-
The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
Re: Re:
On a different note, the earlier mention of the "1 email" is probably a tad dramatic or at least skewed, because;
a) all marketing/advertising and any group that collects feedback will have a multiplier for any feedback they get - this represents the silent 'majority' and works on the basis that there's likely to be more than one person with that opinion, but that not everyone will get up and send in their complaint...
b) it's not like this thread hasn't previously had its detractors - straw that broke the camel's back? Maybe...
Personally, I visited the thread on occasion, even adding to it.
Am I fussed it's closed? Not really.
Do I see an injustice in its closing? Nope.
Am I going to vote above? Nup.
Am I saddened/disappointed that the Krebs has stopped posting in the Chaos thread because of this closure? Yep!
If your biggest problem of the day is the closure of this thread, well...
I never saw the crush videos that generated an uproar, but I object to them...Amsterhammer said:
On a different note, the earlier mention of the "1 email" is probably a tad dramatic or at least skewed, because;
a) all marketing/advertising and any group that collects feedback will have a multiplier for any feedback they get - this represents the silent 'majority' and works on the basis that there's likely to be more than one person with that opinion, but that not everyone will get up and send in their complaint...
b) it's not like this thread hasn't previously had its detractors - straw that broke the camel's back? Maybe...
Personally, I visited the thread on occasion, even adding to it.
Am I fussed it's closed? Not really.
Do I see an injustice in its closing? Nope.
Am I going to vote above? Nup.
Am I saddened/disappointed that the Krebs has stopped posting in the Chaos thread because of this closure? Yep!
If your biggest problem of the day is the closure of this thread, well...
Re:
If I would be a woman, I would be a lesbian. However, I understand that some women don't see the beauty of women's body, as it is natural to be curious and seek for something your don't have.
Carols said:
If I would be a woman, I would be a lesbian. However, I understand that some women don't see the beauty of women's body, as it is natural to be curious and seek for something your don't have.
Re: Re:
@MI: props for some brilliantly articulated arguments and observations.
good post.Archibald said:I never saw the crush videos that generated an uproar, but I object to them...Amsterhammer said:
On a different note, the earlier mention of the "1 email" is probably a tad dramatic or at least skewed, because;
a) all marketing/advertising and any group that collects feedback will have a multiplier for any feedback they get - this represents the silent 'majority' and works on the basis that there's likely to be more than one person with that opinion, but that not everyone will get up and send in their complaint...
b) it's not like this thread hasn't previously had its detractors - straw that broke the camel's back? Maybe...
Personally, I visited the thread on occasion, even adding to it.
Am I fussed it's closed? Not really.
Do I see an injustice in its closing? Nope.
Am I going to vote above? Nup.
Am I saddened/disappointed that the Krebs has stopped posting in the Chaos thread because of this closure? Yep!
If your biggest problem of the day is the closure of this thread, well...
@MI: props for some brilliantly articulated arguments and observations.
Re: Re:
I'm not offended, I just think it's one more way to not respect women. I never visited because just the title tells me enough and I've been discriminated against my entire life simply because of my sex.
Amsterhammer said:
I'm not offended, I just think it's one more way to not respect women. I never visited because just the title tells me enough and I've been discriminated against my entire life simply because of my sex.
I voted no (as a man), but will not cause havoc if it isn't restored. Honestly, it's not a big deal even if it was one of the greatest threads in all of internet history.
Of course there was objectification in the thread. That was the whole point. We weren't examining the intellects or personalities of the babes on the bikes. Given that this forum is largely made up of heterosexual men, that thread grew massively. And is there anything wrong with admiring something physical? I can't speak for everyone else, but it's not like this admiration carries over much into the way I actually deal with women in real life.
There was IIRC another thread called Guys on bikes or something of the equivalent. So there's something for everyone. Some people may get excited seeing Pippo Pozzato lying in a pool chair and that's fine, and it's actually OK to look at a picture like that and NOT care about his personality.
Of course there was objectification in the thread. That was the whole point. We weren't examining the intellects or personalities of the babes on the bikes. Given that this forum is largely made up of heterosexual men, that thread grew massively. And is there anything wrong with admiring something physical? I can't speak for everyone else, but it's not like this admiration carries over much into the way I actually deal with women in real life.
There was IIRC another thread called Guys on bikes or something of the equivalent. So there's something for everyone. Some people may get excited seeing Pippo Pozzato lying in a pool chair and that's fine, and it's actually OK to look at a picture like that and NOT care about his personality.
Re:
That is an aspect of cycling that should be discarded. Serves no purpose whatsoever. We saw this at the Giro especially. These busty women in tight AF cycling jerseys displaying the different leaders jerseys. It was too much. I mean, I can't say it didn't catch my attention, but it's completely unnecessary.kwikki said:
I'm reminded of the the woman who stated that she found it absurd that other woman, and even worse so men, feel that they get to determine if photos are objectifying her. She had a well written OP ED that I very poorly summarized in that one sentence, but you get the idea.
Re:
1. there's an ambiguity in the word "should", which means we can read the results of the poll in different ways. I too don't think it *should* have been closed. So I'd answer "no". Still, I do think the closure of the thread was a respectable decision and don't necessarily think it should be reinstated.
I'm just saying, the "no" answer which is trending at the moment can be read in different ways. It could - but doesn't necessarily - mean that the people who chose "no" also want the thread back. (though, admittedly, that is likely the case for most of the "no"'s)
2. the "no" trend was already there before the poll. Irondan said there was only one person who put in a formal complaint, and he didn't mention any other complaints (formal or informal) about the thread. So apparently there were very few who actually thought the thread *should* be closed.
two thingies (nitpicking maybe):Glenn_Wilson said:
1. there's an ambiguity in the word "should", which means we can read the results of the poll in different ways. I too don't think it *should* have been closed. So I'd answer "no". Still, I do think the closure of the thread was a respectable decision and don't necessarily think it should be reinstated.
