# Commuting in a short dress - Recommended!



## Sara_H (19 Sep 2011)

Two days a week I work office hours in normal clothes (as opposed to uniform - I'm a nurse). 

Commuting I usually wear leggings, t-shirt, trainers etc

Today, one of my office days, I decided I couldn't be bothered to get canged after work- chucked my cycling clothes my bag and peddalled off.

I was wearing a just above knee length dress, which became considerably sorter when I got on the bike.

Have to say - found the drivers loads more considerate than usual today - can't think whyy? One even pulled out of the cycle lane for me!


----------



## Banjo (19 Sep 2011)

I could try that, dont think it would have the same effec t though


----------



## fossyant (19 Sep 2011)

Could be very dangerous you know, lots of crashes


----------



## goody (19 Sep 2011)

You'd probably get just as much attention if you kept your uniform on!


----------



## Fab Foodie (19 Sep 2011)

I find people give me a wide berth when I wear a short dress ... on or off the bike ....


----------



## Sara_H (19 Sep 2011)

goody said:


> You'd probably get just as much attention if you kept your uniform on!



Never thought of that - Brings back memories of Nerys Hughes!


----------



## Norm (19 Sep 2011)

I... umm.. well... but... how about... 

Nope, I have nothing.


----------



## buggi (19 Sep 2011)

i'm gonna have to go one better now. 

where did i put my bikini???


----------



## Sara_H (19 Sep 2011)

Must admit - dismounting was tricky - dress got caught on saddle, took a bit of sorting out!


----------



## Sara_H (19 Sep 2011)

buggi said:


> i'm gonna have to go one better now.
> 
> where did i put my bikini???



Funny - OH suggested someting similar!


----------



## biggs682 (19 Sep 2011)

not sure if anybody would notice if i wore a dress on my commute , sure aint going to try .

but keep it up


----------



## Msmancunia (19 Sep 2011)

I've noticed a similar thing - although I don't wear a dress to cycle home. I've got a 13 mile each way commute so a dress just isn't practical, BUT, I have noticed that I get treated a lot nicer when I have my long blonde hair in a ponytail down my back rather than tucked into my collar. Drivers are also a lot more courteous when I wear a pink cycling jacket too.


----------



## YahudaMoon (19 Sep 2011)

This thread is useless without pictures


----------



## dawesome (19 Sep 2011)

Yep, pics or it didn't happen.


----------



## Sara_H (19 Sep 2011)

dawesome said:


> Yep, pics or it didn't happen.



None are available - unless I got caught on helmet cams along the way!


----------



## Red Light (19 Sep 2011)

Just watch out you don't get arrested!


----------



## gbb (19 Sep 2011)

YahudaMoon said:


> This thread is useless without pictures



I can't understand how this thread got to the 13th reply before someone asked that


----------



## totallyfixed (19 Sep 2011)

Msmancunia said:


> I've noticed a similar thing - although I don't wear a dress to cycle home. I've got a 13 mile each way commute so a dress just isn't practical, BUT, I have noticed that I get treated a lot nicer when I have my long blonde hair in a ponytail down my back rather than tucked into my collar. Drivers are also a lot more courteous when I wear a pink cycling jacket too.



You are so right, my better half has a long commute, mostly on country lanes, in the daylight she has her hair down and is treated considerately, but in the dark she tucks it away for obvious reasons.


----------



## rowan 46 (20 Sep 2011)

doesn't work for me. Perhaps you have to be female?


----------



## zacklaws (20 Sep 2011)

I always give girls on bikes with short dresses a wide berth too when I'm in my car. Its called perving, how else are you going to get your nearside wing mirror into the right position to see whats on show.


----------



## rsvdaz (20 Sep 2011)

YahudaMoon said:


> This thread is useless without pictures






dawesome said:


> Yep, pics or it didn't happen.



+3


----------



## Silver Fox (20 Sep 2011)

YahudaMoon said:


> This thread is useless without pictures



Indeed ...


----------



## CopperCyclist (20 Sep 2011)

How many road bikes drafted you rather than overtook?


----------



## Andrew_P (20 Sep 2011)

edited by moi!


----------



## fimm (20 Sep 2011)

I guess there's a more serious point to be made about attitudes to woman in general - there's "Oh, female legs, let's have a look" and "Oh, woman = incompetant road user (female driver jokes, anyone?), must give them a wide berth" and "well I'm quite happy to cut up that MAMIL 'cos they're all @rseholes but I'm not going to cut up a WOMAN...". I'm not sure how much difference it makes whether I wear trousers or a skirt to cycle - I have short hair so I don't know how obviously female I am from behind.


----------



## BSRU (20 Sep 2011)

LOCO said:


> could you fit a bike cam only fit it the wrong way round, might convince me to view a You tube cycle vid..



I tried that yesterday, I now have a nice one hour long view of my crotch, in 1080p HD .
Not sure many people would want watch a 60 minute video of a male cyclists Lycra clad crotch, although it could more interesting than some of my other uploads.


----------



## Beebo (20 Sep 2011)

CopperCyclist said:


> How many road bikes drafted you rather than overtook?




I have never done such a thing, how dare you even suggest it Officer!!!


----------



## Bman (20 Sep 2011)

At the beginning of summer when the weather started to warm up and the legs came out, I noticed more drivers hanging back, waiting for a sensible time to overtake. 

It took a few days to collate the results, but all these drivers that hung back, were female 

So it works both ways I think. 

I still notice it now (at this time of year). When a driver sits behind me longer than normal, the drivers are (almost) always female.


----------



## Andrew_P (20 Sep 2011)

*They pass me with a sick bag


----------



## User169 (20 Sep 2011)

Red Light said:


> Just watch out you don't get arrested!



Hhhmmm. That got Van Moof a huge amount of publicity. The more cynical might suppose they made it all up (the cyclist being an employee of Van Moof and all).


----------



## Red Light (20 Sep 2011)

Bongman said:


> I still notice it now (at this time of year). When a driver sits behind me longer than normal, the drivers are (almost) always female.



They're probably all nurses taking a professional interest


----------



## the reluctant cyclist (20 Sep 2011)

Jesus What the HELL is that?!!!! ^^


----------



## User169 (20 Sep 2011)

the reluctant cyclist said:


> Jesus What the HELL is that?!!!! ^^



Hincapie's leg.


----------



## ianrauk (20 Sep 2011)

That is vile


----------



## abo (20 Sep 2011)

BSRU said:


> I tried that yesterday, I now have a nice one hour long view of my crotch, in 1080p HD .
> Not sure many people would want watch a 60 minute video of a male cyclists Lycra clad crotch, although it could more interesting than some of my other uploads.



There are websites for just about anything these days... You might make a few quid


----------



## Bman (20 Sep 2011)

Red Light said:


> They're probably all nurses taking a professional interest




I'm quite happy that my legs look nothing like that!


----------



## Red Light (20 Sep 2011)

Delftse Post said:


> Hincapie's leg.



Sean Yates' legs look very similar but yes those are George's legs.


----------



## Red Light (20 Sep 2011)

Bongman said:


> I'm quite happy that my legs look nothing like that!



Yes, but the nurses need to slow down just to check whether they are or not.


----------



## Red Light (20 Sep 2011)

Delftse Post said:


> Hhhmmm. That got Van Moof a huge amount of publicity. The more cynical might suppose they made it all up (the cyclist being an employee of Van Moof and all).



Maybe but OTOH the NY police have form.

[media]
]View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ&feature=player_embedded[/media]


One of the funniest cycling videos around.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

@ OP - Was this you per change?


----------



## User169 (20 Sep 2011)

Red Light said:


> One of the funniest cycling videos around.



 That's excellent!


----------



## Sheffield_Tiger (20 Sep 2011)

Just watch out for those trikes, so low to the ground!

If you're following one and he suddenly starts to adjust his rear-view mirror....


----------



## BenM (20 Sep 2011)

> I have short hair so I don't know how obviously female I am from behind.


Girls look quite different to boys from the back - even when riding a bike... Sometimes it takes me ages to decide though 

B.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

I commute in full lycra if I'm going to Regents Park for laps after work but otherwise I usually wear a short skirt/dress and leggings (it's only 2 miles). I'm pretty certain I get more close passes and experience more careless driving in the lycra. So much so that I have now added a gym style skirt to my lycra (also because it's getting a bit thin over the arse and I don't want to but new stuff yet!). It may be the placebo effect but I think I get treated better with the skirt on - if looking "girly" keeps the white van men and HGV drivers from trying to squash me then so be it (doesn't work on Addison Lee drivers though)! Instead of getting abuse I'm now getting told I'm "quite fast for a bird".

And anyway I happen to think a short skirt and road shoes is a pretty good look!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

I always ride in lycra and never a dress. Plenty of close passes.

My neighbours downstairs have recently gotten into cycling and they're a couple. When he's gone out riding with her he's noticed that if she's ina summer dress and has her long blonde hair down she gets lots of honks and comments from drivers...

How crap...and I'd say than Fimm's post about attitudes is very pertinent for how all cyclists are being treated on the roads.


----------



## Red Light (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> How crap...and I'd say than Fimm's post about attitudes is very pertinent for how all cyclists are being treated on the roads.



And not just drivers. There seem to be a lot of unreformed male cyclists on this forum too judging by the posts in this thread. <ducks and runs for cover>


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Red Light said:


> And not just drivers. There seem to be a lot of unreformed male cyclists on this forum too judging by the posts in this thread. <ducks and runs for cover>



Absolutely, it's been like a perv fest..oh post photos etc etc.
When does that change? Come on fellas you're all cyclists - let's be respectful to women please? We don't like to be treated as a block of meat on fora or in life.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Absolutely, it's been like a perv fest..oh post photos etc etc.
> When does that change? Come on fellas you're all cyclists - let's be respectful to women please? We don't like to be treated as a block of meat on fora or in life.



Oh come on, can you not take a joke? I worked in an office where I was one of only three men. The women there were terrible for remarks about how men looked. We didn't take offence!


----------



## Norm (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Absolutely, it's been like a perv fest..oh post photos etc etc.
> When does that change? Come on fellas you're all cyclists - let's be respectful to women please? We don't like to be treated as a block of meat on fora or in life.


It takes a bit to make my jaw drop but I struggle to imagine how anyone would think it appropriate to ask a complete stranger to shoot a video up her own skirt whilst cycling.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> It takes a bit to make my jaw drop but I struggle to imagine how anyone would think it appropriate to ask a complete stranger to shoot a video up her own skirt whilst cycling.



Norm I think it was meant as a joke!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Oh come on, can you not take a joke? I worked in an office where I was one of only three men. The women there were terrible for remarks about how men looked. We didn't take offence!



I wouldn't think that's pleasant either

This is the thing, how come you didn't comment or Red Lights observations and chose to pick me up on mine?
Joke or not, unless it's picked up how will things change generally?

Take the issue seriously and don't denigrate into posts about posting photos etc. This happens a lot with threads that women start, its get into this little pattern of posting stupid things and actually has been at a level in the past where women forummers have felt that it's made the environment less pleasant.

It's not actually funny for me as I've mentioned elsewhere, the hassle I get just going down the high street in Jeans and a waterproof jacket with honks, blokes commenting and seeing me as something they want to shag, being polite and saying no thanks leads to a barrage of abuse and comments of it's just a complement.

Actually, a complement is about me as a person, not as to whether you want to **** me or not and not to be seen as a pretty thing only.
That is the difference. It's a thin edge of a wedge AFS.

PS don't read being offended into my posts- regardless of joke or not (ps it's a crass and crap joke) I asking you to look at the wider picture


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> I wouldn't think that's pleasant either
> 
> This is the thing, how come you didn't comment or Red Lights observations and chose to pick me up on mine?
> Joke or not, unless it's picked up how will things change generally?
> ...



I think it is safer if I just say nothing. My god I thought I was unstable!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I think it is safer if I just say nothing. My god I thought I was unstable!



Excuse me? Now that is offensive AFS.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

I don't know, I perve on blokes all the time :-) If manipulating these simple creatures by wearing a short skirt gets us treated better then so be it!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

AFS can you not see how it may not be appropriate or pleasant to make jokes about shooting videos up someones' skirt and posting photos of riding in a short skirt?

It's pervy and sexist and not at all funny and calling me unbalanced is downright low - learn to debate of a forum ffs.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> I don't know, I perve on blokes all the time :-) If manipulating these simple creatures by wearing a short skirt gets us treated better then so be it!



Becs, you know I don't agree with you on this issue.

I'd rather be treated a certain way and get things done as a merit of what I choose to do rather than flashing a bit of tit and leg to get my way. It's manipulative and does everyone male and female a disservice.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> AFS can you not see how it may not be appropriate or pleasant to make jokes about shooting videos up someones' skirt and posting photos of riding in a short skirt?
> 
> It's pervy and sexist and not at all funny and calling me unbalanced is downright low - learn to debate of a forum ffs.



It is hard to debate with someone who does not get a joke!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Whether it's a joke or not, it's not appropriate for the thread.

Whether a person finds it funny is not a strong point to start from re debate.

It sounds like you're trying to play derailment bingo.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Joke or not, it's pervy. Yes or no?


----------



## Theseus (20 Sep 2011)

Seems to me that as a bloke we just can't win.

Some women don't see the problem with using thier charms to influence men.
Some women are offended if men notice or comment on thier charms.

If all women were in the latter category I would fear for the continuation of the species. Fortunately there are enough of the former.


----------



## fossyant (20 Sep 2011)

AFS you are over-stepping the mark. Do what you said a page back - keep motormouth shut. You'll only dig a deeper hole, time to stop digging.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Becs, you know I don't agree with you on this issue.
> 
> I'd rather be treated a certain way and get things done as a merit of what I choose to do rather than flashing a bit of tit and leg to get my way. It's manipulative and does everyone male and female a disservice.



Sure I'd never use "feminine charms" to get ahead in something that matters, like a career etc (in fact I think feminine charms are a hindrance in a lot of cases) but for something superficial like this I don't see a problem with it.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Touche said:


> Seems to me that as a bloke we just can't win.
> 
> Some women don't see the problem with using thier charms to influence men.
> Some women are offended if men notice or comment on thier charms.
> ...



All I am interested is respect and equality.
I'm not talking about being offended about comments made about my appearance what becomes tiresome is when people become rude, lewd or abusive about it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Joke or not, it's pervy. Yes or no?



Many posts on here ask for photographic evidence , a new bike, a close pass, etc. I read it in that style so no it was not pervy IMHO or as pervy as the chap you filmed his lycra covered crotch!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

fossyant said:


> AFS you are over-stepping the mark. Do what you said a page back - keep motormouth shut. You'll only dig a deeper hole, time to stop digging.



??????????????????


----------



## rsvdaz (20 Sep 2011)

I wish women would honk at me....I would positively encourage it


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> Sure I'd never use "feminine charms" to get ahead in something that matters, like a career etc (in fact I think feminine charms are a hindrance in a lot of cases) but for something superficial like this I don't see a problem with it.



You see this is it, it's hard to draw those demarcations when you use 'charms' (lol the word made me smile, I don't know why) in one context, there's sometimes expectations to use it in another context. Actually, as you mention being female can be a hinderance..why is this? that's what dissapoints me.

