I wrote back discussing that very point.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDHillSlug
Printable View
I wrote back discussing that very point.Quote:
Originally Posted by MDHillSlug
Thanks Mimi, let us know if you hear anything back.
I haven't gotten my July issue yet, but I'm one of the "women riders" featured on the website (goal: Bike to Work). First and most upsetting is the complete fabrication that "she needs to be able to tote papers and clothes around. .... And she doesn't want to create a spectacle of her backside." I cannot bring papers home because most of my work is classified, so I don't know where they got that comment. And I never said ANYTHING about my backside. I'm 44 years old, really could care less, and at the risk of sounding immodest, am pretty proud of my strong, biker's glutes. I am all about performance and comfort when I ride, not how I look, for crying out loud. I'm not renewing my subscription to Bicycling. It's more targeted to adolescent males than serious riders
I don't like how the write ups made you all sound needy and wimpy, because you're not. It didn't take into account that you already have a bunch of gear, including bikes and helmets.
It was just a chance for them to advertise more.
And it was LAME!
I rarely buy a Bicycling issue and this article didn't improve my opinion of them any.
V.
Good grief! I just looked up the Internet versions of these writeups. They're a bit better (no model) but still manipulative. They USED you women! Here you are, strong riders all, willing to stand up for women riders, willing to be an inspiration by telling about achievements and goals ... and they 1) misrepresent your achievements, 2) misuse your goals, and 3) show that they lured you into this by misrepresenting their intentions. I'm glad there've been write-ins to complain about this. I'm glad there've been women cancelling their subscriptions. If you want to make an even stronger impact, I suggest writing to the advertisers. Tell them you're potential customers, been looking at their products seriously, but that after this debacle you've really been turned off.
Good grief, that could get you into big trouble at work!Quote:
Originally Posted by Velobambina
::helmet in hands, pleading look on face::
I am not finding the online version of the article. Can someone post a link, please?
:o
http://www.bicycling.com/topic/0,661...23-0-0,00.html
bicycling.com/womenriders
I wanted to echo what others have said....I don't think the article is well done, or that it accurately represents the women portrayed.
Nevertheless - I (some how) ended up with a subscription (I've never subscribed or paid for it), and I do have the insert. If someone wants it for some reason, I'll be happy to pass it along.
CA
Luckily, I've never been one to take work home. LOL. My conscience is clear and I'm known for my honesty at work (not always career enhancing, as I will speak my mind! haha). The "rearend" thing bugs me more. Makes me sound like a twit, not an athlete. "I can't commute because my bum looks too big in bike shorts." Jaysus....Quote:
Originally Posted by mimitabby
I'm so appalled by the lack of integrity in the article. I have a BS in Journalism and as part of my required J-school classes in college, had several courses in ethics, law, etc. I guess the advertisers strongly influence the content of the articles. It's not a magazine---it's a catalog.
Makes you wonder if they would have done the same thing---make the subjects sound like wimps---if this had been an article on men?
Okay, so Velo has a background in journalism.
This is an article for Salon, folks.
Agreed?
How kickass riders were turned into whiney simpering wimps in one fell swoop of advertising -- which didn't even get put into all the issues!
It would best be done by a person who actually was interviewed and had expectations, a first-hand account.
Velo, how about it? Want to interview CWR and KG and see if you can sell the story to Salon?
Me again.
I'm a writer. As a published romance writer I got stung more than once by journalists who interviewed me and either twisted my words/story to fit their preconception about that they wanted a story about "romance writers" to be, or who took things I said out of context and ran with them. (This was not difficult to do the first couple of times, because I tend to be either a smartass, or to use self-deprecating humor.)
A journalist friend told me, every good journalist goes into an interview knowing the story they want to write, and interviews accordingly, but if they're good, they drop that idea as soon as you give them a better one.
So what am I saying? The temptation to chat easily with a writer/reporter/journalist is natural, but you never know what will come back and bite you in your wide bum, kick you with your wide feet, or clip you with your cheaters.
Bottom line, that was never meant to be an article of profiles; it was always meant to be advertising masquerading as a "makeover" article for which they needed real women. They knew what they wanted when they interviewed you, even though you didn't. I'm not sure it's really that awful a thing, considering what the press can and does do to celebrities, political figures, etc.
I suggest that the three TE women write a joint letter to the editor where they briefly list their accomplishments (that were left out of the profiles) and voice their disgust with how their images were used.
But I really think a personal article in Salon or elsewhere could be interesting and entertaining and infuriating while it makes a number of valid points about how women are viewed, but from the magazine's point of view they probably didn't do anything wrong.
I think the real issues where I believe the magazine really hurt us are:
A) They only put this section in some of the magazines.
B) Their "makeover" was totally superficial and expensive -- and had nothing to do with training and serious cycling.
Bite me, Buycycling.
And what other mags are out there instead?
(By the way, I got the issue with the women's section; my subscription is in my name, obviously female. What about the others of you? Female name, female section?)
I think that's an excellent idea, pooks.
I have that issue (not sure how I got it either) and I would never have "recognized" any of you, based on the way the did the write-ups.
Our issue came to Mr Raleighdon, so no women's foldout for us!
I agree with you Pooks.
(washing my hands with bleach)
What's Salon?