I'm just saying, the "no" answer which is trending at the moment can be read in different ways. It could - but doesn't necessarily - mean that the people who chose "no" also want the thread back. (though, admittedly, that is likely the case for most of the "no"'s)
2. the "no" trend was already there before the poll. Irondan said there was only one person who put in a formal complaint, and he didn't mention any other complaints (formal or informal) about the thread. So apparently there were very few who actually thought the thread *should* be closed.
Re: Re:
Yes the originator of the objection to the thread was as it seems 1 person. Who was most likely a male and most likely grinding a grudge against the OP for the thread.
I don't think the erected poll ever asks if the thread should be brought back.sniper said:
Yes the originator of the objection to the thread was as it seems 1 person. Who was most likely a male and most likely grinding a grudge against the OP for the thread.
Re:
Because it would be impossible to find any men willing to be presented as sexual objects?kwikki said:
Re: Re:
I would have no problem with being presented as a sexual object but I would think the viewers might have a problem with me presented as a sexual object.frenchfry said:
Re:
If she means that the photos are not objectifying her specifically, I agree. I haven’t seen the Op-ed, but perhaps her point is, if other women want men to ogle them, I don’t care, it doesn’t affect me. But it does affect women in general, for reasons that have been amply discussed in these BoB threads.
Or maybe her point is that she could be one of the women in these photos, and she, not the men or other women, would determine whether she’s being objectified? If that’s her claim, she’s definitely wrong. Of course men get to decide if photos are objectifying women. Men decide because they know, or ought to know, what’s going on inside their heads when they look at the photos. I definitely objectify women at times when looking at such photos, and no other person, man or woman, can possibly dispute me on my own self-knowledge.
All a woman in that situation can claim is that she doesn’t care if she’s objectified. That’s a valid position, I respect it, but it’s very different from saying she isn’t objectified. That’s like her saying other people don’t determine whether they like her or respect her. Of course they do. None of us can determine how someone else perceives us.
jmdirt said:
If she means that the photos are not objectifying her specifically, I agree. I haven’t seen the Op-ed, but perhaps her point is, if other women want men to ogle them, I don’t care, it doesn’t affect me. But it does affect women in general, for reasons that have been amply discussed in these BoB threads.
Or maybe her point is that she could be one of the women in these photos, and she, not the men or other women, would determine whether she’s being objectified? If that’s her claim, she’s definitely wrong. Of course men get to decide if photos are objectifying women. Men decide because they know, or ought to know, what’s going on inside their heads when they look at the photos. I definitely objectify women at times when looking at such photos, and no other person, man or woman, can possibly dispute me on my own self-knowledge.
All a woman in that situation can claim is that she doesn’t care if she’s objectified. That’s a valid position, I respect it, but it’s very different from saying she isn’t objectified. That’s like her saying other people don’t determine whether they like her or respect her. Of course they do. None of us can determine how someone else perceives us.
Re: Re:
Should: used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness.
You have demonstrated why polls are usually unreliable and/or invalid: people try to read between the lines when there is nothing there. Should the thread have been removed? yes, or no has no ambiguity. The poll doesn't ask if you think its a respectable decision (though the comments allow that input). The poll does not ask if you want the thread back (though the comments allow that input).sniper said:
Should: used to indicate obligation, duty, or correctness.
Re: Re:
Yeah, it just sucks to be a woman, huh? On this particular, specific subject, you clearly, and by your own admission, have no idea what you're talking about, so I'll consider your stated opinion as being worthless.
Carols said:
Yeah, it just sucks to be a woman, huh? On this particular, specific subject, you clearly, and by your own admission, have no idea what you're talking about, so I'll consider your stated opinion as being worthless.
Once and for all, to all those claiming, 'it's just a topic on an internet forum, get over it' - the whole point is that this topic was unique on the web, as far as any of us could tell. It was not simply a.n. other topic on some forum. As Alpe has pointed out, nearly 5 million views is an awful lot of traffic. Any forum on the web would bite your hand off to have a topic that attracts so much traffic.
Worst of all, though, it seems that this whole chain of events was set in motion after the latest of foxxy's sockpuppets was banned. An email - yes, one email - of complaint was ostensibly received, as a result of which this insane over-reaction to a non-existent issue occurred, using the shamefully laughable excuse that we were given. Yes, I think foxxy is totally capable of having done this, because he has hated me with a particular passion ever since I first called him out as a neo-fascist and a bigot (based entirely on his own words).
Worst of all, though, it seems that this whole chain of events was set in motion after the latest of foxxy's sockpuppets was banned. An email - yes, one email - of complaint was ostensibly received, as a result of which this insane over-reaction to a non-existent issue occurred, using the shamefully laughable excuse that we were given. Yes, I think foxxy is totally capable of having done this, because he has hated me with a particular passion ever since I first called him out as a neo-fascist and a bigot (based entirely on his own words).
TRENDING THREADS
-
-
Paris - Roubaix 2024, one day monument, April 7- Started by Dreginald
- Replies: 2K
-
-
Tour of the Alps 2024 (April 15 - 19)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 276
-
-
Volta Ciclista a Catalunya 2024 (March 18-24)- Started by Devil's Elbow
- Replies: 2K
-
De Ronde van Vlaanderen (270.8 km), 2024 March 31 (Sunday)- Started by Netserk
- Replies: 1K
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram