Was it necessary to put female in the title?

[Kookas]

I don't find the thread title offensive, but I do think that including the word 'female' in it was un-necessary. As TMN says, it implies that the default gender for cyclists is male. And that there is possibly something different about an accident when a female is involved.

The OP most likely didn't mean any of this, but this unwitting, insidious use of language contributes to the continuing gender inequalities in our society.

See this all the time in YouTube video titles. You wouldn't put 'black cyclist' if it were a black guy who died, would you?

 

[Spinney]

[QUOTE 2582725, member: 30090"]O'er, get you...[/quote]

Thought you were busy having a life, User30090, rather than posting on here??

 

[marknotgeorge]

Calm down! What a lot of hysterical men on this thread. A few people understood what I was getting at, including the only woman to respond. I did not use the words "offence" or "offended", these were introduced by men - who seem to me to protest too much. It's not a crusade either, just a serious observation about our use of language, which we should all take care over anyway.

Ah, but do you see how what you said could be misinterpreted? I think I understand what you're saying, but understand and agree aren't the same thing. To use a bit of hyperbole, this 'unthinking sexism' business sounds somewhere between crying wolf and thoughtcrime. When young girls are being mutilated, or blown up for the temerity of seeking an education elsewhere in the world, arguing about the use or non-use of an adjective seems a little silly and counterproductive. But I can see that's a difference of opinion.

I wouldn't have said anything, but it bugged me, and as you pointed out (echoed by my CBT therapist recently), avoidance isn't necessarily the best thing. So I decided to get out of my comfort zone. I don't want to argue with you - it's not why I'm here.

 

[mrandmrspoves]

I must say I am with TMN on this one.

I agree that the main concern is yet another cyclist has died - but if the cyclist had been a man we would not have read " Male cyclist Died....."
I see from the newspaper report that the cyclist's partner was a female " So I am surprised we didn't get "Lesbian Cyclist Died......"
Surely we would all think that was totally inappropriate in exactly the same way as if we reported her skin colour or her religion?

As a nurse (who happens to be male) I hate it when people refer to me as a male nurse......they don't call nurses who happen to be female, female nurses.

 

[potsy]

I see from the newspaper report that the cyclist's partner was a female " So I am surprised we didn't get "Lesbian Cyclist Died......"
.

FFS

 

[classic33]

I must say I am with TMN on this one.

I agree that the main concern is yet another cyclist has died - but if the cyclist had been a man we would not have read " Male cyclist Died....."
I see from the newspaper report that the cyclist's partner was a female " So I am surprised we didn't get "Lesbian Cyclist Died......"
Surely we would all think that was totally inappropriate in exactly the same way as if we reported her skin colour or her religion?

As a nurse (who happens to be male) I hate it when people refer to me as a male nurse......they don't call nurses who happen to be female, female nurses.

Not quite true.
http://www.islingtontribune.com/news/2013/aug/male-cyclist-dies-after-lorry-collision

 

[mrandmrspoves]

Not quite true.
http://www.islingtontribune.com/news/2013/aug/male-cyclist-dies-after-lorry-collision

Ok I stand corrected!

 

[mrandmrspoves]

FFS

I wasn't having a dig at your original post Potsy.....just think that refering to a cyclist by gender is unnecessary.

Sensitive subject for me. When my Grandfather was killed while he was out cycling with me, the local rag wrote "OAP killed while cycling" as the headline. As if his age mattered - or maybe as if to explain that as he was old he was to blame......

 

[Rob3rt]

What I take forward from this thread is the following, at least sexist Potsy isn't a homophobe!

 

[StuartG]

Headlines/Titles are difficult things. Like Twitter you have few words to paint a picture. We use shorthand and assumptions to help readers grasp the image. Anybody who uses the word 'cyclist' will rightly or wrongly will have to assume that most readers will picture a male somewhere between 20/50 as these currently constitute the majority of cyclists. Hence most of us will use an adjective to steer the image away from the stereotype when its wrong. So female, young, old or their synonyms are added. They can be useful. Relevancy - well that's another debate I'm ducking now.

But as @User13710 points out it this may well perpetuate stereotypes. Paradoxically it may not matter so much for those who recognise the problem (and hence can try and adjust for it) as to those who unconsciously plough on and are infuriated by TMN trying to call them to account.

TMN and I have very different viewpoints over the use and purpose of language - stemming partly from our backgrounds. It doesn't mean mine is right and TMN's is wrong (or v.v.). What is wrong is not recognising the other viewpoint as valid and having both upsides and downsides. Which means I don't take objection to the OP having female in the title nor TMN highlighting the dangers of social stereotyping that caused the OP to include it.

I do take objection to the fury of some responses. And, moving on and from a personal, viewpoint I find the RIPs disagreeable in the same way I find latest craze of roadside shrines. That's different from white bikes - which are not about the last fatality but are there for the express purpose of trying to prevent the next.

As to these threads. Whilst much of the content I find fatuous and much of the speculation unhelpful - it has helped me grasp the real dangers of cycling in London - especially the left hooking building lorry. I now don't do things I used to do. In a way by knowing and largely avoiding what kills has made me feel safer riding in London.

 

[Shaun]

I've separated this discussion from the Cyclist Down thread so that it can be expanded upon outside of the frame of reference of someone dying (and also to include a wider audience / range of views).

Please don't post flippant / inflammatory replies or deliberately try to wind other members up - and please be respectful when responding.

Thanks,
Shaun

 

[Markymark]

Isn't there a disparity though between the number of male and female cycle deaths?

Whether that should therefore be mentioned in the title of a thread is not clear. It could just be an anomoly (or mainloy around lorry collision deaths), but if there is something different between how male and female cyclists ride, then it's not something that should be ignored.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8296971.stm
http://www.theguardian.com/environm...2010/may/13/cycling-lorries-women-road-deaths

 

[Dan B]

Ah, but do you see how what you said could be misinterpreted? I think I understand what you're saying, but understand and agree aren't the same thing. To use a bit of hyperbole, this 'unthinking sexism' business sounds somewhere between crying wolf and thoughtcrime. When young girls are being mutilated, or blown up for the temerity of seeking an education elsewhere in the world, arguing about the use or non-use of an adjective seems a little silly and counterproductive.

I agree with you that 'hyperbole' is a good word here ;-)

If it really was a zero-sum game, and all the time spent raising awareness of unconscious biases/use of language/'unthinking sexism' detracted directly from time that would otherwise be spent on campaigns against FGM or whatever, I'd be inclined to support this viewpoint. But I don't think that's the case: we have complicated brains that allow us to care about more than one thing

 

[yello]

As a nurse (who happens to be male) I hate it when people refer to me as a male nurse......they don't call nurses who happen to be female, female nurses.

I can understand your frustration. Think of it as positive discrimination! Trying to realign a common misconception, or somesuch.

 

[yello]

it doesn't work like that: your communications are judged on their effects, not on the purity of your heart.

Ain't that the truth. I would suggest that there are differences between intention and perception. Therein lies the beauty of (mis)communication.

None of that to diminish the fact that there is, of course, people with real -isms out there.