What I'm saying in regards to cycling in short skirts- it's not always the case that you get a positive experience. Like I mentioned re my neighbour she got shedloads of grief - wouldn't it be great if people, male and female could wear what they want without negative hassle?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Sara_H said:


> Two days a week I work office hours in normal clothes (as opposed to uniform - I'm a nurse).
> 
> Commuting I usually wear leggings, t-shirt, trainers etc
> 
> ...



Were you offended by this alteration in treatment?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Many posts on here ask for photographic evidence , a new bike, a close pass, etc. I read it in that style so no it was not pervy IMHO or as pervy as the chap you filmed his lycra covered crotch!



oh come on.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

rsvdaz said:


> I wish women would honk at me....I would positively encourage it



heheh!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> heheh!



So why was that post OK?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

No one's asking him to post pictures of himself in lycra or revealing clothes.
And I am not humourless, it's commenting on the difference between the way men and women are treated and was probably and attempt at diffusing the thread.


----------



## Beebo (20 Sep 2011)

Blimey, I leave the office for a quick lunchtime snack and what seemed to me to be a light hearted chat has turned into some mad cycle perv thread in no time at all. I would have hoped that all the comments were made and taken in jest.

Everyone, stand back from the keyboard there's nothing to see here!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Beebo said:


> Blimey, I leave the office for a quick lunchtime snack and what seemed to me to be a light hearted chat has turned into some mad cycle perv thread in no time at all. I would have hoped that all the comments were made and taken in jest.
> 
> Everyone, stand back from the keyboard there's nothing to see here!



Many of us did take them that way


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

How would you guys feel if it was your mum/sister on this board? Would you all make the same comments?
Let's make cycling and the forum a bit more inclusive please?

Why is it appropriate for women to put up with jokes of a sexual nature?

It's about the act of objectifying someone not about being offended about attraction. I'm not into the idea of repressed victorian era sexuality but it's about respect and not seeing a woman as something that is just a sexual object.


----------



## Mad at urage (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Absolutely, it's been like a perv fest..oh post photos etc etc.
> When does that change? Come on fellas you're all cyclists - let's be respectful to women please? We don't like to be treated as a block of meat on fora or in life.


I've been wolf-whistled, asked for photographs, been told "lovely legs, can I stroke them?" by women (and occasionally by men), never had a problem with it and see no reason why it doesn't (apparently) work both ways.

I'm an adult and can cope with remarks and advances, I too can say "no thanks": I'd expect an adult female to be able to handle it too.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> How would you guys feel if it was your mum/sister on this board? Would you all make the same comments?
> Let's make cycling and the forum a bit more inclusive please?



I would have no issue with making such comments. They are adults and can differentiate between humour and crude/lewd behaviour!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> I've been wolf-whistled, asked for photographs, been told "lovely legs, can I stroke them?" by women (and occasionally by men), never had a problem with it and see no reason why it doesn't (apparently) work both ways.
> 
> I'm an adult and can cope with remarks and advances, I too can say "no thanks": I'd expect an adult female to be able to handle it too.


----------



## rsvdaz (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> I've been wolf-whistled, asked for photographs, been told "lovely legs, can I stroke them?" by women (and occasionally by men), never had a problem with it and see no reason why it doesn't (apparently) work both ways.




Lucky sod!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> I've been wolf-whistled, asked for photographs, been told "lovely legs, can I stroke them?" by women (and occasionally by men), never had a problem with it and see no reason why it doesn't (apparently) work both ways.
> 
> I'm an adult and can cope with remarks and advances, I too can say "no thanks": I'd expect an adult female to be able to handle it too.



What response do you get when you politely say no thanks?

When I've said that I've got a barrage of nastiness calling me a ****ing bitch. That's not quite the same is it?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> What response do you get when you politely say no thanks?
> 
> When I've said that I've got a barrage of nastiness calling me a ****ing bitch. That's not quite the same is it?



I find this amazing. I know many female cyclists who do not get treated like this. Where do you live? Do you look like a supermodel?


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> You see this is it, it's hard to draw those demarcations when you use 'charms' (lol the word made me smile, I don't know why) in one context, there's sometimes expectations to use it in another context. Actually, as you mention being female can be a hinderance..why is this? that's what dissapoints me.



In my field (veterinary/academia) women are paid less than men (about £6000 less on average based on last years SPVS survey). We're also less likely to become partners/senior academics as it assumed we will have babies and come back part time. Clients still assume that a male vet is great until proven crap but a female vet is crap until proven good (in large animal medicine at least). It's just the way it is.

So yes if getting my cleavage out gets me a few free drinks and putting on a skirt when I cycle gets me treated a little better I don't have any problem doing it. If I get abuse from ignorant drivers I just ignore it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> In my field (veterinary/academia) women are paid less than men (about £6000 less on average based on last years SPVS survey). We're also less likely to become partners/senior academics as it assumed we will have babies and come back part time. Clients still assume that a male vet is great until proven crap but a female vet is crap until proven good (in large animal medicine at least). It's just the way it is.
> 
> So yes if getting my cleavage out gets me a few free drinks and putting on a skirt when I cycle gets me treated a little better I don't have any problem doing it. If I get abuse from ignorant drivers I just ignore it.



Sadly that is true in just about all sectors of industry


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

London

It's not even just cycling mate - it's not pleasant.

And yes I am pretty but I find it's often a hinderance (and haha before anyone starts-sod off to photo requests!!)


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Sadly that is true in just about all sectors of industry



That's why I question all these 'jokes'.

Becs I am sad to read that but not surprised.
Getting equality is a difficult thing and on a subtle level getting people on a cycling forum to question the 'jokes' is a start.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Sadly that is true in just about all sectors of industry



Yep. It sucks, but I don't think it should preclude a bit of light hearted banter.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> London
> 
> It's not even just cycling mate - it's not pleasant.
> 
> And yes I am pretty but I find it's often a hinderance (and haha before anyone starts-sod off to photo requests!!)



I wonder how many ladies on here experience similar behaviour. I lived and worked in London for many years and did not witness such behaviour towards Ladies when they were out and about safe for the occasional drunken letch!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> Yep. It sucks, but I don't think it should preclude a bit of light hearted banter.



Neither do I. Hence joining in.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I wonder how many ladies on here experience similar behaviour. I lived and worked in London for many years and did not witness such behaviour towards Ladies when they were out and about safe for the occasional drunken letch!



This is the thing though, experiences between women as well as between men and women and men and men will vary because we're all very different in appearances etc.

An added complication is I am Chinese, so that makes the whole idea of 'exoticness' a factor. It's very sad.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> London
> 
> It's not even just cycling mate - it's not pleasant.
> 
> And yes I am pretty but I find it's often a hinderance (and haha before anyone starts-sod off to photo requests!!)



I can concur - Grace is very pretty :-)


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> I can concur - Grace is very pretty :-)



out the door you!!!

Want to swap for a week?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> This is the thing though, experiences between women as well as between men and women and men and men will vary because we're all very different in appearances etc.
> 
> An added complication is I am Chinese, so that makes the whole idea of 'exoticness' a factor. It's very sad.



I wonder if this is more of a race thing than a gender issue?


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I wonder how many ladies on here experience similar behaviour. I lived and worked in London for many years and did not witness such behaviour towards Ladies when they were out and about safe for the occasional drunken letch!



I get loads: Ranging from fat c*nt to "I wish my face was that saddle", how much did you pay for those tits to the simple stare and dribble. I just feel sorry for these people that feel the need to do this and go on with my day, after all you can't reason with a moron! :-)


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> This is the thing though, experiences between women as well as between men and women and men and men will vary because we're all very different in appearances etc.
> 
> *An added complication is I am Chinese, so that makes the whole idea of 'exoticness' a factor.* It's very sad.



It's only a race thing in that Chinese girls are always hot!








In case you cant tell, the above was a joke!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I wonder if this is more of a race thing than a gender issue?



It's both, one is more subtle than the other.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Rob3rt said:


> It's only a race thing in that Chinese girls are always hot!
> 
> 
> 
> ...









I am tempted to hit you with a crank arm.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> I get loads: Ranging from fat c*nt to "I wish my face was that saddle", how much did you pay for those tits to the simple stare and dribble. I just feel sorry for these people that feel the need to do this and go on with my day, after all you can't reason with a moron! :-)



I agree those type of comments are very sad indeed.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> It takes a bit to make my jaw drop but I struggle to imagine how anyone would think it appropriate to ask a complete stranger to shoot a video up her own skirt whilst cycling.




Wot E said!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> It's both, one is more subtle than the other.



Is this also cultural expectation? I get the impression (and I may be wrong) that ladies are treated with more respect in China then here.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I agree those type of comments are very sad indeed.



This is why I get irked.

If daily life is like this for women, it's not good.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> I get loads: Ranging from fat c*nt to "I wish my face was that saddle", how much did you pay for those tits to the simple stare and dribble. I just feel sorry for these people that feel the need to do this and go on with my day, after all you can't reason with a moron! :-)




I wish I could learn that, it would make my days so much quieter! :-(


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I agree those type of comments are very sad indeed.



So when I get nice ones they make me smile a little


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> This is why I get irked.
> 
> If daily life is like this for women, it's not good.



There is however a big difference between a light-hearted comment about show us a photo of you on the bike in your short skirt. The video comment I am sure was very much tongue in cheek.


----------



## Mad at urage (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> What response do you get when you politely say no thanks?
> 
> When I've said that I've got a barrage of nastiness calling me a ****ing bitch. That's not quite the same is it?


On occasion I've had adverse reactions: Two in particular stand out, one a (male) manager who wanted me to sleep with him and his partner "Come on, I know all you English students are up for it" ... I got another job and worked my notice out, refusing him on a daily basis; the other a female acquaintance who kept up an email harassment for a while (I sent them to the junk bin). It does happen both ways, it can be distressing if you allow it to be but the adult response is to accept the complements and pass over the idiots.



ttcycle said:


> This is the thing though, experiences between women as well as between men and women and men and men will vary because we're all very different in appearances etc.
> 
> An added complication is I am Chinese, so that makes the whole idea of 'exoticness' a factor. It's very sad.


Yes, we all have different experiences - you'll note that some - well, one (male?) poster on here has expressed 'jealousy' because I've had this. 'Exotic' is in the beholder also, both of those who seriously 'hassled' me (above) were foreigners, so I was the 'exotic' one to them.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I wonder how many ladies on here experience similar behaviour. I lived and worked in London for many years and did not witness such behaviour towards Ladies when they were out and about safe for the occasional drunken letch!


I think it's less common than it used to be, but it's still around. It's when it tips over in to (this may not be quite the word I'm looking for, but it's the best I can do) hatred that the need for lines becomes apparent. I may be a bit over-concerned, but when The Kid comes home bearing tales of male 'flirtation' turning in to aggression I start getting all Valerie Solanis.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Is this also cultural expectation? I get the impression (and I may be wrong) that ladies are treated with more respect in China then here.



I grew up here so am British culturally with small amounts of chinese culture (another long topic there)

Look into Chinese history, bound feet, women marry into families as slaves and child bearers. The value of the son and the abandonment of Chinese female babies.

More women in Hong Kong are in high powered positions compared to the UK but it's not necessarily more respectful in lots of ways.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> So when I get nice ones they make me smile a little



So what would you class as a nice comment? Nice legs? May I say you are a very beautiful Lady? You don't sweat much for a fat lass? (ducks  )


----------



## Andrew_P (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> It takes a bit to make my jaw drop but I struggle to imagine how anyone would think it appropriate to ask a complete stranger to shoot a video up her own skirt whilst cycling.


It was a joke and actually it was more a comment on how boring I find Cycle You Tube vids and the plethra of them in communting vis a vie near misses, clearly lost in translation. If it caused any offence I would be surprised but would apologise if it had!


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Is this also cultural expectation? I get the impression (and I may be wrong) that *ladies are treated with more respect in China then here.*



Are you kidding?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> I grew up here so am British culturally with small amounts of chinese culture (another long topic there)
> 
> Look into Chinese history, bound feet, women marry into families as slaves and child bearers. The value of the son and the abandonment of Chinese female babies.
> 
> More women in Hong Kong are in high powered positions compared to the UK but it's not necessarily more respectful in lots of ways.



OK it was just a thought.

I was referring to the current situation and not history. Most cultures have some horrendous skeletons in their closets.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Rob3rt said:


> Are you kidding?



No. I did say I may be wrong.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Really, all I ask is that people think before they post, there is a difference between sharing a joke with someone you know and lewd lazy but jokey posting.


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> No. I did say I may be wrong.



Some of my gf's family dont even think women should be educated.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> No. I did say I may be wrong.



As an example in HK, young women are called 'pretty girl' as a standard form of colloquial address.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Rob3rt said:


> Some of my gf's family dont even think women should be educated.



Then based upon your experience I am wrong.


----------



## Aperitif (20 Sep 2011)

I get comments about my leg bits from males and females. I can only deduce that they have a scar fetish, but there's nothing wrong with 'window shopping' I suppose.
I draw the line at a bandage though...

Lukesdad has got nice legs. Proper cyclist.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> As an example in HK, young women are called 'pretty girl' as a standard form of colloquial address.



OK I am wrong. I live and learn


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

It's not surprising that the men want to keep the ladies in the kitchen really. Have you ever tasted Cantonese pastries?  YUM!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Rob3rt said:


> It's not surprising that the men want to keep the ladies in the kitchen really. Have you ever tasted Cantonese pastries?  YUM!



ey that's sexist.

Men can cook very well too. My dad's a mean cook but sadly doesn't make dimsum


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Rob3rt said:


> It's not surprising that the men want to keep the ladies in the kitchen really. Have you ever tasted Cantonese pastries?  YUM!



You sexist pig!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> ey that's sexist.
> 
> Men can cook very well too. My dad's a mean cook but sadly doesn't make dimsum



Vegetarian dimsum. Yummy!!!


----------



## Aperitif (20 Sep 2011)

2+2=5 - my dim sums are excellent.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

oh pastries...depends on which one it is...please send some to me




So I can err test them for tastiness...


----------



## CopperCyclist (20 Sep 2011)

Its all got far too PC for this PC. Wheres the door...!


----------



## Bman (20 Sep 2011)

I think there is some equality. Thats why I pointed out that men also get treated differently by the opposite sex.

I agree though, some of the posts in this thread go a bit too far.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Aperitif said:


> 2+2=5 - my dim sums are excellent.



indeed!!


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> ey that's sexist.
> 
> Men can cook very well too. My dad's a mean cook but sadly doesn't make dimsum



Women make the lunch, the men make the dinner 

Now fetch me a nice cold bubble tea!


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> So what would you class as a nice comment? Nice legs? May I say you are a very beautiful Lady? You don't sweat much for a fat lass? (ducks  )




Ha Ha. The first 2 would make me smile, the first would be ignored, the second may even get a polite thank you (if he was hot  ), the last one would either get ignored, or potentially told to f*ck off if I was having a bad day.


I have a pretty thick skin (I grew up being bullied for my apearance - 6ft tall at a young age, a disasterously short hair cut and pretty big shoulders for a girl - evoked a lot of comments from the small minds at the village comp) but I can see how these comments can be intimidating.

