CityCyclingEdinburgh was launched on the 27th of October 2009 as "an experiment".
IT’S TRUE!
CCE is 16years old!
Well done to ALL posters
It soon became useful and entertaining. There are regular posters, people who add useful info occasionally and plenty more who drop by to watch. That's fine. If you want to add news/comments it's easy to register and become a member.
RULES No personal insults. No swearing.
closedSuggests, quite strongly, that if there were equal tv coverage, and men prancing around in various states of undress then it would be fine.
No. This suggests, quite strongly, that there should be more coverage of female sports. And that there should not be podium girls.
Which isn't a point you'd raised till now
Fair enough. Though in my defence I had assumed I was stating the blindingly obvious.
The other night, after we had all been watching the results, my 6 year old asked 'why are those girls there'?
Would love to know how you would all answer that question.
"Would love to know how you would all answer that question."
Just say "decoration" - then discuss if that's a good thing...
"No. This suggests, quite strongly, that there should be more coverage of female sports. And that there should not be podium girls."
And podium men?
So yes, there should be more coverage of female sport; there should only be people and awards on the podium that are connected with winning a race. Job done. (personally, if I was a pro cyclist I'd be more chuffed to be given my trophy by Eddie Merckx...)
"Would love to know how you would all answer that question."
To award the prizes...
(though actually, and this shows how little I take in of the podiums, do the podium girls actually hand over the prizes, or is it someone else? In which case chdot's answer is a better one).
Just popped down to our wee shop here and the magazine stand here is something I'd tackle long before podium girls as having a negative impact on how women are seen in society, and the effect it can have on creating unrealistic expectations in young girls.
Untitled by blackpuddinonnabike, on Flickr
I mean.... 'Are their boobs too big for their bodies?' What????
"To award the prizes"
Which raises the 'why are they girls' Why are they chosen based on looks? Why not have young local athletes? Or para-athletes?
As chdot's answer suggests, it is based on assumption that "we" (presumably heterosexual males) want to look at 'cute' girls. Not to mention thin ones.
You're picking on the girls mags rather than the 'girlie' mags? Really? That's your biggest objection to your newsagents shelves? Really??
http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/dominic-mohan-take-the-bare-boobs-out-of-the-sun-nomorepage3
"Not to mention thin ones"
Now that is something that I don't actually think comes from the general population of heterosexual men. I don't know a single male friend who actually likes women to be stick thin. Not one.
"Which raises the 'why are they girls' Why are they chosen based on looks? Why not have young local athletes? Or para-athletes?"
Well yes, exactly. Which then gets onto chdot's discussion. If it was an overweight mayor handing over the prize (gross French mayoral stereotype) would she have asked 'why is that man there?' and what would your answer have been?
As the photograph above suggests, it is based on assumption that "we" (presumably heterosexual males young women) want to look at 'cute' girls. Not to mention thin ones.
And podium men?
No podium men either. I have no desire to see anyone, male or female, objectified.
"You're picking on the girls mags rather than the 'girlie' mags? Really? That's your biggest objection to your newsagents shelves? Really??"
Er. No. It was in comparison to podium girls. And our office shop doesn't sell porn. And I'm not going to take my phone out to photograph a top shelf rack of mags either. And I didn't say it was my 'biggest' objection, just a bigger objection than podium girls.
"No podium men either. I have no desire to see anyone, male or female, objectified."
Personally I wish I had a body that means I could even be considered to be objectified...
"an overweight mayor" who presumably represents thelocal area, and was elected, or someone else appointed based on merit? Or even a royal who at least constitutionally is the figurehead of the nation?
Yes. Any of those make sense. Choosing someone based on their appearance doesn't/shouldn't.
"Or even a royal who at least constitutionally is the figurehead of the nation?"
I can agree with the overweight mayor, or someone chosen on merit etc. But urgh, some accident-of-birth high-heid-yin... I'm not sure that's any better than choosing someone for their looks.
Actually, they got it very very right in the Olympics for the lighting of the flame. Proper sportspeople handing over to young up-and-coming athletes. Was the highlight of the opening ceremony for me. True merit, both past and present.
Personally I wish I had a body that means I could even be considered to be objectified...
Why?
"an overweight mayor" who presumably represents thelocal area, and was elected, or someone else appointed based on merit? Or even a royal who at least constitutionally is the figurehead of the nation?
But now your imposing your sense of "merit" on the situation. A lot of people would object to politicising the issue, would any one want Borris standing up there? Even if he wasn't allowed to speak. Also you run the risk of protesters ruining the riders victory saying nothing of the hypocrisy of Keith Broon presenting a Yellow Jersey!
A minor royal could potentially invite trouble from republicans, not to mention the issue of finding a royal in France.
Just say "decoration"
That may be how the women's role is perceived now, but I don't think it is anywhere near as simple as that. It's a ritual, literally a kind of 'hero worship' which cannot be adequately explained through rational motives.
Human beings are not 'rational actors' in a perfect free market. There are all kinds of other cultural behaviours going on which, when distilled into a televisual image, seem to project a particular coded meaning familiar to us from other media forms.
I personally think this particular example is more complicated. Having said that, no harm in debating whether such traditions are too anachronistic to be 'acceptable'. But then the question becomes 'acceptable to whom?' That's fundamentally a political question. Individuals, and groups within society will take positions on associated issues. Perhaps there will be pressure brought to bear on the Tour organisers to end the podium ritual in its current form. We'll see.
Does having podium girls mean that the men who are watching them will objectify women, treating them worse, and lead to a general degredation in the rights and treatment of women in the world?
Would the disposal of podium girls mean the opposite, that the cause of women would be gernally improved?
I'll build a bit of a straw man here - for the "booth babe" version, then yes, they are meant to both objectify the women (willing though they may be), and manipulate or titillate the male observer. I actually resent the suggestion that I'll buy something because of its association with a scantily clad woman. Even the scientific instrument resellers sent a rep round the labs who appeared to be chosen for her looks and dress sense, rather than her knowledge of the technology or science!
I'm a little less concerned about "respectably dressed" podium girls, as that moves the question from exploiting sexuality to exploiting beauty. The latter has its own problems (unrealistic expectations, self-image, etc), but at least we've moved away from lust.
Put it like this - I don't want my children deliberately setting out to parade their sexuality, and I want them to have healthy body images, but I'm happy that they should take appropriate care of their appearance and bodies.
Robert
Because I was trying a joke to inject some levity....
But also because in reality I'd like to look as good as I can. Simple as that. EVERYONE does to an extent. If you disagree with that think about the next time you buy some clothes. Do you buy something that's just a sack cloth, or do you think about how you would look in it? Everyone, to varying degrees, wants to look good - whether that's for themselves, or for other people, who knows. If we didn't care about how we looked we'd all have a wardrobe with some black slacks and a white shirt, for each and every day of the year.
I have a gluten intolerance. It just makes me a tiny, little bit ill at times, but just at times, and ont in any way that affects my day to day life, while the main side effect is a horribly bloated stomach. I hate it, it makes me feel really rotten to think I have that physical aspect to me that looks so awful. I find myself sucking my stomach in all day. And so I don't eat gluten in the hope that I can bring it down (all the while, at the moment, trying to help with all sorts of abs exercises). Is that vain? Is it daft? Is it being driven by me thinking too mcuh about what other people thnik when they see me in a cycling top with the belly sticking out? Or is it just me wanting to feel good with no reference to anyone else?
What was my point again? Ah yes, a joke...
What was my point again? Ah yes, a joke...
I guess it comes down then to what one would consider funny and what one would consider belittling the problem. I'm afraid I took your post as the latter.
*sigh* I'm out of this.
the problem.
And here is the problem, "we" are applying a middle class British morality to a situation where we are ultimately hangers on.
Do we force countries to stop employing child labour because it upsets our sensibilities despite having no real sense of what's really happing on the ground.
The women doing these jobs, and it is a job, are being paid well enough and some might not find work paying similar in what we'd consider respectable employment so do we insist they work in an office? Can't work in reception though just in case they're seen as being objectified...
Other terms may be in use by the organisations involved but "podium girl" itself is gratingly decorative/diminutive.
An article which popped up a while back (possibly the same BBC story linked further up) mentioned the purported employment of local female athletes in the prize presentation process but didn't clarify if they were asked to wear the outfit applicable to their sport (or perhaps a sponsor-coloured equivalent thereof) or supplied with a skimpy dress. Even in the case of cycling when both genders' outfits are skin-tight the female cycling short does have a tendency to finish much higher up the thigh than the male equivalent, as well as probably having some seemingly obligatory pink somewhere on it.
"Tradition" and "people are 'willing' to be paid for standing around smiling for cameras through their make-up" aren't really valid reasons - other things hithertho considered traditional have eventually been ditched after having logic and reason applied to them and it's an established thing that people will sometimes do things for money if the opportunity is made available.
May re-enforce some stereotypes, but do people remember the 'Sagan pinch' from last year....
other things hithertho considered traditional have eventually been ditched after having logic and reason applied to them
You place too much faith in logic and reason. I'd rather say that the process of 'ditching' traditions (and by extension creating new ones) is one of politics. Politics, logic and reason are rarely seen to be operating in harmony.
"You place too much faith in logic and reason."
Did I state how much faith I was placing in logic and reason? Was I commenting on traditions ditched through political influencing excluding the use of logic and reason?
*sigh* I'm out of this.
I do not think I am being unreasonably harsh here and am actually a little offended by your response. Perhaps I should have read your comment and just filed it under "Ill considered, best to ignore" but this subject is important to me as I would assume it is to all of the women (and hopefully all of the men) on this forum and previous comments along the lines of 'well there are far worse objectifications of women in the media out there so why worry now about podium girls' got me heated up to begin with.
As for the original reason I linked to the article I just don't understand how, in a world where equality between the sexes is definitely on most agendas, such things as podium girls can still be considered ok. Granted those employed in cycling are far more tame than other sports and granted there are worse examples of objectification of men and women but it just seems so damned archaic.
@wingpig, I just quoted what you did say.
It does not necessarily follow that if a tradition is 'ditched' this is the outcome of the application of logic and reason, which I think is what you said. It might be the outcome of such an application, but I would say more often it's the outcome of political processes which have very little resemblance to logical reasoning. Unless you count people's calculations of which group(s) currently hold power and influence at any given moment. Is that logic? Or instinct?
such things as podium girls can still be considered ok
Do you watch le tour? Or any other sport with "podium girls"? Then stop.
This is a commercial transaction just the same as buying battery eggs. If you object to any part of the product then exercise your supreme right as the consumer to not buy it. Write to the sponsors and tell them why you no longer wish to purchase their product, start a facebook page about it but don't complain and continue watching. Advertisers don't care whether the consumer is disgruntled only that they are consuming.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Cycling in Edinburgh Flickr group
Video embedded using Easy Video Embed plugin
posts