Log in:  

Register

Modestly clothed women

Grab a short black and come join in the non-cycling discussion. Favourite books, movies, holiday destinations, other sports - chat about it all in the cafe.

Moderators: peloton, Irondan, Eshnar, Alpe d'Huez, Red Rick, Tonton, Pricey_sky

28 May 2016 19:00

Here are some Pictures of modestly clothed women on bikes. :D

Image

Image
Aka The Ginger One.
User avatar RedheadDane
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,741
Joined: 05 May 2010 13:47
Location: Viking Land! (Aros)

Re:

28 May 2016 19:47

Alpe d'Huez wrote:Just a note: I posted a note in the mod forum asking for an explanation why the BoB thread was removed. I only know so far that recently new ownership took over the site. I do not know their rationale, or thinking. I do know a few things though:

This was without question the most popular thread on the entire forum. That equals traffic, which equals advertising, which equals money.

There was nothing offensive in the thread. In the past photos were included of women from the backside with no under garments, we deleted and banned those.

Nearly every photo was professionally shot. Many of the photos were of women wearing regular cycling clothing, many of them professional cyclists or amateur racers. Some were nostalgic looking. Some were of famous people.

The vast majority of the photos were no more offensive, or of women no more or less scantily clad, than what you would see in any woman's magazine today, aimed at female readers (Cosmo, Allure, etc). I would even make the argument that nearly every one of those photos are photoshopped, and thus present a dangerous view of what a women should look like, while photos of healthy women on bicycles is a positive thing for women to aspire to.

I spend less time than I did in the past as a mod. If this thread is removed permanently, like many of you, I'll spend even less time here without question.


Post of the year.

Removing the thread is a solution to a non-existent problem. PC run amok. Again.
User avatar Scott SoCal
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,421
Joined: 08 Nov 2012 16:47
Location: Southern California

Re: Re:

28 May 2016 20:25

Scott SoCal wrote:
Alpe d'Huez wrote:Just a note: I posted a note in the mod forum asking for an explanation why the BoB thread was removed. I only know so far that recently new ownership took over the site. I do not know their rationale, or thinking. I do know a few things though:

This was without question the most popular thread on the entire forum. That equals traffic, which equals advertising, which equals money.

There was nothing offensive in the thread. In the past photos were included of women from the backside with no under garments, we deleted and banned those.

Nearly every photo was professionally shot. Many of the photos were of women wearing regular cycling clothing, many of them professional cyclists or amateur racers. Some were nostalgic looking. Some were of famous people.

The vast majority of the photos were no more offensive, or of women no more or less scantily clad, than what you would see in any woman's magazine today, aimed at female readers (Cosmo, Allure, etc). I would even make the argument that nearly every one of those photos are photoshopped, and thus present a dangerous view of what a women should look like, while photos of healthy women on bicycles is a positive thing for women to aspire to.

I spend less time than I did in the past as a mod. If this thread is removed permanently, like many of you, I'll spend even less time here without question.


Post of the year.

Removing the thread is a solution to a non-existent problem. PC run amok. Again.


Could not possibly agree more with both Alpe's and Scott's comments. It could, at worst, even have been locked. Deleting such a unique topic was a crying shame, and utterly unnecessary. I would hold this opinion even if I didn't happen to be the birth 'mother' of something unique that outgrew all expectations.
#FeeltheBern
User avatar Amsterhammer
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,912
Joined: 22 Jun 2009 08:29
Location: Amsterdam

28 May 2016 20:26

Some live in cities with women on bicycles. Interaction and mutual appreciation encouraged.

But I guess for the television/nuclear age.
aphronesis
Senior Member
 
Posts: 4,338
Joined: 30 Jul 2011 16:47
Location: Bed-Stuy

29 May 2016 01:05

That was the greatest thread in the history of forums though... :(
User avatar jsem94
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,597
Joined: 05 Oct 2010 18:24
Location: Örebro, Sweden

Re:

29 May 2016 01:09

Alpe d'Huez wrote:Just a note: I posted a note in the mod forum asking for an explanation why the BoB thread was removed. I only know so far that recently new ownership took over the site. I do not know their rationale, or thinking. I do know a few things though:

This was without question the most popular thread on the entire forum. That equals traffic, which equals advertising, which equals money.

There was nothing offensive in the thread. In the past photos were included of women from the backside with no under garments, we deleted and banned those.

Nearly every photo was professionally shot. Many of the photos were of women wearing regular cycling clothing, many of them professional cyclists or amateur racers. Some were nostalgic looking. Some were of famous people.

The vast majority of the photos were no more offensive, or of women no more or less scantily clad, than what you would see in any woman's magazine today, aimed at female readers (Cosmo, Allure, etc). I would even make the argument that nearly every one of those photos are photoshopped, and thus present a dangerous view of what a women should look like, while photos of healthy women on bicycles is a positive thing for women to aspire to.

I spend less time than I did in the past as a mod. If this thread is removed permanently, like many of you, I'll spend even less time here without question.

All this talk about how respectful and healthy the thread was, while ignoring that it was called Babes on Bikes. Delicious whitewashing. :p
User avatar hrotha
Veteran
 
Posts: 14,927
Joined: 10 Jun 2010 20:45

29 May 2016 01:12

There are even nude bicycle rides in some cities. It's even legal for females to go topless in some countries.
http://www.vice.com/en_ca/read/dumb-cops-who-dont-know-the-law-are-causing-trouble-for-topless-women-across-canada-vgtrn
Starstruck
Member
 
Posts: 1,286
Joined: 16 Apr 2016 22:13

29 May 2016 01:17

Yeah, but this is an internet forum.
User avatar jsem94
Senior Member
 
Posts: 2,597
Joined: 05 Oct 2010 18:24
Location: Örebro, Sweden

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 01:55

hrotha wrote:All this talk about how respectful and healthy the thread was, while ignoring that it was called Babes on Bikes. Delicious whitewashing. :p

On the contrary, if you do a similar Google search, you can find plenty of women's groups, lead by women, who go by that, or similar names.

So, is it derogatory if men use the phrase, or just term 'babe" out of admiration, but okay if women use it?
User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Administrator
 
Posts: 9,751
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 02:48

Alpe d'Huez wrote:
hrotha wrote:All this talk about how respectful and healthy the thread was, while ignoring that it was called Babes on Bikes. Delicious whitewashing. :p

On the contrary, if you do a similar Google search, you can find plenty of women's groups, lead by women, who go by that, or similar names.

So, is it derogatory if men use the phrase, or just term 'babe" out of admiration, but okay if women use it?


I'd guess no one ever bothered to ask the ladies. Just a bunch of uptight dudes worried about their own shadow.

Maybe I'm wrong.
User avatar Scott SoCal
Veteran
 
Posts: 9,421
Joined: 08 Nov 2012 16:47
Location: Southern California

29 May 2016 04:32

User avatar Alpe d'Huez
Administrator
 
Posts: 9,751
Joined: 11 Mar 2009 03:51
Location: New England

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 05:54

Alpe d'Huez wrote:
hrotha wrote:All this talk about how respectful and healthy the thread was, while ignoring that it was called Babes on Bikes. Delicious whitewashing. :p

On the contrary, if you do a similar Google search, you can find plenty of women's groups, lead by women, who go by that, or similar names.

So, is it derogatory if men use the phrase, or just term 'babe" out of admiration, but okay if women use it?


Pejorative terms have different meanings depending on the context; often oppressed groups will aim to reclaim demeaning terms. It's the unequal power relationships that make it oppressive to start with, and the casual sexism of that thread proves nicely the unequal power relationships of this world. In short: yes.

(By the way, 'admiration' is going on my list of 'disgusting synonyms for base lechery'. Why not just say 'use the term "babe" out of sexual appreciation for her physical qualities?' It would be much more honest.)
choose life choose a car choose smack choose gullibility choose marx choose opium choose religion choose masses
-blackcat
Cannibal72
Member
 
Posts: 953
Joined: 06 Feb 2016 20:49

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 08:43

Scott SoCal wrote:
Alpe d'Huez wrote:
hrotha wrote:All this talk about how respectful and healthy the thread was, while ignoring that it was called Babes on Bikes. Delicious whitewashing. :p

On the contrary, if you do a similar Google search, you can find plenty of women's groups, lead by women, who go by that, or similar names.

So, is it derogatory if men use the phrase, or just term 'babe" out of admiration, but okay if women use it?


I'd guess no one ever bothered to ask the ladies. Just a bunch of uptight dudes worried about their own shadow.

Maybe I'm wrong.
you are not wrong. imo, it's a typical result of differences in our tastes, views, definitions...

that said, i never cared for the bob thread. cant recall posting there and only occasionally clicking. still, while the thread deemed mildly sexist (though nothing, as alpe said, we dont find in mass media) i can understand that some, women included, would celebrate the beauty of human body.

it is also true that the owners are completely within their right to regulate the content. however, i seriously doubt that banning a thread can in any way contribute tangibly to the stated noble goal of improving the image of female cycling.

i agree with one scott comment- it was a solution to an in-existing problem. if it was a porn, yea i can see the move, but it wasn't b/c watchful mods excized it timely.
DJPbaltimore:'John Kerry is an honorable person and would not call out the Russians if there was not evidence', 'the 2 of you are russia stooges'
in foreign policy there are no eternal friendships or eternal enemies, only eternal interests
User avatar python
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,243
Joined: 25 Sep 2009 01:01

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 14:45

python wrote:
Scott SoCal wrote:
Alpe d'Huez wrote:
hrotha wrote:All this talk about how respectful and healthy the thread was, while ignoring that it was called Babes on Bikes. Delicious whitewashing. :p

On the contrary, if you do a similar Google search, you can find plenty of women's groups, lead by women, who go by that, or similar names.