I would be a lot less stoic if the harrassment was coming from a collegue though!

P.S. Teef your legs are awesome you sexy beast - pictures please?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> Ha Ha. The first 2 would make me smile, the first would be ignored, the second may even get a polite thank you (if he was hot  ), the last one would either get ignored, or potentially told to f*ck off if I was having a bad day.
> 
> 
> I have a pretty thick skin (I grew up being bullied for my apearance - 6ft tall at a young age, a disasterously short hair cut and pretty big shoulders for a girl - evoked a lot of comments from the small minds at the village comp) but I can see how these comments can be intimidating.
> ...



Yo have a good sense of humour


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Yo have a good sense of humour




That's what they say about us fat birds!  



Actually in all fairness I'm not fat, I've just got big tits and "childbearing hips" and I like it!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

I got loads of grief as well at school for different reasons (grew up in a mainly white area and wanted actually to do well academically)

I have a thick skin for lots of other things but this and a few small areas do get on my nerves. Probably due to tolerance levels being exhausted some time ago.

Robert - bubble tea is disgusting.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> That's what they say about us fat birds!
> 
> 
> 
> Actually in all fairness I'm not fat, I've just got big tits and "childbearing hips" but I like it!



I am resisting the temptation to ask for photographic proof


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> I got loads of grief as well at school for different reasons (grew up in a mainly white area and wanted actually to do well academically)
> 
> I have a thick skin for lots of other things but this and a few small areas do get on my nerves. Probably due to tolerance levels being exhausted some time ago.
> 
> *Robert - bubble tea is disgusting.*



No way, opinion invalid!!!


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> I think it's less common than it used to be, but it's still around. *It's when it tips over in to (this may not be quite the word I'm looking for, but it's the best I can do) hatred* that the need for lines becomes apparent. I may be a bit over-concerned, but when The Kid comes home bearing tales of male 'flirtation' turning in to aggression I start getting all Valerie Solanis.



It's interesting - the relationship between courtesy and misogyny. You get a feeling for it over the years, but it's very difficult to explain, not least on tinternet when a variety of defensive responses about "harmless" behaviour inevitably volley in the moment anyone objects to anything on grounds of sexism. It's not true that most women are indoctrinated by radical feminists into being shirty about attentively courteous behaviour from men. Some love it, others find it patronising, most make distinctions based on context. But I can confidently assert that a lot of the threatening everyday situations in which women find themselves begin with unwanted attention that is characterised by exaggerated courtesy. The hostility was always there, just below the surface, and if you look closely you'll see that the supposed politeness is often nothing more than an adversarial strategy and a form of manipulation.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Rob3rt said:


> No way, opinion invalid!!!



It's lumps of gelatinous starch suspended in tea, not my thing.


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> It's lumps of gelatinous starch suspended in tea, not my thing.



The actual bubbles are a bit much if drank regularly but the milk tea itself is lovely.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Rob3rt said:


> The actual bubbles are a bit much if drank regularly but the milk tea itself is lovely.



I love "masala chai latte" but I also love it in masala chai sans milk form


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> It's interesting - the relationship between courtesy and misogyny. You get a feeling for it over the years, but it's very difficult to explain, not least on tinternet when a variety of defensive responses about "harmless" behaviour inevitably volley in the moment anyone objects to anything on grounds of sexism. It's not true that most women are indoctrinated by radical feminists into being shirty about attentively courteous behaviour from men. Some love it, others find it patronising, most make distinctions based on context. But I can confidently assert that a lot of the threatening everyday situations in which women find themselves begin with unwanted attention that is characterised by exaggerated courtesy. The hostility was always there, just below the surface, and if you look closely you'll see that the supposed politeness is often nothing more than an adversarial strategy and a form of manipulation.



It is about subtleties and context - something which is hard to explain on a forum


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> It is about subtleties and context - something which is hard to explain on a forum



I think that works both ways. Jokes can easily be misinterpreted as misogynistic comments.

Eg. Based on the one photo I have seen of TC I'd say she is a very good looking Lady. Is that a compliment or a creepy comment with subtext?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I think that works both ways. Jokes can easily be misinterpreted as misogynistic comments.
> 
> Eg. Based on the one photo I have seen of TC I'd say she is a very good looking Lady. Is that a compliment or a creepy comment with subtext?



Did you understand TC's comment at all?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Did you understand TC's comment at all?



Yes I did. That was why my reply was to you!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I think that works both ways. Jokes can easily be misinterpreted as misogynistic comments.
> 
> Eg. Based on the one photo I have seen of TC I'd say she is a very good looking Lady. Is that a compliment or a creepy comment with subtext?



I can't comment on TC- her feelings would be subjective to her surely?
It is also a comment that would be thought about in terms of tone, voice, intention, body language etc.

I'd still like to ask you; what you thought TC said in her comment.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> I can't comment on TC- her feelings would be subjective to her surely?
> It is also a comment that would be thought about in terms of tone, voice, intention, body language etc.



Exactly. So immediately taking offence to a comment that most understand to have been made in jest is uncalled for.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Firstly, (bloody hell) I am not offended - annoyed more like.

And that's not what she's talking about or at least my reading of her comment.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Firstly, (bloody hell) I am not offended - annoyed more like.
> 
> And that's not what she's talking about or at least my reading of her comment.



I was referring to your reaction to this thread.


----------



## YahudaMoon (20 Sep 2011)

This is my favourite thread at the moment


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Please read TC's comment again AFS and let me know how it supports what you have just written??

And for the record my reaction isn't to the thread - do you remember what I wrote?
It's to comments that were a bit lewd and out of context to the OP.

If the OP finds her experience of cycling in a short skirt is beneficial then that's her call - not everyone's experience will be the same and that's their call.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Please read TC's comment again AFS and let me know how it supports what you have just written??
> 
> And for the record my reaction isn't to the thread - do you remember what I wrote?
> It's to comments that were a bit lewd and out of context to the OP.
> ...



My comments were aimed at you and not TC. I used her as an example as she is the only female CC member I have seen a photo of.

It was a reaction to the thread and not the OP.


----------



## NormanD (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I am resisting the temptation to ask for *photographic *proof


PHEWWWW! just checking that said Photographic and not porxxx ... I'll stop there


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

NormanD said:


> PHEWWWW! just checking that said Photographic and not porxxx ... I'll stop there


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> My comments were aimed at you and not TC. I used her as an example as she is the only female CC member I have seen a photo of.
> 
> It was a reaction to the thread and not the OP.



You used her comment to support yours- all I'm asking is how her comment supports the one you posted?

You've failed to answer this.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

well, to go back to the beginning - there's a market (of sorts) in pictures that pry. And, as we know, because so very many people use photobucket and facebook and the like, a photograph or a video (of anything at all) can be wrenched out of whatever context it aspired to and be whizzed around the world in seconds.

so.......going on about videos of women in short skirts is a bit iffy. It's paying court to this market in concupiscience (I may come back and think of a better word than that......). I imagine that the thought of an intrusive image of yourself bouncing around the ionosphere, and coming to rest on a thousand screens is not a happy one. 

I think TT's reaction to some of the posts made in this thread is perfectly sensible. It wouldn't do any of us any harm to think about it.


----------



## Jezston (20 Sep 2011)

I just noticed the photo I posted earlier of a fully dressed girl on a bike was deleted.

The thing sticking out between her legs was a BIKE SADDLE.

A BIKE SADDLE.

If it was that big a deal shouldn't I at least been given an explanation?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> You used her comment to support yours- all I'm asking is how her comment supports the one you posted?
> 
> You've failed to answer this.



I didn't use her comment to support mine. Seeing her post reminded me I had seen a photo of her and thus my post.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Jezston said:


> I just noticed the photo I posted earlier of a fully dressed girl on a bike was deleted.
> 
> The thing sticking out between her legs was a BIKE SADDLE.
> 
> ...



What photo was it? Mine is still there!!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I think that works both ways. Jokes can easily be misinterpreted as misogynistic comments.
> 
> Eg. Based on the one photo I have seen of TC I'd say she is a very good looking Lady. Is that a compliment or a creepy comment with subtext?



Are you sure you didn't attempt to use TC's post to back your up?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Are you sure you didn't attempt to use TC's post to back your up?



I am 100% positive.


----------



## Jezston (20 Sep 2011)

It was a girl in shorts riding on a bike with a tan coloured saddle, which if you looked at it with a certain mindset might lead you to believe the young lady had something sticking out of her shorts that a lady shouldn't have.


----------



## Norm (20 Sep 2011)

Jezston said:


> If it was that big a deal shouldn't I at least been given an explanation?


Why do think that?

AFS, you really should have followed your own counsel rather than, yet again, pretending something was posted as a joke and then making it obvious that you are merely hiding behind that excuse.

And those who consider sexist jokes and comments to be appropriate, then cogitate a while on the difference between a conversation or a text message and a posting on an internet forum. 

As I said earlier, I wonder whether the person who asked for the up-skirt video would have walked up to a stranger and requested something similar and, if not, whether they'd care to suggest why not.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Jezston said:


> It was a girl in shorts riding on a bike with a tan coloured saddle, which if you looked at it with a certain mindset might lead you to believe the young lady had something sticking out of her shorts that a lady shouldn't have.



Obviously not family suitable


----------



## 007fair (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle I think you brought your own preconceived ideas and negative experience and applied them to this thread - thus making it much more sexist than it was ever intended to be. The thread was started by a female and some of the first contributions were female - all posts were in good humour! (I agree that maybe LOCO's video comment was too far but it was made worse by subsequent comments)


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Ok, If you say so but reading the flow of postings, this doesn't look to be the case but I'll take that as said.

There have been several people who have said that some of the comments have been a bit below the mark but why are you only questioning about my response? Think about that? And before you accuse me again of being imbalanced, have a think first.

Edit;

In response to AFS


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> Why do think that?
> 
> AFS, you really should have followed your own counsel rather than, yet again, pretending something was posted as a joke and then making it obvious that you are merely hiding behind that excuse.
> 
> ...



Norm - Are you a physiologist or psychiatrist. If not please do not take it upon yourself to make assumptions about the meanings of and motivations behind my posts.


----------



## Jezston (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> Why do think that?



So I would know what I had done wrong and be careful not to do it again?

If I hadn't decided to look through the thread from page one I would have never even known it had been deleted.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Ok, If you say so but reading the flow of postings, this doesn't look to be the case but I'll take that as said.
> 
> There have been several people who have said that some of the comments have been a bit below the mark but why are you only questioning about my response? Think about that? And before you accuse me again of being imbalanced, have a think first.
> 
> ...



I think 007fair has just answered the question you asked me no my behalf.


----------



## Mad at urage (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> It's interesting - the relationship between courtesy and misogyny. You get a feeling for it over the years, but it's very difficult to explain, not least on tinternet when a variety of defensive responses about "harmless" behaviour inevitably volley in the moment anyone objects to anything on grounds of sexism. It's not true that most women are indoctrinated by radical feminists into being shirty about attentively courteous behaviour from men. Some love it, others find it patronising, most make distinctions based on context. But I can confidently assert that a lot of the threatening everyday situations in which women find themselves begin with unwanted attention that is characterised by exaggerated courtesy. The hostility was always there, just below the surface, and if you look closely you'll see that the supposed politeness is often nothing more than an adversarial strategy and a form of manipulation.


Some years ago I was walking to a meeting with a female colleague, a manager for whom I had huge respect (getting me to say that about management is itself an Achievement, but she was simply the best manager I've yet to meet). As I am taller with longer legs (walk faster), I strode out in front to hold the door open for her. No ulterior motive, I felt (and feel) no physical attraction for her, it's the sort of thing I've done and do for colleagues male and female over the years. Her response was interesting:
"Do NOT walk in front of me like that! I am NOT a second-class citizen to walk in your wake"
Now let it be said that we were on good, professional terms. At the time I reported to her, I shortly moved on (for career reasons) to a parallel reporting stream, we remained friends; but her reaction was very specific, to a particular 'old-world' courtesy with which habit I was raised. I did hold the door for her occasionally after that, never had the same reaction (probably because I was so puzzled by - and questioned, her reaction on that occasion).


----------



## 007fair (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> Why do think that?
> 
> AFS, you really should have followed your own counsel rather than, yet again, pretending something was posted as a joke and then making it obvious that you are merely hiding behind that excuse.
> 
> ...



Surely your interpretation of what LOCO said is worse than what was actually stated!


----------



## mickle (20 Sep 2011)

007fair said:


> ttcycle I think you brought your own preconceived ideas and negative experience and applied them to this thread - thus making it much more sexist than it was ever intended to be. The thread was started by a female and some of the first contributions were female - all posts were in good humour! (I agree that maybe LOCO's video comment was too far but it was made worse by subsequent comments)



Huh?


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

007fair said:


> ttcycle I think you brought your own preconceived ideas and negative experience and applied them to this thread - thus making it much more sexist than it was ever intended to be. The thread was started by a female and some of the first contributions were female - all posts were in good humour! (I agree that maybe LOCO's video comment was too far but it was made worse by subsequent comments)


I think you need to take on board the thought that humour is not a get out of jail free card.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

I think yourself and 007 are a bit mixed up as to the whether posters are male/female- on the first page, apart from the OP one woman who responds.

Yes, I have had a load of negative experience but it doesn't mean that some of the posting hasn't been lazily sexist.


----------



## Norm (20 Sep 2011)

007fair said:


> Surely your interpretation of what LOCO said is worse than what was actually stated!


Poor attempt at a side track.

Whatever it was that was said, would he have said the same to a stranger in the street?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

And just to mix it up a little 007, I think we all come to this board with preconceived ideas.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> And those who consider sexist jokes and comments to be appropriate, then cogitate a while on the difference between a conversation or a text message and a posting on an internet forum.




As TT said it's all about context. Being a generally friendly place (although I guess this is "commuting"  ) I automatically take the "sexist" comments on here to be harmless banter. Like I said there's a big difference between sexual harrassment from a collegue and having a bit of a laugh on a forum, or even lewd comments from pricks in the street.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> Poor attempt at a side track.
> 
> Whatever it was that was said, would he have said the same to a stranger in the street?



Maybe it is an indication that a forum environment engenders a feeling of friendship and people do not see each other as strangers?

Cross post with Becs.

If a cyclist you had never met before said "I'm cold" how many of us would say MTFU? It is a regular comment used on many threads!


----------



## 007fair (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> I think you need to take on board the thought that humour is not a get out of jail free card.



I threw myself into the deep end of this thread .. not entirely sure why! 

The humour was started by a female and other females contributed .. seriously - were the first page of comments that bad or do they now look bad because of the way they have discussed afterwards? Was the OP offended ?

its only a get out of jail card if its hiding something which I don't think it was.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

You also have to be aware that contexts will be different for each individual.

Becs, you acknowledge that the comments on board can be sexist whether jokey or not.
I think other posters may not recognise the comments as being sexist as has been alluded to by Dellzeqq and TC.


----------



## Norm (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Maybe it is an indication that a forum environment engenders a feeling of friendship and people do not see each other as strangers?


