Paris-Roubaix Femmes, 2021 - Oct. 2nd

Page 3 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Not everything needs to be sexism. Also then why organise a female edition at all?
I didn’t say everything does, but in this case I think it’s an assumption that the women can’t handle it. No way they’d drop it if it had to be the first sector in the men’s race for some reason.

sexism isn’t binary. It’s perfectly possible to do something that benefits women while still having that thing affected by sexism, like creating a very short PR and cutting out pave sectors because you don’t think they can cope.
 
I didn’t say everything does, but in this case I think it’s an assumption that the women can’t handle it. No way they’d drop it if it had to be the first sector in the men’s race for some reason.

sexism isn’t binary. It’s perfectly possible to do something that benefits women while still having that thing affected by sexism, like creating a very short PR and cutting out pave sectors because you don’t think they can cope.
I don't think it's as much that they "can't handle it" but more that organisers seem to go "sure that's good enough".

I don't really know what the economic considerations are. But the broadcasts aren't that long either.
 
The argument would be that it's one of the places where you can truly swing the race in your favour, especially with cobbles of that condition being relatively new to the female peloton as a collective.

I kind of see it. I'd like to see the Arenberg in the race, but as the third or fourth sector if possible, so everyone has at least a chance to feel their way into the race on the day. All 3 five star sectors in both the men's and women's races would be great if it can be done.
If it was in the race there‘d still be 100+km to go I think. If a rider can drop the rest of the peloton there and hold them off she deserves to win. They’ve been out training on them and while I know racing is different, I can’t see it following anything other than what the men’s race does there. A massive fight to get in first then string out until the end. Also, Arenberg as the first ever sector of cobbles in a women’s PR would have been iconic.
 
Reactions: 42x16ss
I don't think it's as much that they "can't handle it" but more that organisers seem to go "sure that's good enough".

I don't really know what the economic considerations are. But the broadcasts aren't that long either.
If it’s just laziness and a “that’s good enough” attitude it’d be a classic example of sexism.

im guessing it’s sold as a package with other racers, so broadcast details would be up to the broadcasters rather than the organiser, but I’m not sure about that.
 
There's another angle of Arenberg's omission from this year's edition... once it gets introduced gonna provide a new publicity impact.

I'm on the same page with ASO about this.
Perfectly fine route for the premiere edition. An early hazardous section would only make a difference in the amount of non-racing-related distress.
Let's see how it goes, gather impressions and boost it in the future.
 
Last edited:
If it was in the race there‘d still be 100+km to go I think. If a rider can drop the rest of the peloton there and hold them off she deserves to win. They’ve been out training on them and while I know racing is different, I can’t see it following anything other than what the men’s race does there. A massive fight to get in first then string out until the end. Also, Arenberg as the first ever sector of cobbles in a women’s PR would have been iconic.
The Arenburg forest has changed many an edition of PR - The race often splits up with 10 or 15 riders and sometimes they are not brought back - Having the Arenburg Forest early on in the first edition of the ladies PR could determine the winner.
 
The Arenburg forest has changed many an edition of PR - The race often splits up with 10 or 15 riders and sometimes they are not brought back - Having the Arenburg Forest early on in the first edition of the ladies PR could determine the winner.
You're making assumptions about what would be the first cobbled sector at the beginning of a race based on what occasionally happens on the ~10th cobbled sector after over half of a race...
 
Reactions: Orbit501
You're making assumptions about what would be the first cobbled sector at the beginning of a race based on what occasionally happens on the ~10th cobbled sector after over half of a race...
Of course, I'm making assumptions ! After all we are discussing an event which is yet to occur. I can hardly be definitive when this is the first edition of the women's PR - A fact is that Arenberg Forest has often caused splits in the men's peleton, and on some occasions decided the race.
 
Of course, I'm making assumptions ! After all we are discussing an event which is yet to occur. I can hardly be definitive when this is the first edition of the women's PR - A fact is that Arenberg Forest has often caused splits in the men's peleton, and on some occasions decided the race.
In a completely different situation, that’s hardly comparable.
 
I don’t really know why you’d try to relate the two and what the point would be. I’m not talking about the male juniors.
Because they ride nearly the same route? Because Arenberg could be included in both (as the first sector), but isn't in either. They are treated the same, sector-wise.

It's super lazy to assume that any differences must be the result of underlying "problematic" structures.

...

You could also just answer the question. Why do you think the juniors don't ride Arenberg? (The implicit follow-up question is why that explanation wouldn't apply to the women?)
 
Because they ride nearly the same route? Because Arenberg could be included in both (as the first sector), but isn't in either. They are treated the same, sector-wise.

It's super lazy to assume that any differences must be the result of underlying "problematic" structures.

...

You could also just answer the question. Why do you think the juniors don't ride Arenberg? (The implicit follow-up question is why that explanation wouldn't apply to the women?)
You still haven’t given any reason why they should be related. ASO have given their reason for not including Arenberg and I disagree with it. I really don’t care if their route is similar to the juniors, it’s irrelevant to whether the women should be riding Arenberg or not.
 
Do you not think that whatever the reason is why the juniors don't ride Arenberg that the same could be applied to the women? That a related reason is in play?

It is after all the same organiser that decided both (and came to the same result for both). Thus they are related.
 
This isn’t guess work, ASO have given their reason for not including it. I disagree and I also am not a fan of the route they have chosen, which they are claiming has forced the decision to not include Arenberg. That was their choice.

I’m not sure I can be more clear but I will try. I do not care what route the juniors ride. If you care and want to make the argument they should ride Arenberg then make a thread and do it. The juniors are not the elite male riders and I see no relevance to drawing comparisons between their race and the elite women’s race, just because ASO decided to use basically the same route. The choice was made by ASO. They didn’t have to make it and as such, the situation in the women’s race is one of their own making. What they have done feels lazy and dismissive, which I believe is underlying sexism and them believing the women’s elite peloton couldn’t manage a longer race and would find Arenberg too dangerous.
 
Do you not think that whatever the reason is why the juniors don't ride Arenberg that the same could be applied to the women? That a related reason is in play?

It is after all the same organiser that decided both (and came to the same result for both). Thus they are related.
They think the juniors can't handle it - probably true. They think the grown-up women can't handle it - still to be proven. The juniors are still growing and learning and need to be protected. The women - one could try it before saying/ behaving like they can't handle it.
Personally I would have made the race longer most of all; I find the length more than the leaving out of certain sectors unnecessary and yes, insulting. Then if the race was longer the placing of the sectors probably wouldn't be much of a problem anyway.

I'm not blind towards the huge differences in level in the women's peloton, though. But this is a ridiculous length in my opinion and if you don't have longer and harder races there isn't much of a reason to train for those for the women.

Another aspect is that due to the small amount of climbing in women's pro cycling the percentage of strong rouleurs with a good sprint is higher in the women's peloton. I could definitely name more women specifically suited to P-R than for Lombardia for instance.
 
As I metioned earlier, Arenberg hasn't been used in the U23 race either (at least I haven't found proof of it), but of course it wouldn't be a problem for ASO to include it if they wanted to.

Hopefully they will listen to some of the criticisim regarding race length, TV coverage, prize money, the omission of Arenberg etc. in the future, but right now the main thing is that the race is finally going to take place.



View: https://twitter.com/TrekSegafredo/status/1443985373378617364
 
Reactions: yaco and Leinster
This isn’t guess work, ASO have given their reason for not including it. I disagree and I also am not a fan of the route they have chosen, which they are claiming has forced the decision to not include Arenberg. That was their choice.

I’m not sure I can be more clear but I will try. I do not care what route the juniors ride. If you care and want to make the argument they should ride Arenberg then make a thread and do it. The juniors are not the elite male riders and I see no relevance to drawing comparisons between their race and the elite women’s race, just because ASO decided to use basically the same route. The choice was made by ASO. They didn’t have to make it and as such, the situation in the women’s race is one of their own making. What they have done feels lazy and dismissive, which I believe is underlying sexism and them believing the women’s elite peloton couldn’t manage a longer race and would find Arenberg too dangerous.
The juniors are not the elite male riders, just like the elite female riders are not the elite male riders. By your logic neither does the route of the elite men's race have any relevance.

You can feel whatever you want to, it's as logical as feeling that the route of the juniors is lazy and dismissive and ageist.

They think the juniors can't handle it - probably true. They think the grown-up women can't handle it - still to be proven.
That sounds awfully ageist of you.
 
Last edited:
Reactions: Open Horizon
I'm finding @Netserk 's parallel between sexism and agism quite appropriate.
But that's only because the sexism remark's inadequate, thus making the agism reference a fitting analogy for the false argumentation.

If the girls show they can handle the course and it proves manageable in all aspects, but ASO continues avoiding Arenberg in the coming years, then I'll start complaining.
 
Reactions: Open Horizon

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS