what steps might be necessary. Doing nothing does not treat people equally, it perpetuates the status quo of inequality.



You are very presumptious to tell me what I believe. Where does that come from?

If I have a group of 10 kids on bikes and three of them are from BAME backgrounds, then important thing is still that there are 10 kids on bikes. Nothing else matters, IMO. Incidentally, the kids themselves couldn't give a stuff either.

I would imagine your focus would be drawn to the three. My focus is on the 10. That's proper inclusivity. And that's probably where we differ.


----------



## Buddfox (23 Sep 2016)

S-Express said:


> You are very presumptious to tell me what I believe. Where does that come from?
> 
> If I have a group of 10 kids on bikes and three of them are from BAME backgrounds, then important thing is still that there are 10 kids on bikes. Nothing else matters, IMO. Incidentally, the kids themselves couldn't give a stuff either.
> 
> I would imagine your focus would be drawn to the three. My focus is on the 10. That's proper inclusivity. And that's probably where we differ.



They're not telling you what you believe, they're telling you how the way you come across implies what you believe. That's something anyone can have an opinion on, but for what it's worth, there seem to be a whole bunch of us that have drawn the same conclusions about what you believe. You don't care, you think we're arrogant, but we're all seemingly interpreting what you're writing in the same way.

It seems possible there could be more than one important thing about the scenario you describe. First, that there are ten kids on bikes (important and great!). Second, that 30% of them are BAME, higher than the average for the population. Double great and also important! You seem only to be concerned about the former, when it's entirely possible to be concerned about both, no?


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

Buddfox said:


> It seems possible there could be more than one important thing about the scenario you describe. First, that there are ten kids on bikes (important and great!). Second, that 30% of them are BAME, higher than the average for the population. Double great and also important! You seem only to be concerned about the former, when it's entirely possible to be concerned about both, no?



The % could just as easily be lower or higher. Possibly lower in a go-ride club in Devon, for instance - possibly a lot higher in a go-ride club in Hackney, for example. Once again though, you guys are focusing on the wrong aspect. The actual number I use in the example is irrelevant. There could be one, there could be none, there could be all 10. The important thing is the treatment of ALL the kids in the group is no different.


----------



## Bollo (23 Sep 2016)

@S-Express seems to be taking a lot of heat for this and I honestly don't think it's deserved.

First off, the thread was not about diversity, it was about a business deal between two organisations. BC and HSBC might not be shining examples of ethnic goodness, but they're no better or worse than any other large, British organisation. How it transformed into this is still a mystery to me.

As I've read it, S-Express is making two points, and I hope he'll correct me if I'm wrong, that

based on his personal experience, BC is an inclusive organisation and

promotional material that doesn't include BAME models isn't necessarily and purposefully racist. It's more important to promote genuine diversity than think you've solved the problem by including a few non-White faces in a video.

No one can argue with the first point because he explicitly said it's based on his experience. You can disagree with the second point, but extrapolating that to calling S-Express a racist is deeply unfair.


----------



## S-Express (23 Sep 2016)

Bollo said:


> As I've read it, S-Express is making two points, and I hope he'll correct me if I'm wrong, that
> 
> based on his personal experience, BC is an inclusive organisation and
> 
> promotional material that doesn't include BAME models isn't necessarily and purposefully racist. It's more important to promote genuine diversity than think you've solved the problem by including a few non-White faces in a video.



In a nutshell - cheers fella 

Inclusivity - it's far more important to deliver it than to aspire to it.


----------



## huwsparky (23 Sep 2016)

Bollo said:


> @S-Express seems to be taking a lot of heat for this and I honestly don't think it's deserved.
> 
> First off, the thread was not about diversity, it was about a business deal between two organisations. BC and HSBC might not be shining examples of ethnic goodness, but they're no better or worse than any other large, British organisation. How it transformed into this is still a mystery to me.
> 
> ...



For sure, to me, the 'mob' in this thread have much more of a racial motive than @S-Express has shown. He's made it clear that he just wants to see people on bikes, end of.

He's done well really, we all know what they say about arguing with idiots...


----------



## Scoosh (23 Sep 2016)

*MOD NOTE:*
Having moved a long way off the topic of the switch from SKY to HSBC as the funding behind BC and aired all sorts of different opinions - generally in a civil manner - it's time to Close this thread now.

Some posts have been Deleted and some Edited to maintain the general civility of the thread.

Thank you.


----------