With all due respect, are you holding yourself out as a psychologist or psychiatrist by suggesting that you know the meanings and motivations behind the posts of others?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

007fair said:


> I threw myself into the deep end of this thread .. not entirely sure why!
> 
> The humour was started by a female and other females contributed .. seriously - were the first page of comments that bad or do they now look bad because of the way they have discussed afterwards? Was the OP offended ?
> 
> its only a get out of jail card if its hiding something which I don't think it was.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> With all due respect, are you holding yourself out as a psychologist or psychiatrist by suggesting that you know the meanings and motivations behind the posts of others?



Not at all. I am asking a question not making a statement.


----------



## 007fair (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> As TT said it's all about context. Being a generally friendly place (although I guess this is "commuting"  ) I automatically take the "sexist" comments on here to be harmless banter. Like I said there's a big difference between sexual harrassment from a collegue and having a bit of a laugh on a forum, or even lewd comments from pricks in the street.



some sense! Thank you


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> You also have to be aware that contexts will be different for each individual.
> 
> Becs, you acknowledge that the comments on board can be sexist whether jokey or not.
> I think other posters may not recognise the comments as being sexist as has been alluded to by Dellzeqq and TC.



Totally, some are definitely sexist. Coming from a very boistrous, rugby type family and always being "one of the lads" I have just accepted this as part of life and give as good as I get, but I understand that this is not the same for everybody and people should be mindful of that when they post. . . . . 

. . . I'm still waiting for a picture of Teef's legs though


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

oh dear - poor Teef, he's got a perv to deal with!

I come from a family of men too and grew up as a massive tomboy (despite what they wanted for a girl).

Thanks, it is thinking about stuff- I'm quite tough and vocal, there are some forummers who aren't and may possibly lurk or find CC distasteful for those reasons. 

Just use some grey matter that's all- that's all I'm asking.


----------



## 007fair (20 Sep 2011)

Norm said:


> Poor attempt at a side track.
> 
> Whatever it was that was said, would he have said the same to a stranger in the street?



He possibly could have ! ..but only after a few jokes similar the first ones in this thread which lead him to believe that the the comment would be taken in humour Please note - I don't believe he was seriously asking for an upskirt vid If he was - I fully agree with you


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> oh dear - poor Teef, he's got a perv to deal with!




 

Just adding some equality  


Are you coming out for a ride on Sunday, Grace?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Will need to check Becs, not sure yet.


----------



## Mad at urage (20 Sep 2011)

[QUOTE 1551105"]
This shows that many men have no idea of the harassment women have to put up with.
[/quote]
In the context of the "harassment" present in this thread, it does nothing of the sort. That some women have had worse experiences is well understood. That some men have been raped is also understood. That rape and sexual assault tends to be perpetrated on the weakest in society (whoever these may be) and that for some time our society trained women to be weaker than men is all understood.

But that is not what this thread is about. If an adult is worried about simple "I'd like a picture of that" comments then that adult has issues. No-one was threatened in this thread, no-one assaulted, no-one put in fear of a stalker.

Edit: The whole premise of this thread is based on the fact that men react differently to the sight of an (attractive? I have no idea!) woman in a skirt rather than an androgynous 'cyclist' figure. If you want to undo that reaction, I'm afraid you have whole millenia of evolution to deal with. What happened? People on the thread reacted to the idea of a women in a skirt  surprise!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> In the context of the "harassment" present in this thread, it does nothing of the sort. That some women have had worse experiences is well understood. That some men have been raped is also understood. That rape and sexual assault tends to be perpetrated on the weakest in society (whoever these may be) and that for some time our society trained women to be weaker than men is all understood.
> 
> But that is not what this thread is about. If an adult is worried about simple "I'd like a picture of that" comments then that adult has issues. No-one was threatened in this thread, no-one assaulted, no-one put in fear of a stalker.


----------



## Dan B (20 Sep 2011)

Seen recently thanks to a similar conversation in an entirely different place: check your privilege


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> Some years ago I was walking to a meeting with a female colleague, a manager for whom I had huge respect (getting me to say that about management is itself an Achievement, but she was simply the best manager I've yet to meet). As I am taller with longer legs (walk faster), I strode out in front to hold the door open for her. No ulterior motive, I felt (and feel) no physical attraction for her, it's the sort of thing I've done and do for colleagues male and female over the years. Her response was interesting:
> "Do NOT walk in front of me like that! I am NOT a second-class citizen to walk in your wake"
> Now let it be said that we were on good, professional terms. At the time I reported to her, I shortly moved on (for career reasons) to a parallel reporting stream, we remained friends; but her reaction was very specific, to a particular 'old-world' courtesy with which habit I was raised. I did hold the door for her occasionally after that, never had the same reaction (probably because I was so puzzled by - and questioned, her reaction on that occasion).



Ah! The old Opening Doors chestnut! I nearly incorporated that into my previous post but thought it wouldn't be necessary. Forgive my questioning the detail of your story, but is for real? I ask because I consider myself a radical feminist and I have yet to meet any woman who actually gets offended by a man happening to hold a door open for her, or one who imports to it an "ulterior motive". Some men go to slightly absurd lengths to be seen to be opening doors for women, and this can be a bit patronising, but it's hardly up there with the major feminist issues of our time. I think of it as a bit of a myth (the function of which is to associate claims to equality with absurd demands), along the same lines as councils banning Christmas and hypothetical people being offended by manhole covers.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> In the context of the "harassment" present in this thread, it does nothing of the sort. That some women have had worse experiences is well understood. That some men have been raped is also understood. That rape and sexual assault tends to be perpetrated on the weakest in society (whoever these may be) and that for some time our society trained women to be weaker than men is all understood.
> 
> But that is not what this thread is about. If an adult is worried about simple "I'd like a picture of that" comments then that adult has issues. No-one was threatened in this thread, no-one assaulted, no-one put in fear of a stalker.



Errr excuse me? When I'm asking people to think a bit more before posting mindless twaddle you're saying I have issues? That is one hell of a momentous jump.


----------



## XmisterIS (20 Sep 2011)

*High five! Pepsi max.*


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

007fair said:


> I threw myself into the deep end of this thread .. not entirely sure why!


can't help you there!



007fair said:


> The humour was started by a female and other females contributed .. seriously - were the first page of comments that bad or do they now look bad because of the way they have discussed afterwards? Was the OP offended ?


it's a bit like Wittgenstein and apples (I can hear TC warming up her keyboard to tell me that it's not like Wittgensteing and apples at all, but I'm hoping she'll stay her hand...). If I say apple then you think that I mean what you think of as an apple - so it behoves each one of us to take a little care. Personally I thought that some of the posts were a bit rank. Personally I think an apology is in order. 

On the other hand, if we were ever to meet, you'd probably work out that the person who posts on these forums is by a long way a lot more polite and a lot less foul-mouthed than the person that rides his bicycle. Setting aside Shaun's swear-filter, I like to think of myself as having a few social graces, which is why one poster didn't get told to '**** off and die, you pervy little ****', a remark that could be, alternatively, deeply offensive or sidesplittingly funny. I'll vote for both.

It's the blindness of humour that makes it, from time to time, so repellent.


----------



## growingvegetables (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> I think TT's reaction to some of the posts made in this thread is perfectly sensible. It wouldn't do any of us any harm to think about it.



+1 - and written with more grace than I could muster; thank you


----------



## adds21 (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Ah! The old Opening Doors chestnut! I nearly incorporated that into my previous post but thought it wouldn't be necessary. Forgive my questioning the detail of your story, but is for real? I ask because I consider myself a radical feminist and I have yet to meet any woman who actually gets offended by a man happening to hold a door open for her, or one who imports to it an "ulterior motive". Some men go to slightly absurd lengths to be seen to be opening doors for women, and this can be a bit patronising, but it's hardly up there with the major feminist issues of our time. I think of it as a bit of a myth (the function of which is to associate claims to equality with absurd demands), along the same lines as councils banning Christmas and hypothetical people being offended by manhole covers.



Nope. It's happened to me too. I'll often hold doors open but have been told (once) I was sexist for doing so. Unfortunately, I was so flabbergasted at the time I didn’t have time to argue.

I should point out that I'll hold doors open for either sex, and am more than happy to go through a door being help open for me by a woman. It's not a sexist thing, it's just a politeness thing.


----------



## Dan B (20 Sep 2011)

I get in terrific trouble for holding doors open. Apparently you're not supposed to do it if they're revolving doors though

I mean, how was I supposed to know?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Dan B said:


> I get in terrific trouble for holding doors open. Apparently you're not supposed to do it if they're revolving doors though


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Dan B said:


> Seen recently thanks to a similar conversation in an entirely different place: check your privilege



Like it!


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Dan B said:


> Seen recently thanks to a similar conversation in an entirely different place: check your privilege


the dogs and lizards bit is a tad over-extended, but, that's well put. 

I'll own up to having had to google 'cisgender'!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Dan B said:


> Seen recently thanks to a similar conversation in an entirely different place: check your privilege



As there seemed to be no malice between the two the Lizard could have asked the dog to agree to a one day with AC on and one day with AC off.


----------



## growingvegetables (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Errr excuse me? When I'm asking people to think a bit more before posting mindless twaddle you're saying I have issues? That is one hell of a momentous jump.



 As immutable as Godwin's Law, and an almost infallible technique - when defending the (border-line?) indefensible, suggest the other person "has issues".

+1 for "asking people to think a bit more before posting mindless twaddle".


----------



## lukesdad (20 Sep 2011)

Aperitif said:


> I get comments about my leg bits from males and females. I can only deduce that they have a scar fetish, but there's nothing wrong with 'window shopping' I suppose.
> I draw the line at a bandage though...
> 
> Lukesdad has got nice legs. Proper cyclist.




Why thank you dear !


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> oh dear - poor Teef, he's got a perv to deal with!
> 
> I come from a family of men too and grew up as a massive tomboy (despite what they wanted for a girl).
> 
> ...


that's a difficult one. 

When you look at the number of women running in London (over 50% in my neck of the woods) then you're bound to wonder why more women don't cycle - if I had to make a guess I'd say that women made up no more than 20% of commuting cyclists except on a couple of major routes. It may be that the attitude in bike shops is patronising, or that the attitude of people, motorists, pedestrians or even other cyclists is demeaning or intimidating. I've certainly noticed that Susie gets all kinds of grief from motorists when it's not apparent she's with me. 

So there is a problem, and one would hope that CC would be part of the answer to the problem, rather than a contributing factor. 

I'm not claiming to know the answer, not least because the proportion of women on the FNRttC has been stuck at 25% for two years, having briefly risen to 30% in 2009. I've been told that Ditchling Beacon puts women off the ride to Brighton, and this may well be true, and I've been told that the attitude of some of the men on the ride is off-putting and this may also be true - I've certainly had to take one participant aside and put him straight, but there's always a bit of boysiness that some women will be comfortable with and some women will not be comfortable with. 

In the end we're not all going to get along all of the time, but it doesn't hurt to think about things when somebody as wise as TT makes a point, not least because sexism runs through all our lives.

And, to repeat, 'humour' is just as likely to offend as anything else.


----------



## 007fair (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> can't help you there!
> 
> it's a bit like Wittgenstein and apples (I can hear TC warming up her keyboard to tell me that it's not like Wittgensteing and apples at all, but I'm hoping she'll stay her hand...). If I say apple then you think that I mean what you think of as an apple - so it behoves each one of us to take a little care. Personally I thought that some of the posts were a bit rank. Personally I think an apology is in order.
> 
> ...



Hadn't heard of wittgenstein - a philosopher?	I'll look 'it' up as I have a passing interest 
The problem is that there is a huge difference in what some people find offensive and what others do. You say an apology is required - this _may_ be true - but that would be to the OP. An apology is not due to any random person who would find the comment offensive IF it were aimed at them - especially after making the comment more explicit and worse than it was. 

I agree care is required - of course	But there is the flipside - not to take all slightly 'sexist' joking too seriously too quick


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

007fair said:


> *Hadn't heard of wittgenstein - a philosopher?	I'll look 'it' up as I have a passing interest *
> The problem is that there is a huge difference in what some people find offensive and what others do. You say an apology is required - this _may_ be true - but that would be to the OP. An apology is not due to any random person who would find the comment offensive IF it were aimed at them - especially after making the comment more explicit and worse than it was.
> 
> I agree care is required - of course	But there is the flipside - not to take all slightly 'sexist' joking too seriously too quick



It certainly is a "passing" interest if you haven't heard of Wittgenstein...

I see you didn't bother to read Dan's link...


----------



## Crackle (20 Sep 2011)

Do you know. I didn't read this thread because I didn't think I'd ever commute in a short dress. Then I saw it had reached 14 pages and had a look in. I should've guessed really.


----------



## clarion (20 Sep 2011)

How has this got to 14 pages? About eight pages back, a forummer asked for a bit of thought & respect from people making comments. Is that so difficult or complicated?

fwiw: My personal experience is that, riding with my partner, who has long hair, sometimes wears short dresses over her cycling shorts, and sometimes wears pink lycra or helmet, is that I get a lot more trouble from drivers acting like pillocks than she does. But I've only once been wolf whistled recently, and it means something rather different from what it does when at a woman.


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

Crackle said:


> Do you know. I didn't read this thread because I didn't think I'd ever commute in a short dress. Then I saw it had reached 14 pages and had a look in. I should've guessed really.



Funny, I did exactly the same.

And I now regret my latest comment on Crock's CC Christmas meet-up thread, posted _before_ I started to read this thread!


----------



## Msmancunia (20 Sep 2011)

I think there's a fine line between banter and sexist remarks at the best of times, and a lot of what is said is usually backed up when you know the person you're talking to, or if you're able to read their body language and so on. On an internet forum, you usually don't have either! So things can be taken out of context to a certain extent and I think you do have to tred with a little caution.

Plus people have different opinions on all this - not better or worse, just different. What's offensive to one person is just harmless banter to another. There's a Grill the Gash (hate that word) in the MTB forum on BR at the moment that was opened up by two girls who I have no doubt could hold their own if being abused on their bike on the street. It's not my kind of thing, but if that's something they want to do, then fair enough. 

So, different strokes for different folks, and people should bear that in mind. I don't know anyone on this board personally, but I'd be a lot more careful/guarded about what I said in a personal comment on here, than to someone I knew in my personal life for precisely that reason.


----------



## MissTillyFlop (20 Sep 2011)

Sometimes I would just like someone to point out a positive attribute (or just lie if there aren't any!)when I'm cycling, rather than pointing out the colour of my hair or my skin.

For the record, I am quite aware that I am ginger. I have this great new invention called EYES.

Having said this, I did once work for a guy who asked me to sew all the costumes because I was a "lady of a certain age".

Surprisingly, I did not use the c-bomb, but rather explained that I would be happy to if he showed me how (I am quite a good seamstress, but I wasn't giving him the satisfaction). And I would happily return the favour should his computer break down...


----------



## fimm (20 Sep 2011)

I am going to add, rather cautiously, that I also felt that one or two of the early remarks were a bit inevitable. Request for pictures, sigh... I contemplated saying something and then didn't... and when I got back from a meeting I found the thread had grown quite a lot - first I thought it was going to end in an enormous arguement but it seems to be managing to remain a bit more thoughtful.


----------



## srw (20 Sep 2011)

007fair said:


> The humour was started by a female and other females contributed .. seriously - *were the first page of comments that bad* or do they now look bad because of the way they have discussed afterwards? Was the OP offended ?
> 
> its only a get out of jail card if its hiding something which I don't think it was.




Yes, they were that bad. Bad enough that despite being a very shaggy dog with all the privileges the world can throw at me I shut away the thread until I spotted some intelligent people contributing. Arguably I should have stepped in earlier - and frankly it's utterly irrelevant whether the OP was offended.


----------



## BrumJim (20 Sep 2011)

[QUOTE 1551142"]
A woman once commented on my legs when I was at traffic lights. It felt good. If I had to put up with men talking to my chest or commenting on my appearance above my personality on a daily basis I don't imagine I'd be so happy.
[/quote]

In legs Vs personality, I'm afraid your legs win every time.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

adds21 said:


> Nope. It's happened to me too. I'll often hold doors open but have been told (once) I was sexist for doing so. Unfortunately, I was so flabbergasted at the time I didn’t have time to argue.
> 
> I should point out that I'll hold doors open for either sex, and am more than happy to go through a door being help open for me by a woman. It's not a sexist thing, it's just a politeness thing.



OK - a proposition for you. The Significance of Opening Doors looms larger in the consciousness of anti-feminists than it does in that of feminists. For me, it's a non-issue, a red herring, an irrelevance. The repeated invocation of The Opening Doors Question (which isn't much of a question at all) is essentially a bolstering of the flimsiest kind of masculinities and an attempt to trivialise serious feminist concerns.


----------



## Little yellow Brompton (20 Sep 2011)

Red Light said:


> Sean Yates' legs look very similar but yes those are George's legs.



But why?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> But why?


Bust veins/blood v's I believe.


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

Little yellow Brompton said:


> But why?




He swallowed his shoe laces.  

Varicose veins: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varicose_veins


----------



## Mad at urage (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Ah! The old Opening Doors chestnut! I nearly incorporated that into my previous post but thought it wouldn't be necessary. Forgive my questioning the detail of your story, but is for real? I ask because I consider myself a radical feminist and I have yet to meet any woman who actually gets offended by a man happening to hold a door open for her, or one who imports to it an "ulterior motive". Some men go to slightly absurd lengths to be seen to be opening doors for women, and this can be a bit patronising, but it's hardly up there with the major feminist issues of our time. I think of it as a bit of a myth (the function of which is to associate claims to equality with absurd demands), along the same lines as councils banning Christmas and hypothetical people being offended by manhole covers.


Yes it is for real, it happened. I was a surprised as you seem to be because this was a rational person who I'd long known and the incident was out of place.

It's not the only time I've been 'told off' for holding a door open though - that happens, even when I've been holding it for the past _n_ people (of mixed ages and sexes). Whether you think it a myth or not, I'm afraid it's just one of the things we males have to deal with .


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

And not for the squeamish: Sean Yates' legs - http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?q=se...rt=80&ndsp=11&ved=1t:429,r:6,s:80&tx=97&ty=88


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

Varicose veins are grim!


----------



## Dan B (20 Sep 2011)

growingvegetables said:


> +1 for "asking people to think a bit more before posting mindless twaddle".



It's a nice idea, but it'd be even better to think a bit more _instead of_ posting mindless twaddle ;-)


----------



## Fnaar (20 Sep 2011)

I thought this was going to be like a resurrection of the "girls in lycra shorts" thread


----------



## Rob3rt (20 Sep 2011)

I do recall somewhere seeing a mention cycling specific skirts!


----------



## Mad at urage (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Errr excuse me? When I'm asking people to think a bit more before posting mindless twaddle you're saying I have issues? That is one hell of a momentous jump.


I don't know whether you have issues (and frankly it doesn't interest me) but you could consider whether you were worried about simple "I'd like a picture of that" comments. As I said, no-one was threatened in this thread, no-one assaulted, no-one put in fear of a stalker.

IME internet forums are places where people post mindless twaddle a lot. Usually I find the best thing to do is ignore it YMMV.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> I don't know whether you have issues (and frankly it doesn't interest me) but you could consider whether you were worried about simple "I'd like a picture of that" comments. As I said, no-one was threatened in this thread, no-one assaulted, no-one put in fear of a stalker.
> 
> IME internet forums are places where people post mindless twaddle a lot. Usually I find the best thing to do is ignore it YMMV.


----------



## YahudaMoon (20 Sep 2011)

This is still my favourite post at the moment


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

YahudaMoon said:


> This is still my favourite post at the moment



Yep and you pretty much started its current direction with............



YahudaMoon said:


> This thread is useless without pictures


----------



## Mad at urage (20 Sep 2011)

YahudaMoon said:


> This is still my favourite post at the moment


How about https://www.cyclechat.net/


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> How about http://www.cyclechat...e__pid__1849366



How dare the French use a Lady to sell whatever it is they are selling?!


----------



## YahudaMoon (20 Sep 2011)

LOL


----------



## VamP (20 Sep 2011)

Red Light said:


> They're probably all nurses taking a professional interest




Somebody has to ask...


How does he shave them?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

VamP said:


> Somebody has to ask...
> 
> 
> How does he shave them?



With great care!!!!!


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> Yes it is for real, it happened. I was a surprised as you seem to be because this was a rational person who I'd long known and the incident was out of place.
> 
> It's not the only time I've been 'told off' for holding a door open though - that happens, even when I've been holding it for the past _n_ people (of mixed ages and sexes). Whether you think it a myth or not, *I'm afraid it's just one of the things we males have to deal with* .



Poor dears. By "myth", I do not mean something which is necessarily false, but a narrative and/or symbolic means of making sense of the world. We tell ourselves stories that construct or reinforce particular meanings. This process itself is being made visible on this very thread - someone asks you to think more carefully about something, and you respond with a tenuously connected narrative about something that happened "some time ago". You may think you are telling a story about how feminist hypersensitivity has resulted in men's ordinary courtesy or harmless gallantry being misunderstood, but I read it as a defensive anti-feminist cliche that deliberately uses triviality to forestall serious discussion. Either way, talking about Opening Doors usually gets us precisely nowhere.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Poor dears. By "myth", I do not mean something which is necessarily false, but a narrative and/or symbolic means of making sense of the world. We tell ourselves stories that construct or reinforce particular meanings. This process itself is being made visible on this very thread - someone asks you to think more carefully about something, and you respond with a tenuously connected narrative about something that happened "some time ago". You may think you are telling a story about how feminist hypersensitivity has resulted in men's ordinary courtesy or harmless gallantry being misunderstood, but I read it as a defensive anti-feminist cliche that deliberately uses triviality to forestall serious discussion. Either way, talking about Opening Doors usually gets us precisely nowhere.



Oddly about 20 years ago I was criticised by my then GF for not opening the car door for her. I had to explain that the Central Locking was buggered and I could only unlock the car from the drivers side. I read nothing into that but this bit of the thread just reminded me.


----------



## srw (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Oddly about 20 years ago I was criticised by my then GF for not opening the car door for her. I had to explain that the Central Locking was buggered and I could only unlock the car from the drivers side. I read nothing into that but this bit of the thread just reminded me.



...which I think makes TC's point very nicely.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Oddly about 20 years ago I was criticised by my then GF for not opening the car door for her. I had to explain that the Central Locking was buggered and I could only unlock the car from the drivers side. I read nothing into that but this bit of the thread just reminded me.



AFS, I don't mean to be rude, but my previous post was a sort of attenuated version of "WHY THE **** CAN'T WE HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT SEXISM WITHOUT PEOPLE BANGING ON IRRELEVANTLY ABOUT OPENING DOORS?"


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

srw said:


> ...which I think makes TC's point very nicely.



Ha! You got there first again.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> AFS, I don't mean to be rude, but my previous post was a sort of attenuated version of "WHY THE **** CAN'T WE HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT SEXISM WITHOUT PEOPLE BANGING ON IRRELEVANTLY ABOUT OPENING DOORS?"



Did you miss the part where I said I was reminded of it. It was an aside nothing more.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Rob3rt said:


> I do recall somewhere seeing a mention cycling specific skirts!




Brilliant things - lyra-clad arse coverage with no extra seams - I am a convert. My mate used to wear "skorts" on our rides - padded shorts with an in built skirt. Looked nice.

I do wonder why more girls don't cycle when a lot run, from experience the lewd comments are far more plentiful when an element of bouncing is introduced! 

I work in a predominantly female office and the 2 of us that cycle in could be described as having more assertive personality types. The other girls all cite being scared of the traffic as a reason not to give it a go. I can see this being the case in London (I felt the same until I gave myself a stress fracture running and had to get on the bike because I couldn't walk to the bus stop without making it worse!) - I wonder if the proportion of female cyclists increases outside of big cities?

FWIW Dell I have never found the fnrttc rides anything other than polite . . . . . except for when Big Martin farted right next to me at a p*ncture stop!


----------



## Silver Fox (20 Sep 2011)

Fnaar said:


> I thought this was going to be like a resurrection of the "girls in lycra shorts" thread



Were there any pics on that thread  .

Yes, yes I know, back to the naughty step.


----------



## twobiker (20 Sep 2011)

Knowing the abrasions I received from falling off in cycle shorts , are the ladies on the forum not concerned about incurring scars, and also Mrs Twobiker and I have had numerous talks with our 18yr old Daughter now she goes to nightclubs about what may be seen as leading guys on, by accepting drinks etc.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Oddly about 20 years ago I was criticised by my then GF for not opening the car door for her. I had to explain that the Central Locking was buggered and I could only unlock the car from the drivers side. I read nothing into that but this bit of the thread just reminded me.


there you go! 

(except that srw beat me to it!)

(your package is in the post - but missed the last pick-up of the day)


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Did you miss the part where I said I was reminded of it. It was an aside nothing more.



I know - I'm just taking out a bit of general thread exasperation on you. It's a post timing thing, not a particular objection to what you wrote...


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> I know - I'm just taking out a bit of general thread exasperation on you. It's a post timing thing, not a particular objection to what you wrote...



That's ok.


----------



## srw (20 Sep 2011)

twobiker said:


> Knowing the abrasions I received from falling off in cycle shorts , are the ladies on the forum not concerned about incurring scars, and also Mrs Twobiker and I have had numerous talks with our 18yr old Daughter now she goes to nightclubs about what may be seen as leading guys on, by accepting drinks etc.


Why is that her problem and not a problem that lecherous men ought to sort out?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> (your package is in the post - but missed the last pick-up of the day)



Cheers. Good Man


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

srw said:


> Why is that her problem and not a problem that lecherous men ought to sort out?



Who is the one most likely to get hurt?


----------



## srw (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Ha! You got there first again.



That's what comes of preparing presentations for the IT department - you look for distractions.


----------



## srw (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Who is the one most likely to get hurt?



Why is that her problem and not one that lecherous men ought to sort out?

Or, to put it another way, why should I stop cycling because there are some idiots in cars out there?


----------



## twobiker (20 Sep 2011)

srw said:


> Why is that her problem and not a problem that lecherous men ought to sort out?


Its a joint problem, why would she expect some one to buy her a drink,she is perfectly capable of getting her own,and why has the drink buyer got to be lecherous, when I went to clubs, they used to let in the pretty girls in jeans but made the guys wear smart casual, none of the girls complained then about it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

srw said:


> Why is that her problem and not one that lecherous men ought to sort out?
> 
> Or, to put it another way, why should I stop cycling because there are some idiots in cars out there?


Ok problem is not the right word. However if yot are aware that certain actions may bring certain consequences that are undesirable to you is it easier to change your behaviour or that of others.
I am not for one minute condoning such action but simply asking a question.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> I don't know whether you have issues (and frankly it doesn't interest me) but you could consider whether you were worried about simple "I'd like a picture of that" comments. As I said, no-one was threatened in this thread, no-one assaulted, no-one put in fear of a stalker.
> 
> IME internet forums are places where people post mindless twaddle a lot. Usually I find the best thing to do is ignore it YMMV.



No, you see, for me ignoring it allows the status quo to continue.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Ok problem is not the right word. However if yot are aware that certain actions may bring certain consequences that are undesirable to you is it easier to change your behaviour or that of others.
> I am not for one minute condoning such action but simply asking a question.



hmmm, AFS this really does then verge into very not good territory

As for the opening doors thing- I couldn't give a toss if someone opens a door for me, as TC has said it's not even the big thing here.


----------



## Chromatic (20 Sep 2011)

Is the pub shut for refurbishment then?


----------



## twobiker (20 Sep 2011)

Having for some reason been knocked off twice in 4 months, the idea of wearing long sleeves and tracksuit trousers seems to appeal to me, that gravel rash bl***y hurt, and being a first on scene at a fatal motorbike/Jcb crash ,the thought of falling off wearing less not more is enough to make me ughh at the idea. Not all drivers are dangerous, not all men are lecherous, and not all ladies would use whatever they had to get on, but there are exceptions to every rule.


----------



## Dan B (20 Sep 2011)

twobiker said:


> I went to clubs, they used to let in the pretty girls in jeans but made the guys wear smart casual, none of the girls complained then about it.


Ew. Ben Sherman land


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> hmmm, AFS this really does then verge into very not good territory
> 
> As for the opening doors thing- I couldn't give a toss if someone opens a door for me, as TC has said it's not even the big thing here.


Why is it heading into bad territory. In terms of presertation the first thing to do is ensure you control as much of your environment as possible.


----------



## 007fair (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> I see you didn't bother to read Dan's link...



I did	But it misses the point which is that not all people find the same things offensive

This is not to trivialise the point it does make which is a good one.


----------



## sunnyjim (20 Sep 2011)

Whene'er to Drink you are inclin'd, 
Or cutty-sarks run in your mind, 
Think ye may buy the joys o'er dear; 
Remember Tam o' Shanter's mare. 


Not a new problem, this men and short skirts thing.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Why is it heading into bad territory. In terms of presertation the first thing to do is ensure you control as much of your environment as possible.




Well, you're not asking to control the environment though are you?


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Why is it heading into bad territory. In terms of presertation the first thing to do is ensure you control as much of your environment as possible.



I find this statement quite extraordinary. Are we supposed to accept a situation in which young women approach a night out with friends as if they are wildebeest attempting to cross the Mara?


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

007fair said:


> I did	But* it misses the point which is that not all people find the same things offensive*
> 
> This is not to trivialise the point it does make which is a good one.



That's not the point. That is a truism. And it doesn't miss it anyway. We're not talking about who is and isn't offended - we are talking about people taking responsibility for what they write, and taking thoughtful criticism graciously.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> That's not the point. That is a truism. And it doesn't miss it anyway. We're not talking about who is and isn't offended - we are talking about people taking responsibility for what they write, and taking thoughtful criticism graciously.



THANK YOU THE CLAUD









I get mightily tired of forummers painting a picture of me as some humourless issue laden, hysterical type.

This bandying about of the word offense- not I'm not offended; I question what you're writing- think about it from outside a narrow perspective and something might make sense.

FFS if another one tries to tar me with either being unbalanced/having issues and/or being offended.
Please read what I am writing and STOP typing words into my posts and comprehend what I am trying to say.


----------



## Andrew_P (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> That's not the point. That is a truism. And it doesn't miss it anyway. We're not talking about who is and isn't offended - we are talking about people taking responsibility for what they write, and taking thoughtful criticism graciously.


well I have edited my post, it was a joke and it was bad taste but I was trying to be a little ironic which clearly missed the spot..


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> I find this statement quite extraordinary. Are we supposed to accept a situation in which young women approach a night out with friends as if they are wildebeest attempting to cross the Mara?


Not at all. Being aware of the potential dangers is one of the best ways of controling your environment.
No Lady should be treated as a piece of meat or a thing to fu*k but an awarness that many man think that way can prevent serious inncidents.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

LOCO said:


> well I have edited my post, it was a joke and it was bad taste but I was trying to be a little ironic which clearly missed the spot..



I appreciate that you thought about it, thank you.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Not at all. Being aware of the potential dangers is one of the best ways of controling your environment.
> No Lady should be treated as a piece of meat or a thing to fu*k but an awarness that many man think that way can prevent serious inncidents.



This is very telling AFS.

Shouldn't 'the way men think' be addressed (this is what I've been trying to do on this thread before all the labels of offended and unbalanced got thrown in- ffs it's good I have a thick skin). It's taken the unacceptable behaviour (darkly, more so if it leads to violence/assault) and the person who should modify their behaviour is the woman on a night out? WHAT?

The scenario TC posted, is what you're asking for. Do you read some of these posts and actually comprehend what they're saying?!!


----------



## twobiker (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> I find this statement quite extraordinary. Are we supposed to accept a situation in which young women approach a night out with friends as if they are wildebeest attempting to cross the Mara?


We are talking about the same young, shy, retiring types who my kids have on their facebook pages at some foam party in Ibiza are we, story, Daughter at club with mates , guy comes up, asks for dance, then says"give us a kiss" she says no, so he snogs her mate, people are all different.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

twobiker, in relation to the drinks thing, I'm in agreement - this is what I was trying to touch on earlier with Becs. It does no-one any favours.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> This is very telling AFS.
> 
> Shouldn't 'the way men think' be addressed (this is what I've been trying to do on this thread before all the labels of offended and unbalanced got thrown in- ffs it's good I have a thick skin). It's taken the unacceptable behaviour (darkly, more so if it leads to violence/assault) and the person who should modify their behaviour is the woman on a night out? WHAT?
> 
> The scenario TC posted, is what you're asking for. Do you read some of these posts and actually comprehend what they're saying?!!


I could ask you the same think. How do you propose that the behaviour of young males is changed. In principle it is a great idea in the same way that making all car drivers aware of cyclists rights. Until that happens a good defensive strategy is required. It shouldn't need to be but sadly it is.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Riding in primary and defensive cycling is not an example that marries up with women dressing 'modestly' to avoid sexual assault or violence or at the smaller scale lewd comments and behaviour.

The suggestion is absurd! 

Firstly defensive cycling does not limit your freedoms does it?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Young men aren't just at issue here as we have witnessed on this very thread.

To address that, this is what I've been trying to do- get people to actually think about the impact of what they write as well as what they write in the first place.

It's about speaking to people, challenging them and setting up good examples and good role models.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> twobiker, in relation to the drinks thing, I'm in agreement - this is what I was trying to touch on earlier with Becs. It does no-one any favours.




Why shouldn't a single girl accept a drink from a guy that finds her attractive if she wants to get to know him? If dressing nicely increases the chance of this happening then so be it (perhaps in joking about it I gave the impression that I would use "the girls" to get as many drinks as possible out of any simple creature that's offering?  )


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> Why shouldn't a single girl accept a drink from a guy that finds her attractive if she wants to get to know him? If dressing nicely increases the chance of this happening then so be it (perhaps in joking about it I gave the impression that I would use "the girls" to get as many drinks as possible out of any simple creature that's offering?  )



nothing wrong with that and that's not what I'm saying, I think the transformative power of clothing for both men and women can be a great and healthy thing.

Yes, what you suggest can be empowering in some sense, but can also be disempowering. It's not taking advantage of people based on an appearance or as you have sometimes stated (equally sexist) is taking advantage and getting drinks from people due to your appearance. (EDIT: to clarify, by reducing men down to letches that will more likely buy you a drink cause you have a low cut top on - it reinforces the negative behaviour).

Isn't it much nicer to get a drink for 'getting to know' someone and their strength of personality/conversation rather than just by flashing cleavage etc etc? I speak for myself entirely but that's more satisfactory for me?

One of the problems and one of the things that I kind of find a real shame is that men and women can be so shy with approaching people they find attractive for fear of rejection.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Riding in primary and defensive cycling is not an example that marries up with women dressing 'modestly' to avoid sexual assault or violence or at the smaller scale lewd comments and behaviour.
> 
> The suggestion is absurd!
> 
> Firstly defensive cycling does not limit your freedoms does it?


No comparison is perfect and I agree that I could have chosen a better one. 

It may suprise you to know that years ago I pinned a guy to the wall in a nightclub after he repeatedly hit the girl he war with. She then began hitting me. This hasn't put me off defending a Lady.
You have a perfect right to dress however you wish but you also know that certain styles of dressing will attract more attention than others. Until all young me are given Bromide nothing will change.


----------



## Mad at urage (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Poor dears. By "myth", I do not mean something which is necessarily false, but a narrative and/or symbolic means of making sense of the world. *We tell ourselves stories that construct or reinforce particular meanings*. This process itself is being made visible on this very thread - someone asks you to think more carefully about something, and you respond with a tenuously connected narrative about something that happened "some time ago". You may think you are telling a story about how feminist hypersensitivity has resulted in men's ordinary courtesy or harmless gallantry being misunderstood, but* I read it as a defensive anti-feminist cliche that deliberately uses triviality to forestall serious discussion*. Either way, talking about Opening Doors usually gets us precisely nowhere.



Yes, you do don't you.


----------



## Aperitif (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> nothing wrong with that and that's not what I'm saying, *I think the transformative power of clothing for both men and women can be a great and healthy thing.*



I can change from shoot to potatoes at a stroke.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Excuse me? Now that is offensive AFS.



+1 afs was out of order.

this was posted whilst reading page ? of 19


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> One of the problems and one of the things that I kind of find a real shame is that men and women can be so shy with approaching people they find attractive for fear of rejection.



That is certainly an issue with men. Approaching a very attractive Lady is far more scary than approaching a plain Jane. This is possibly because the man believes that the attractive Lady has far more men to choose from than a PJ.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Not at all. Being aware of the potential dangers is one of the best ways of controling your environment.
> No Lady should be treated as a piece of meat or a thing to fu*k but an awarness that many man think that way can prevent serious inncidents.



Taking a different tack for a moment, has it occurred to anyone who has never been a young woman and is dishing out advice to young women that such advice might actually be bad advice, and that it therefore might have the opposite effect of making women more vulnerable? I hope you don't mind me saying that I find it very quaint that you refer to women as Ladies (with a capital L, no less) in this situation - it implies a certain gentility which, though well intentioned, makes a certain kind of objectification inevitable even as it argues against it. Your emphasis is not on what women might want but on how Ladies should be treated. Where is the space in this picture for young women who go out as interested in a f**k as any of the men that are offering them drinks, but would like to choose whom they have it with and on what terms? There's a supposition of innocence or naivete on the part of women and a corresponding notion that there is something necessarily darkly predatory in male sexuality that women do not instinctively understand and must guard against by treating maleness with suspicion. Actually I think it's often very easy to identify suppressed hostility in men if you know what you are looking for, but it's much more difficult if you are conflating male sexual desire with the intent to harm.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> No comparison is perfect and I agree that I could have chosen a better one.
> 
> It may suprise you to know that years ago I pinned a guy to the wall in a nightclub after he repeatedly hit the girl he war with. She then began hitting me. This hasn't put me off defending a Lady.
> You have a perfect right to dress however you wish but you also know that certain styles of dressing will attract more attention than others. Until all young me are given Bromide nothing will change.



No it doesn't surprise me AFS - you appear to through your posting styles have very traditional views of masculinity and femininity. From what I know of domestic violence, you'll find many people who have intervened who have experienced the above, in fact I was talking to a friend about it the other day. You cannot know where someone is going to go with their anger.

I question whether things will not change- why not? societal attitudes to genders will take time to address but this biological deteministic - it's hard wired bollocks, is widely unproven. It's because people don't question it and because people allow it to continue and allow it to be continually reinforced.

Let me put it to you - there was a break from my posting as I headed up the road - wore my tracksuit bottoms and my waterproof jacket - still wolf whistle etc and from what I posted earlier, I wore jeans and a waterproof.

I like some very girly clothes but I don't need to be dressed in a certain way for there to be undesirable comments etc

Address the issue of commenting and the behaviour behind it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

bromptonfb said:


> +1 afs was out of order.
> 
> this was posted whilst reading page ? of 19



I based my comment not just on reading this thread. When the Dutch lady was allegedly arrested for looking sexy a thread was started about it. TTCycle pretty much reacted in the same way on that thread as well.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> That is certainly an issue with men. Approaching a very attractive Lady is far more scary than approaching a plain Jane. This is possibly because the man believes that the attractive Lady has far more men to choose from than a PJ.



That's not necessarily but again, I'm keep pushing you on this; why do people (not just men I add)

rate each other like this?


----------



## Glow worm (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> One of the problems and one of the things that I kind of find a real shame is that men and women can be so shy with approaching people they find attractive for fear of rejection.



Aha, phew- that must be why no women ever approach me then!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Taking a different tack for a moment, has it occurred to anyone who has never been a young woman and is dishing out advice to young women that such advice might actually be bad advice, and that it therefore might have the opposite effect of making women more vulnerable? I hope you don't mind me saying that I find it very quaint that you refer to women as Ladies (with a capital L, no less) in this situation - it implies a certain gentility which, though well intentioned, makes a certain kind of objectification inevitable even as it argues against it. Your emphasis is not on what women might want but on how Ladies should be treated. Where is the space in this picture for young women who go out as interested in a f**k as any of the men that are offering them drinks, but would like to choose whom they have it with and on what terms? There's a supposition of innocence or naivete on the part of women and a corresponding notion that there is something necessarily darkly predatory in male sexuality that women do not instinctively understand and must guard against by treating maleness with suspicion. Actually I think it's often very easy to identify suppressed hostility in men if you know what you are looking for, but it's much more difficult if you are conflating male sexual desire with the intent to harm.



Absolutely.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Mad@urage said:


> Yes, you do don't you.



We all do. But only some of us are aware of it.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> No it doesn't surprise me AFS - you appear to through your posting styles have very traditional views of masculinity and femininity. From what I know of domestic violence, you'll find many people who have intervened who have experienced the above, in fact I was talking to a friend about it the other day. You cannot know where someone is going to go with their anger.
> 
> I question whether things will not change- why not? societal attitudes to genders will take time to address but this biological deteministic - it's hard wired bollocks, is widely unproven. It's because people don't question it and because people allow it to continue and allow it to be continually reinforced.
> 
> ...



I wish there was a quick solution to the problem you face. I don't believe there is. I in no way condone harassment of any kind towards Ladies. However, I have witnessed the way packs of young girls behave on nights out and TBH they put males to shame. They re-enforce the "slut" stereotype in a shameful way as much as a group of lads trying to "cop a feel" re-enforces the lechery of all males.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I based my comment not just on reading this thread. When the Dutch lady was allegedly arrested for looking sexy a thread was started about it. TTCycle pretty much reacted in the same way on that thread as well.



maybe have a think about what I'm trying to say for a change rather than labelling me as unbalanced?


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Isn't it much nicer to get a drink for 'getting to know' someone and their strength of personality/conversation rather than just by flashing cleavage etc etc? I speak for myself entirely but that's more satisfactory for me?




But when they find out I am clever they lose interest  .



BTW a lot of what I saw is meant to be taken tongue in cheek! Including the comment I made about wearing a low cut top to get drinks (I actually wear them because Gok Wan and heat magazine tell me they are best for my body shape  ). . . . . sorry!

Of course I prefer to be admired for my personality and conversation, which is why I doubt I'll find my future husband in a bar!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I wish there was a quick solution to the problem you face. I don't believe there is. I in no way condone harassment of any kind towards Ladies. However, I have witnessed the way packs of young girls behave on nights out and TBH they put males to shame. They re-enforce the "slut" stereotype in a shameful way as much as a group of lads trying to "cop a feel" re-enforces the lechery of all males.



To answer this is a long post but in short and this is why I challenge Bec's views.

Sexuality and being a sexual person is a positive thing. Being aware of yourself and comfortable in your own skin is a very healthy thing.

However, the way that objectifying both male and female (whether in a heterosexual/homosexual context) is rife is just not good as it can lead to losing sight of people for the wholeness of who they are. Being attracted to someone is not what you're mentioning above in your example.

However, I want to throw this into the ring. What men and women (God I hate this, too much of a focus on heterosexual views of the world, but I'll stick with it for now for the sake of not muddying the water) get in terms on messages in culture reinforce the idea of treating people this way. You get swathes of women who speak the language of 'ladetteism' though that's a slightly old term because it's a way to push forward in a male dominated world. If you can't beat them join them kind of idea. Encouraging looking at a person just as a sexual object. Their choice of course but in terms of mutual respect, a big step back it seems.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Taking a different tack for a moment, has it occurred to anyone who has never been a young woman and is dishing out advice to young women that such advice might actually be bad advice, and that it therefore might have the opposite effect of making women more vulnerable? I hope you don't mind me saying that I find it very quaint that you refer to women as Ladies (with a capital L, no less) in this situation - it implies a certain gentility which, though well intentioned, makes a certain kind of objectification inevitable even as it argues against it. Your emphasis is not on what women might want but on how Ladies should be treated. Where is the space in this picture for young women who go out as interested in a f**k as any of the men that are offering them drinks, but would like to choose whom they have it with and on what terms? There's a supposition of innocence or naivete on the part of women and a corresponding notion that there is something necessarily darkly predatory in male sexuality that women do not instinctively understand and must guard against by treating maleness with suspicion. Actually I think it's often very easy to identify suppressed hostility in men if you know what you are looking for, but it's much more difficult if you are conflating male sexual desire with the intent to harm.



A very good post indeed. I base my advice on looking after my younger Sister when she started going out (Not that I did a great job of it  )

My posts were based on the ideas put forward that attention of males is in the main unwanted. Of course a Lady/Woman/Girl can go out and look to get laid by whomever she chooses, just as a man can. Everyone should be free to choose how they wish to behave.

Your point about suppressed hostility is well noted as is your point about "if you know what to look for". 

I did not mean to conflate male sexual desire with intent to do harm and for that I apologise.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> maybe have a think about what I'm trying to say for a change rather than labelling me as unbalanced?



Yes you are right. Unbalanced was the wrong word. Maybe edgy might be a better choice?


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

i have been married to an 'exotic'woman for 21 years and yes she is gorgeous. but the hassle she/we have had over the years usually falls into 2 camps. either, number 69 please, how much you pay for her,etc etc usually crappy pisshead/ignorant oafs or middleclass discrimination which is very very subtle.

point is

lads, 
behave around beautiful (or ugly) 'exotic' women exactly the same as 'our own' women, i.e., with respect, by all means compliment them, but don't 'dis' them when you don't get a typical english reply.

it's just not cool.

(nb. i've posted this after getting to page 10, so may be out of context)

ttcycle,

please try to understand that you are up against a millennia of dna, don't expect miracles, but chapeau for trying.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> But when they find out I am clever they lose interest  .
> 
> 
> 
> ...


]
I do know this Becs, I used to be a stylist too






I know you well enough to be able to read that but I will still challenge the supposition cause of my wider feelings (oh **** another radical feminist here...what are we going to do wrings hands in angst) and from what can be read into them.

Sad isn't it? The reverse also of characterising attractive people as bimbos as well is sad, such a shame that people don't want to relate to each other on a human, considered level.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

bromptonfb said:


> i have been married to an 'exotic'woman for 21 years and yes she is gorgeous. but the hassle she/we have had over the years usually falls into 2 camps. either, number 69 please, how much you pay for her,etc etc usually crappy pisshead/ignorant oafs or middleclass discrimination which is very very subtle.
> 
> point is
> 
> ...



Come on Brompton, I've said it before and will say it again. Nowt to do with DNA.


AFS - Edgy...What as in challenging?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> That's not necessarily but again, I'm keep pushing you on this; why do people (not just men I add)
> 
> rate each other like this?



It is nature. It is something that stems from the primal part of the brain. Be a man/woman hetro, homo or bi there will always be fear of rejection and an assumption that the more beautiful / handsome a person the harder a catch they will be. This is ere-enforced be the media. How often do we see a famous person involved with am ugly man /woman?


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> ]
> I do know this Becs, I used to be a stylist too




can we go shopping some time?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Come on Brompton, I've said it before and will say it again. Nowt to do with DNA.
> 
> 
> AFS - Edgy...What as in challenging?



Edgy as on edge about this particular topic. We all have at least one topic that presses out buttons. Gods know I have a few.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> can we go shopping some time?



yes if you must


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Come on Brompton, I've said it before and will say it again. *Nowt to do with DNA*.
> 
> 
> AFS - Edgy...What as in challenging?



ok fair point, lets go with tradition then? or is stigmatization more likely?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

What does Becs (our medically trained person) think about the genetics of sexual behaviour?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> It is nature. It is something that stems from the primal part of the brain. Be a man/woman hetro, homo or bi there will always be fear of rejection and an assumption that the more beautiful / handsome a person the harder a catch they will be. This is ere-enforced be the media. How often do we see a famous person involved with am ugly man /woman?



You're mixing up some key issues here AFS and pop science does not mean it's the right answer. How exactly is fear of rejection biological?

How exactly also in leering etc biological?


----------



## Aperitif (20 Sep 2011)

This was supposed to be a mini thread.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> What does Becs (our medically trained person) think about the genetics of sexual behaviour?



she works with animals; determining human behaviour through the looking glass of animal studies is a very dangerous kind of determinism. 

I'm a trained ex psychologist so know a FAIR amount about this area.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Aperitif said:


> This was supposed to be a mini thread.



Can you fit potatoes in a mini? broom broom


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> You're mixing up some key issues here AFS and pop science does not mean it's the right answer. How exactly is fear of rejection biological?
> 
> How exactly also in leering etc biological?



Fear is a biological response. The act of rejection causes a biological response. The fear of rejection stems from out brains telling us we are not good enough for that person. Thus to my mind it is biological.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

bromptonfb said:


> ok fair point, lets go with tradition then? or is stigmatization more likely?



Sure thing, I get what you're saying, but I'm not into just letting it be as then nothing will ever change.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> she works with animals; determining human behaviour through the looking glass of animal studies is a very dangerous kind of determinism.
> 
> I'm a trained ex psychologist so know a FAIR amount about this area.



Now I know you background I will withdraw the question asked of Becs.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Fear is a biological response. The act of rejection causes a biological response. The fear of rejection stems from out brains telling us we are not good enough for that person. Thus to my mind it is biological.



That's a very simplistic view and not _entirely_ correct

Surmising complex social behaviour into easily explained biology is too simplistic


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Now I know you background I will withdraw the question asked of Becs.



Still, I don't like throwing it in; I don't want to pull rank or expertise to stifle debate - I think a lot of what you said has been on shaky ground, continue to challenge me and I will continue to challenge you in the hope that you can look at it in a different way. It's why I ask for reasoned intelligent responses.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> That's a very simplistic view and not _entirely_ correct
> 
> Surmising complex social behaviour into easily explained biology is too simplistic



Add into the mix alcohol and its ability to lower inhibitions and I think we can see I am pretty close to the mark. Why do you think it occurs then?

Of course it will be also based on past experience. A sterotyped Multimillionaire playboy will have a very different outlook than a awkward inexperienced bloke. There fear of rejection will be tempted by the number of rejections they have experienced.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Still, I don't like throwing it in; I don't want to pull rank or expertise to stifle debate - I think a lot of what you said has been on shaky ground, continue to challenge me and I will continue to challenge you in the hope that you can look at it in a different way. It's why I ask for reasoned intelligent responses.



I love a challenge. That is why I am still talking on this thread. I am more than happy to look at anything in any way. That does not mean my opinions will always change.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

The fear you describe is socially based. It is more about your definitions of your self in an analytical sense rather than the simple central nervous system activation.

TBH AFS - there are some very complex arguements within psychology/biology and I dont have the energy or will to surmise all of that history of 100 years or more into a neat little nutshell. I come from a certain perspective and there are others within psychology that come from another perspective.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Sure thing, I get what you're saying, but I'm not into just letting it be as then nothing will ever change.



as i posted before, chapeau to you (and the suffragettes). good causes require 'fighters for the cause', after 21 years, the fight is getting easier to conquer, although more tiring....lol.

mind you my daughter, who is slimmer (is slighter more pc?) has the same fight as you, which i find as a proud father, amazing. as a realist, frustrating.

go girl, as my women will say.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> What does Becs (our medically trained person) think about the genetics of sexual behaviour?




not my area of expertise I'm afraid.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> The fear you describe is socially based. It is more about your definitions of your self in an analytical sense rather than the simple central nervous system activation.
> 
> TBH AFS - there are some very complex arguements within psychology/biology and I dont have the energy or will to surmise all of that history of 100 years or more into a neat little nutshell. I come from a certain perspective and there are others within psychology that come from another perspective.



Very fair.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> not my area of expertise I'm afraid.



The question was withdrawn m'lord


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Very fair.....way off dealing with ignoramus!!


ftfy..


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I wish there was a quick solution to the problem you face. I don't believe there is. I in no way condone harassment of any kind towards Ladies. However, I have witnessed the way packs of young girls behave on nights out and TBH they put males to shame. They re-enforce the "slut" stereotype in a shameful way as much as a group of lads trying to "cop a feel" re-enforces the lechery of all males.






ttcycle said:


> To answer this is a long post but in short and this is why I challenge Bec's views.




I would just like to point out that my classy V neck/wrap around dresses are a far cry from slutty! Tits or legs, never both


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> A very good post indeed. I base my advice on looking after my younger Sister when she started going out (Not that I did a great job of it  )
> 
> My posts were based on the ideas put forward that attention of males is in the main unwanted. Of course a Lady/Woman/Girl can go out and look to get laid by whomever she chooses, just as a man can. Everyone should be free to choose how they wish to behave.
> 
> ...



What I sort of mean is that people are looking in the wrong place for the harm. Men introducing themselves by offering to buy women drinks is a cliche, and sometimes it's a sexist cliche, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater - it's also a convention that enables sex, stands in symbolically for it, and simultaneously keeps it at a distance. It might be unimaginative, but there's nothing inherently dishonest about it. It's interesting what happens if you deliberately disrupt the convention, for example by making it explicit that it is about sex and not about gin & tonic - you might do so because you are pretty much set for the best sex of your life and don't want to beat about the bush (no pun intended), because you feel someone is hiding behind the convention in order to continuing pestering you with unwanted attention, or because you are genuinely unsure what he wants. It reveals a lot - but I've never heard any of these concerned paternalists advise young women to say "Well I'd love a g&t and a bit of a chat but I'm not going to f**k you, if that's what you're asking," or "Let's skip the formalities and find somewhere quieter". And I would contend that it's because their advice is not usually about empowering women.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> I would just like to point out that my classy V neck/wrap around dresses are a far cry from slutty! Tits or legs, never both



Oh you are of of those girls are you


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

wrap arounds, way to go sister. lol- is that close enough to Gwok for you?


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> wrap arounds, way to go sister. lol- is that close enough to Gwok for you?




Love it! I know how to work my hour-glass!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> What I sort of mean is that people are looking in the wrong place for the harm. Men introducing themselves by offering to buy women drinks is a cliche, and sometimes it's a sexist cliche, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater - it's also a convention that enables sex, stands in symbolically for it, and simultaneously keeps it at a distance. It might be unimaginative, but there's nothing inherently dishonest about it. It's interesting what happens if you deliberately disrupt the convention, for example by making it explicit that it is about sex and not about gin & tonic - you might do so because you are pretty much set for the best sex of your life and don't want to beat about the bush (no pun intended), because you feel someone is hiding behind the convention in order to continuing pestering you with unwanted attention, or because you are genuinely unsure what he wants. It reveals a lot - but I've never heard any of these concerned paternalists advise young women to say "Well I'd love a g&t and a bit of a chat but I'm not going to f**k you, if that's what you're asking," or "Let's skip the formalities and find somewhere quieter". And I would contend that it's because their advice is not usually about empowering women.



Yes, I think this is really important. What I'm talking about is more honesty and less fear about this.
When I mention lets be more respectful to each other and think about posts, it's kind of in the hope that it opens up more space for what TC describes to become realities, it's not about chastising and removing sexual beings in the world.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> What I sort of mean is that people are looking in the wrong place for the harm. Men introducing themselves by offering to buy women drinks is a cliche, and sometimes it's a sexist cliche, but let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater - it's also a convention that enables sex, stands in symbolically for it, and simultaneously keeps it at a distance. It might be unimaginative, but there's nothing inherently dishonest about it. It's interesting what happens if you deliberately disrupt the convention, for example by making it explicit that it is about sex and not about gin & tonic - you might do so because you are pretty much set for the best sex of your life and don't want to beat about the bush (no pun intended), because you feel someone is hiding behind the convention in order to continuing pestering you with unwanted attention, or because you are genuinely unsure what he wants. It reveals a lot - but I've never heard any of these concerned paternalists advise young women to say "Well I'd love a g&t and a bit of a chat but I'm not going to f**k you, if that's what you're asking," or "Let's skip the formalities and find somewhere quieter". And I would contend that it's because their advice is not usually about empowering women.



Apart from the G&T I have experienced both  

I do see what you are saying however and I wonder if this type of empowerment will come from the next generation of parents? It is good advice. I know many people who are happy to let there under-age sons/daughters have sex in there homes as it is safer than the alternative.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

bromptonfb said:


> as i posted before, chapeau to you (and the suffragettes). good causes require 'fighters for the cause', after 21 years, the fight is getting easier to conquer, although more tiring....lol.
> 
> mind you my daughter, who is slimmer (is slighter more pc?) has the same fight as you, which i find as a proud father, amazing. as a realist, frustrating.
> 
> go girl, as my women will say.



Cheers, thank you.


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

your welcome and thank you for not picking me me up on my "my women" faux pas, it seemed funny at the time of writing, but i am a dinosaur learning new tricks!!


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Fear is a biological response. The act of rejection causes a biological response. The fear of rejection stems from out brains telling us we are not good enough for that person. Thus to my mind it is biological.


whether or not this is true (and I've no way of knowing) the great thing about civilisation is that it equips us to make choices and even to put the supposedly hormonal behaviour on hold for a nanosecond while we consider matters.

(trans) leering is a choice


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> whether or not this is true (and I've no way of knowing) the great thing about civilisation is that it equips us to make choices and even to put the supposedly hormonal behaviour on hold for a nanosecond while we consider matters.
> 
> (trans) leering is a choice



I do not believe that I put forward a case for leering being a primal instinct. Also when I witness some of the male members of the species that live in my area I wonder if it is possible to use the term civilisation in any way, shape or form.


----------



## Dan B (20 Sep 2011)

Becs said:


> not my area of expertise I'm afraid.


You say that like it prevents you in some way from replying. Which is laudable and all, but puts you at grave disadvantage on internet forms


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I do see what you are saying however and I wonder if this type of empowerment will come from the next generation of parents? *It is good advice.* I know many people who are happy to let there under-age sons/daughters have sex in there homes as it is safer than the alternative.



Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. All I know is that it's advice that acknowledges that women might have some idea about what they want, and that men are human beings who are quite capable of understanding this. That and the fact that it's a rare sort of advice compared to the depressing "Don't accept drinks from men in bars - they are only after one thing" kind.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> wrap arounds, way to go sister.



 I'm tempted to preserve this as a sig line as an example of your _oeuvre_...


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

Time to look at this (again): a female happy with her body, her dress, her feelings and her bike.   




View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ioQMrlLnlmo


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> I'm tempted to preserve this as a sig line as an example of your _oeuvre_...



lol..bloody quotations


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

Dayvo said:


> Time to look at this (again): a female happy with her body, her dress, her feelings and her bike.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




gets popcorn n comfy chair


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Maybe it is and maybe it isn't. All I know is that it's advice that acknowledges that women might have some idea about what they want, and that men are human beings who are quite capable of understanding this. That and the fact that it's a rare sort of advice compared to the depressing "Don't accept drinks from men in bars - they are only after one thing" kind.



I agree. We are a product of our time and upbringing. I know that as a young man sex was never far from the front of my mind and I now what buying a drink from a Lady/Woman/Girl meant. I doubt that is any different now. Girls are certainly more empowered today than 20 years ago and I am sure this trend will continue. As long as both/all parties are consenting and take precautions (false name and all that  ) I see no problems.

I do see a problem when a young girl from a sheltered upbringing goes out into the big bad world and has no idea what to expect, what she is allowed to want and what is and is not acceptable behaviour.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I agree. *We are a product of our time and upbringing*. I know that as a young man sex was never far from the front of my mind and I now what buying a drink from a Lady/Woman/Girl meant. I doubt that is any different now. Girls are certainly more empowered today than 20 years ago and I am sure this trend will continue. As long as both/all parties are consenting and take precautions (false name and all that  ) I see no problems.
> 
> I do see a problem when a young girl from a sheltered upbringing goes out into the big bad world and has no idea what to expect, what she is allowed to want and what is and is not acceptable behaviour.



I politely call everyone's attention to the fact that it is 2011...


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Dayvo said:


> Time to look at this (again): a female happy with her body, her dress, her feelings and her bike.
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.youtube.c...h?v=ioQMrlLnlmo



Interesting to see if this is deleted as Jetzons photo was


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Interesting to see if this is deleted as Jetzons photo was




And why should it be? It's featured in many other threads with causing offence!


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

[QUOTE 1551270"]
One of the most depressing things on an internet board.

Reading intelligent contributions that are wasted on people that have the IQ of a piece of wood lying in the middle of the road. Make up your own mind who is the former and who is the latter.
[/quote]

oi!!..


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

bromptonfb said:


> oi!!..



It's Ok Brompton..the comment re womens we've let go.


----------



## NormanD (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Interesting to see if this is deleted as Jetzons photo was



We've debated that video before and we all agreed ... that seat is a tad too high, her hips were rocking


----------



## Rohloff_Brompton_Rider (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> It's Ok Brompton..the comment re womens we've let go.


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

NormanD said:


> We've debated that video before and we all agreed ... that seat is a tad too high, her hips were rocking




 Nice one, Norm!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

I see there's a bit of driftwood about.....


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

Depends on your point of view.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

It's all about POVs isn't it?


----------



## Sara_H (20 Sep 2011)

Blimey.......... What happened here?

For info, I posted tongue in cheek and took the initial replies as such also.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> I politely call everyone's attention to the fact that it is 2011...



Yes I know that. I speak as you do as a child of the 1970's. The girls out and about now are children of the 1990's (one would hope!)


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Sara H I do apologise for the direction the thread has taken. I know your posts were tongue in cheek. I am just addressing and challenging certain viewpoints.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Sara_H said:


> Blimey.......... What happened here?
> 
> For info, I posted tongue in cheek and took the initial replies as such also.



I am so glad about that. I was starting to think I was in some parallel universe !!


----------



## NormanD (20 Sep 2011)

Don't worry Sara_H, no single person is blaming you ... We all blame you ... how could you start a thread like this!!


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> It's all about POVs isn't it?




Exactly. 

And that applies to all and sundry.

I was trying to inject a touch of humour into a debate that has raged on far too long. 

Some may laugh, others may scorn.

Que sera sera.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

NormanD said:


> Don't worry Sara_H, _*no single person is blaming you*_ ... We all blame you ... how could you start a thread like this!!



It's just couples


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Dayvo said:


> Exactly.
> 
> And that applies to all and sundry.
> 
> ...



yes of course but you are trying to get a rise out of a certain side of the debate.

What happened to an intelligent response? Does it always have to be reduced down to sexual titillation?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> yes of course but you are trying to get a rise out of a certain side of the debate.
> 
> What happened to an intelligent response? Does it always have to be reduced down to sexual titillation?



To counter that can't some things be taken as fun and without need for intelligent debate?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> To counter that can't some things be taken as fun and without need for intelligent debate?



well, yes maybe but if you want to use humour of a sexual nature to try and annoy me or even belittle my argument, it doesn't really work does it?


----------



## Sara_H (20 Sep 2011)

NormanD said:


> Don't worry Sara_H, no single person is blaming you ... We all blame you ... how could you start a thread like this!!



Oh good - so long as I've united everyone!


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> well, yes maybe but if you want to use humour of a sexual nature to try and annoy me or even belittle my argument, it doesn't really work does it?



No disrespect but no one was targeting you. You took offence to a post made be a female OP and took it upon yourself to take people to task based upon your experience. I do not see the OP complaining.


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> No disrespect but no one was targeting you. You too offence to a post made be a female OP and took it upon yourself to take people to task based upon your experience. I do not see the OP complaining.



Your best post today, AFS!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> No disrespect but no one was targeting you. You too offence to a post made be a female OP and took it upon yourself to take people to task based upon your experience. I do not see the OP complaining.



Seriously AFS, I cannot comprehend how you can conclude that is the issue at hand. Your denseness really does shock me.

how many ****ing times do I have to say that I am not offended and not talking about being offended or the original poster being offended- nowhere have I mentioned any of this. Stop reading a narrow definition into the threads

JESUS CHRIST MAN!??


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Seriously AFS, I cannot comprehend how you can conclude that is the issue at hand. Your denseness really does shock me.
> 
> how many ****ing times do I have to say that I am not offended and not talking about being offended or the original poster being offended- nowhere have I mentioned any of this. Stop reading a narrow definition into the threads
> 
> JESUS CHRIST MAN!??



OK let me change "took offence" to "were up in arms about". I fail to see how anyone can not conclude that you got worked up by the thread.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Dayvo said:


> Your best post today, AFS!



 It's been a slow day though


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

THEN JUST GIVE IT A FUKKIN' REST, THEN!


----------



## Crackle (20 Sep 2011)

Is it about P.O.V, I thought it was about agender.


----------



## fossyant (20 Sep 2011)

[QUOTE 1551270"]
One of the most depressing things on an internet board.

Reading intelligent contributions that are wasted on people that have the IQ of a piece of wood lying in the middle of the road. Make up your own mind who is the former and who is the latter.
[/quote]

Well said.

Anyone going to remove AFS's shovel ?


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Dayvo said:


> Exactly.
> 
> And that applies to all and sundry.
> 
> ...


humour! Well, we can never have enough humour.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> OK let me change "took offence" to "were up in arms about". I fail to see how anyone can not conclude that you got worked up by the thread.


no - neither. Doing the reasonable thing and attempting to reason with people. End of.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

fossyant said:


> Well said.
> 
> Anyone going to remove AFS's shovel ?



Fossyant, odd that the OP is not complaining about the content of this thread don't you think?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> OK let me change "took offence" to "were up in arms about".



Yes but it hasn't been just me that's expressed these views in fact it you only seem to call me alone on it- that does feel like targeting.

It's not just me up in arms about this.

That's nice isn't Dayvo- not on; just telling me to shut the **** up? If you can't answer what I'm questioning it's easier to just silence it then? how lovely


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> no - neither. Doing the reasonable thing and attempting to reason with people. End of.



Errr I have. I have asked and answered many questions and am of the opinion that TTC is in some way disturbed by the contents of this thread.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Fossyant, odd that the OP is not complaining about the content of this thread don't you think?



It's neither here nor there.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Errr I have. I have asked and answered many questions and am of the opinion that TTC is in some way disturbed by the contents of this thread.



this is where you are WRONG.


----------



## Silver Fox (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Fossyant, odd that the OP is not complaining about the content of this thread don't you think?



I suspect the OP may have a sense of humour which could explain things


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Silver Fox said:


> I suspect the OP may have a sense of humour which could explain things



oh jesus, have you read the whole thread?

And by the way, don't start posting and then PM an apology as an after thought as you have done in the past.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Silver Fox said:


> I suspect the OP may have a sense of humour which could explain things



Yep so do I.


----------



## Dayvo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Seriously AFS, I cannot comprehend how you can conclude that is the issue at hand. Your denseness really does shock me.
> 
> how many *****ing* times do I have to say that I am not offended and not talking about being offended or the original poster being offended- nowhere have I mentioned any of this. Stop reading a narrow definition into the threads
> 
> JESUS CHRIST MAN!??






Dayvo said:


> THEN JUST GIVE IT A FUKKIN' REST, THEN!






ttcycle said:


> That's nice isn't Dayvo- not on; just telling me to shut the **** up? If you can't answer what I'm questioning it's easier to just silence it then? how lovely




So, it's OK for you but not for me, is it! Just cos I managed to get around the swear detector, still makes it very clear what you meant.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> It's neither here nor there.



I believe that it is.


----------



## YahudaMoon (20 Sep 2011)

Only 6979 views and still going. 

Edit. Place your bets if it goes over 10000 views


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

But I'm not silencing you or attempting to am I? You are telling me to shut up or give it a rest. I don't give a toss about coarse language in case you think that's what it's about?

BTW that was addressed to AFS who insists I am offended or 'disturbed' by content of this thread...interesting choice of word from him.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

All this because a female OP stated she had been given more road space because she wore a short dress and a few joking comments about a photo and a video. FFS this forum is becoming like a nursery.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Subtlety is lost on you clearly.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> *All this* because a female OP stated she had been given more road space because she wore a short dress and a few joking comments about a photo and a video. FFS this forum is becoming like a nursery.



This is a bit Rich, AFS. I haven't counted but I reckon you're a contender for the most prolific contributor to the thread...


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> This is a bit *Rich*, AFS. I haven't counted but I reckon you're a contender for the most prolific contributor to the thread...



Oooh look - some kind of weird Freudian slip.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> But I'm not silencing you or attempting to am I? You are telling me to shut up or give it a rest. I don't give a toss about coarse language in case you think that's what it's about?
> 
> BTW that was addressed to AFS who insists I am offended or 'disturbed' by content of this thread...interesting choice of word from him.



Why is it that whenever the subject of female sexuality is raised you are there berating those who take part in it. Such as the Dutch girl allegedly arrested for being too sexy on her bike. It was a fantastic marketing stunt and nothing more.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

It isn't female sexuality that's raised.

It's female sexuality from a male viewpoint.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> This is a bit Rich, AFS. I haven't counted but I reckon you're a contender for the most prolific contributor to the thread...



Yep it's either this or read dirty magazines


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Silver Fox said:


> I suspect the OP may have a sense of humour which could explain things


More humour! We're awash with the stuff!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> It isn't female sexuality that's raised.
> 
> It's female sexuality from a male viewpoint.



specifically about comments such as post photos please in this thread.

What is that actually saying about female sexuality AFS?


----------



## rich p (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Why is it that whenever the subject of female sexuality is raised you are there berating those who take part in it. Such as the Dutch girl allegedly arrested for being too sexy on her bike. It was a fantastic marketing stunt and nothing more.




Why is it that whenever anything is raised on this forum, you're there. Ad nauseam.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> It isn't female sexuality that's raised.
> 
> It's female sexuality from a male viewpoint.



So would you be OK with females making lewd remarks about you?


----------



## Crackle (20 Sep 2011)

theclaud said:


> Oooh look - some kind of weird Freudian slip.




That's quite the most disturbing thing I've seen on this thread, even worse than the Gok Wan reference


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

rich p said:


> Why is it that whenever anything is raised on this forum, you're there. Ad nauseam.



'Cos I have a very boarding life.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Dayvo said:


> So, it's OK for you but not for me, is it! Just cos I managed to get around the swear detector, still makes it very clear what you meant.


Humour all gone? Or just taking a break?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> specifically about comments such as post photos please in this thread.
> 
> What is that actually saying about female sexuality AFS?



FFS nothing at all. People ask for photos of bikes, of close passes, of places they have ridden.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> So would you be OK with females making lewd remarks about you?



Depends on context surely?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Crackle said:


> That's quite the most disturbing thing I've seen on this thread, even worse than the Gok Wan reference



Sorry did I offend you with my Gok Wan reference?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Depends on context surely?



Same context as the males you reference.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Same context as the males you reference.



Not at all, being a woman is a different reality to being a man so not the same context. 
Subtlety AFS. These things can be.


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

Crackle said:


> That's quite the most disturbing thing I've seen on this thread, even worse than the Gok Wan reference



You might be right. He's not only lurking about in my unconscious, but somewhere on my hard drive there's a file entitled "packet.jpg".


----------



## Crackle (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Sorry did I offend you with my Gok Wan reference?




Oooh, I think it was Becs. I'm sure she implied she took his style tips seriously.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Not at all, being a woman is a different reality to being a man so not the same context.
> Subtlety AFS. These things can be.



No you stated it depended on context, I said the context is the same. Would you then be bothered by the same remarks is the came from the mouth of a woman instead of a man>


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> No you stated it depended on context, I said the context is the same. Would you then be bothered by the same remarks is the came from the mouth of a woman instead of a man>



I have had an experience where a woman was very full on and that was unsettling and that's entirely contextual.

I've also had come ons from men and women which aren't lewd or unsettling. go figure


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Crackle said:


> Oooh, I think it was Becs. I'm sure she implied she took his style tips seriously.


nobody disses Gok in my presence, buster! That man can accessorize!


----------



## rich p (20 Sep 2011)

I have a piccie somewhere which may be apposite.....


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

What I'm saying and that you're failing to understand is that context between men and women can be very different and is not the same.


----------



## Zoiders (20 Sep 2011)

Have ttcycle and Angelfishsolo considered getting a room so they can resolve all this tension?

They seem to be enjoying all this rather too much on some sick and twisted level.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> nobody disses Gok in my presence, buster! That man can accessorize!



You are our resident Gok and you know it!


----------



## funnymummy (20 Sep 2011)

After reading this thread, i'm almost tempted to go out & buy a frock!


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Zoiders said:


> Have ttcycle and Angelfishsolo considered getting a room so they can resolve all this tension?
> 
> They seem to be enjoying this rather too much in a sick and twisted way.



No thanks


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

funnymummy said:


> After reading this thread, i'm almost tempted to go out & buy a frock!



wrapover or bodycon fm?


----------



## Dan B (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> More humour! We're awash with the stuff!



and not a drop to drink


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> What I'm saying and that you're failing to understand is that context between men and women can be very different and is not the same.



I do appreciate that different and not the same mean the same thing. You have eluded to different forms of sexuality and I was simply curious as to your thoughts.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> No thanks



One thing we do agree on.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> I do appreciate that different and not the same mean the same thing. You have eluded to different forms of sexuality and I was simply curious as to your thoughts.



But what has that got to do with your rather fixed viewpoints?


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Dan B said:


> and not a drop to drink



Humour, humour everywhere and ner a drop to drink. Humour, humour everywhere and all the boards did shrink.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> But what has that got to do with your rather fixed viewpoints?



Curiosity and nothing more.


----------



## dellzeqq (20 Sep 2011)

Zoiders said:


> Have ttcycle and Angelfishsolo considered getting a room so they can resolve all this tension?
> 
> They seem to be enjoying all this rather too much on some sick and twisted level.


hilarious! Have you ever considered going on stage with Dayvo?


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Curiosity and nothing more.



Curiosity about WHAT exactly??


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> Curiosity about WHAT exactly??



If you would treat identical comments from males and females the same way.


----------



## Becs (20 Sep 2011)

Dan B said:


> You say that like it prevents you in some way from replying. Which is laudable and all, but puts you at grave disadvantage on internet forms



Well I do like to try to use my mouth for speaking, even on an internet forum! ;-)


----------



## Silver Fox (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> oh jesus, have you read the whole thread?
> 
> And by the way, don't start posting and then PM an apology as an after thought as you have done in the past.




Blimey, your cage has been well and truely rattled.


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

Silver Fox said:


> Blimey, your cage has been well and truely rattled.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> If you would treat identical comments from males and females the same way.



never have they been identical and actually there isn't a black and white way to classify human interactions on a simplistic scale and asking me to do that is crude


----------



## theclaud (20 Sep 2011)

dellzeqq said:


> hilarious! Have you ever considered going on stage with Dayvo?









(It took me a while to come up with something more disturbing than Rich's pic...)


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Silver Fox said:


> Blimey, your cage has been well and truely rattled.



I find it boring repetitiveness and my cage is not rattled.

Trying to reason and actually look at this properly


----------



## YahudaMoon (20 Sep 2011)

funnymummy said:


> After reading this thread, i'm almost tempted to go out & buy a frock!




Frocks are out and a bit last year. Hot pants is where its at.


----------



## Crackle (20 Sep 2011)

That's a long way short of 'as disturbing'


----------



## Angelfishsolo (20 Sep 2011)

ttcycle said:


> never have they been identical and actually there isn't a black and white way to classify human interactions on a simplistic scale and asking me to do that is crude



Use your imagination to extrapolate a probable outcome.


----------



## ttcycle (20 Sep 2011)

Angelfishsolo said:


> Use your imagination to extrapolate a probable outcome.



Say it directly, what are you trying to say?


----------