So, is it derogatory if men use the phrase, or just term 'babe" out of admiration, but okay if women use it?


I'd guess no one ever bothered to ask the ladies. Just a bunch of uptight dudes worried about their own shadow.

Maybe I'm wrong.
you are not wrong. imo, it's a typical result of differences in our tastes, views, definitions...

that said, i never cared for the bob thread. cant recall posting there and only occasionally clicking. still, while the thread deemed mildly sexist (though nothing, as alpe said, we dont find in mass media) i can understand that some, women included, would celebrate the beauty of human body.

it is also true that the owners are completely within their right to regulate the content. however, i seriously doubt that banning a thread can in any way contribute tangibly to the stated noble goal of improving the image of female cycling.

i agree with one scott comment- it was a solution to an in-existing problem. if it was a porn, yea i can see the move, but it wasn't b/c watchful mods excized it timely.

What kind of a world is it when I completely agree with python. :p
Let alone scott.
User avatar Hugh Januss
Veteran
 
Posts: 6,624
Joined: 09 Jul 2009 00:33
Location: socal

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 14:50

Hugh Januss wrote:
python wrote:
Scott SoCal wrote:
Alpe d'Huez wrote:
hrotha wrote:All this talk about how respectful and healthy the thread was, while ignoring that it was called Babes on Bikes. Delicious whitewashing. :p

On the contrary, if you do a similar Google search, you can find plenty of women's groups, lead by women, who go by that, or similar names.

So, is it derogatory if men use the phrase, or just term 'babe" out of admiration, but okay if women use it?


I'd guess no one ever bothered to ask the ladies. Just a bunch of uptight dudes worried about their own shadow.

Maybe I'm wrong.
you are not wrong. imo, it's a typical result of differences in our tastes, views, definitions...

that said, i never cared for the bob thread. cant recall posting there and only occasionally clicking. still, while the thread deemed mildly sexist (though nothing, as alpe said, we dont find in mass media) i can understand that some, women included, would celebrate the beauty of human body.

it is also true that the owners are completely within their right to regulate the content. however, i seriously doubt that banning a thread can in any way contribute tangibly to the stated noble goal of improving the image of female cycling.

i agree with one scott comment- it was a solution to an in-existing problem. if it was a porn, yea i can see the move, but it wasn't b/c watchful mods excized it timely.

What kind of a world is it when I completely agree with python. :p
Let alone scott.


...I inexplicably find myself in the same position...maybe its a bug or something....or strange times...

Cheers
User avatar blutto
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,848
Joined: 04 Jul 2009 19:27

29 May 2016 15:07

This all started because of one uptight person sending an email to the website main office, maybe some emails by the other side would give them some perspective? Idk....
User avatar Irondan
Administrator
 
Posts: 5,587
Joined: 30 Apr 2014 02:13
Location: Seattle, WA

Re:

29 May 2016 15:43

Irondan wrote:This all started because of one uptight person sending an email to the website main office, maybe some emails by the other side would give them some perspective? Idk....


....many thanks for that useful bit of info....

Cheers
User avatar blutto
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,848
Joined: 04 Jul 2009 19:27

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 15:59

blutto wrote:
Irondan wrote:This all started because of one uptight person sending an email to the website main office, maybe some emails by the other side would give them some perspective? Idk....


....many thanks for that useful bit of info....

Cheers

Well well Well.

Must have been our friend of the forum.
User avatar Semper Fidelis
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,469
Joined: 07 Dec 2010 15:53
Location: New Orleans

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 16:01

Glenn_Wilson wrote:
blutto wrote:
Irondan wrote:This all started because of one uptight person sending an email to the website main office, maybe some emails by the other side would give them some perspective? Idk....


....many thanks for that useful bit of info....

Cheers

Well well Well.

Must have been our friend of the forum.

I wasn't told if it was or wasn't, but I'm assuming it was.
User avatar Irondan
Administrator
 
Posts: 5,587
Joined: 30 Apr 2014 02:13
Location: Seattle, WA

Re: Re:

29 May 2016 16:19

Irondan wrote:
Glenn_Wilson wrote:
blutto wrote:
Irondan wrote:This all started because of one uptight person sending an email to the website main office, maybe some emails by the other side would give them some perspective? Idk....


....many thanks for that useful bit of info....

Cheers

Well well Well.

Must have been our friend of the forum.

I wasn't told if it was or wasn't, but I'm assuming it was.

Same here. I realize you were not told and I would be surprised anyone would be told. I just was guessing.
User avatar Semper Fidelis
Veteran
 
Posts: 7,469
Joined: 07 Dec 2010 15:53
Location: New Orleans

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

Back to top