"Special Women's Section"

[sundial]

You can't assume that women who are "out getting a manicure" would not be interested in buying a bike or be great riders, any more than you can assume someone who is tall is a basketball star. Just my humble thoughts.

Crankin, I agree with you.

However, with that being said.....my LBS has tried to entice female customers with WSD bikes, clothing, and accessories. Women's cycling gear is still hanging on the racks, WSD bikes are slow to move, and the ladies shoe sales are sluggish at best. It's not for lack of customer service--the staff bend over backwards to help customers. When I have been there during their busiest time, and if the ladies are there, it's to accompany their husbands or boyfriends while they are test riding bikes. I've only seen one lady purchase a WSD mountain bike while I was there. Many of the female customers head over to the running gear section instead.

On the flip side to that, I'm the one in the family that shops for tools and tinkers with stuff. Until hardware store clerks get accustomed to seeing me, they assume I'm shopping for my husband.

[ZenSojourner]

Last time I checked, the so-called "WSD" designs - at least in the smallest sizes, where it makes the most difference - were no improvement over the old line. Specifically, I compared the new WSD line of Trek's to my old didn't-fit Trek 430? 420? (It was the cheap version of their excellent but not sized for women touring bike).

I discovered that the so-called WSD bikes actually had LONGER top tube lengths in their smallest sizes than my old Trek, which had a top tube that was already actually an inch to an inch and a half too long for that size frame.

In the larger sizes they may very well be suitable for taller women. But in the smaller sizes, if you stick with a 700c front wheel, there's no way to get the top tube short enough AND not have toe clip.

I stood in a bike shop one day and listened to a (male) employee telling a woman that if the forward reach was too long for her, they could just move the seat forward. I had to show HIM how to make sure the rider is properly positioned over the pedals (and that he COULDN'T move the seat much forward without violating that aspect of bike fit).

There are times when unisex is appropriate and times when it's not.

Socks, for instance. There's nothing about socks that ought to relegate them solely to people of only the XX or XY persuasion. (Well, discounting frilly socks, pink socks, socks with bunnies or ponies on them . . . )

Let me rephrase that.

There's nothing about PLAIN BLACK COTTON socks that says only males or only females should be wearing these socks.

When I was living in Puerto Rico and had to buy black socks for my son as part of his school uniform, I could not find plain black cotton socks in the boys department for love or money. However, being a non-sexual-segregation type of thinker, I quickly found plain black cotton socks in the GIRL's department. So I bought him six pairs. (Trust me, NOBODY wants to be wearing nylon socks, particularly BLACK nylon socks, in a Puerto Rican summer)

Later at a beach party some guy whose son was also attending the same school was bemoaning to me his inability to find Plain Black Cotton Socks for his son. I found them, sez I (all innocent and unawares). Where? queries he.

I told him where.

He HIT the flippin' ROOF. Well he would have had there been a roof. He started to read me the riot act about dressing my son in, quote, "GIRL'S CLOTHES". I didn't let this guy get to far into this ridiculous rant (he was wearing SOCKS fer cryin' out loud, not frilly undies).

"Maybe we should just talk about something else." quoth I.

"No, we should talk about NOTHING at all!" he screamed, wobbling off in high dudgeon, as if removing his unpleasant and inebriated presence was some sort of loss to me.

Hey, saved me getting rid of the jerk, LOL!

OK, so unisex socks are NOT ok, but unisex bikes are the only right way. WSD bikes are just a marketing ploy. They're no different than men's bikes except they're inferior. So if you're a serious cyclist you should buy a REAL (eg men's) bike.

But heaven forfend we start sock-cross-dressing!

You gotta laugh. And then go buy a Terry.

Sojourner

[BleeckerSt_Girl]

When I was living in Puerto Rico and had to buy black socks for my son as part of his school uniform, I could not find plain black cotton socks in the boys department for love or money. ...(Trust me, NOBODY wants to be wearing nylon socks, particularly BLACK nylon socks, in a Puerto Rican summer)

Having lived for many years in Puerto Rico myself, I can confirm this. In fact, best not to wear socks at all in the summer, unless you are hanging out in some air conditioned place or going out at night when it's cooler.
Nothing like breaking into a sweat between the time you step out of the cool shower and when you pull your fresh cotton clothes on.

[katluvr]

In the Women's section of this months Bicycling mag is a pretty cool story about a women that went to a Women's Bicycling camp/training in Asheville, NC. I thought it was funny and well written -- there were definitely parts of it that I could relate to, especially when she gets dropped from their ride

Yeah, but, that was pretty much it except for the ads and products, not really anything else. I was disappointed. Except I have to pull out the add for the WSD Pinerrello---I pretty much lust after that bike. If I could get the gal out of the picture I would hang it up.

Otherwise, nothing special about the women's special!

[Crankin]

Maybe I feel like being "provocative" today, but I get the sense that a lot of posters feel you can't be a serious cyclist if you ride a WSD bike. Really?
Let me state that I don't ride a WSD bike. I let myself get talked into buying something else. No one else's fault but my own. I will give the shop owner credit for exchanging the frame of the original bike I bought for an x-small frame in a different model of the same make, 2 years later. I know it involved him realizing that I was going to blab all over town about what cr*ppy service he gave me, after dropping some serious cash for my bike. At the time I made the switch, I had to do all my own research to solve my reach/brake problem. Thanks to everyone at TE, I am now able to ride in the drops (well, other than my own fear going down steep hills!). I went out and bought a new bar at another shop and also had them order me short reach brifters. Why should I have to have done this? If he had shown me a bike that came with some of the things I needed, I would have been better off. But, no, he had to push the Italian frames that he can make a big profit on.
I had 2 WSD bikes before this. Yes, they had 650 wheels, but, I didn't care. I am not a racer, but I am someone whose lifestyle revolves around cycling, and I am serious about it. Serious to have fun, that is. So, when a magazine is showing WSD bikes, I am interested, even though I won't be buying another road bike for a long time.
My mountain bike is not WSD and again, it is too big for me. Not terrible, but definitely could have gone smaller. My around town bike, a Jamis, is the best fitting bike I have. It's a WSD flat bar road bike that is made for a short person! Funny, it is also the cheapest of the 3. Of course, everyone is entitled to his/her opinions, and of course, not all women are built for a WSD bike. But, again, let's not make assumptions about what anyone needs. I just wish I could go into a shop and be listened to. You can bet the LBS owner where I bought my bike listens to me now, but I had to be somewhat threatening to get there!

[Cataboo]

Crankin, I don't think people are saying you can't be a serious cyclist or racer on a WSD bike - I think it's the problem that the top of the line wsd bike by one brand is usually not as nice a bike as the top of the line men's bike. That was one of the comparison's in the special women's section... I think it was the men's trek vs. the women's... they had to swap the wheels and something else on the women's bike to make it comparable....

As for myself - I don't have a wsd and would do very badly on one, because I don't have a wsd body... However, my boyfriend would do great on a wsd, 'cause he's got a wsd body - 33" inseam on a 5'7-5'8 body.

Bike manufacturer's should just offer short vs. long torso versions of their bikes, instead of mens vs women's wsds with pink highlights somehow. Or baby blue.

Short reach brifters & shorter cranks should be standard on smaller frames whether or not they're wsd.... And you wouldn't necessarily have gotten short reach ones with a wsd, because a lot of them really aren't that well thought out (they're not reading team estrogen, apparently).

I usually just buy a bike knowing that I'm going to eventually replace the saddle, cranks, handlebars, etc. - but a lot of people on here would argue that's why you should get a bike fitting by a good bike person when buying your bike at a lbs, so they'll swap all this stuff out and dial it in for you.

[ttaylor508]

I actually think that by the magazine adding a women's section, it is an indication that bike manufacturers are in fact listening and realize that there is a market out there for serious women cyclist. I know some of you don't think you need women specific products, but I am one (maybe the minority) that really likes that ever so slight touch of pink on my all black bike and though I probably could have fit on a men's frame just fine, I liked the women specific design, both the way it looks and feels. My only complaint about the women's section in that magazine is that I wish it would have had more editorial content, but I am still glad they had included it.

[OakLeaf]

Until hardware store clerks get accustomed to seeing me, they assume I'm shopping for my husband.

A little OT but you brought back a memory of going to Sears with my husband for a new set of tools for our new household. "Where's your stuff?" the female cashier asked me. I had to point out, "Well, his motorcycle doesn't need this 27 mm wrench, or this #3 Phillips screwdriver..."

[ny biker]

I actually think that by the magazine adding a women's section, it is an indication that bike manufacturers are in fact listening and realize that there is a market out there for serious women cyclist. I know some of you don't think you need women specific products, but I am one (maybe the minority) that really likes that ever so slight touch of pink on my all black bike and though I probably could have fit on a men's frame just fine, I liked the women specific design, both the way it looks and feels. My only complaint about the women's section in that magazine is that I wish it would have had more editorial content, but I am still glad they had included it.

If bike manufacturers - and magazine publishers - are in fact listening and do realize that there is a market for serous women cyclists, there would not be a special women's section once a year. There would be more content in every issue of the magazine that recognizes the fact that many of the cyclists in their audience are women.

[Norse]

Many women's bodies, mine included, do not fit on a WSD bike. So if that's the primary focus of the bike shop or magazine, it doesn't do much for me. Now, clothing, shoes, helmets, sunglasses... that fit women, that's what I would like to see more focus on.

[malkin]

The magazine that shows up most inexplicably here is Family Circle, which is always like that. Of course with the addition of useful advice about what to do when kids get grumpy and refuse to change their socks and stuff like that.

And how to decorate cupcakes.

[Tuckervill]

Reminded me of a Barenaked Ladies song:

My Big Sister
I like my big sister.
But I don't want to wear her coat.
It may be black
It may fit perfect
But you and I both know it's a girl's coat

Now I can handle some hand me downs
But shirts and sandals are out of bounds
Balls and games and such I don't mind
But a coat is over the line

Last time I checked, the so-called "WSD" designs - at least in the smallest sizes, where it makes the most difference - were no improvement over the old line. Specifically, I compared the new WSD line of Trek's to my old didn't-fit Trek 430? 420? (It was the cheap version of their excellent but not sized for women touring bike).

I discovered that the so-called WSD bikes actually had LONGER top tube lengths in their smallest sizes than my old Trek, which had a top tube that was already actually an inch to an inch and a half too long for that size frame.

In the larger sizes they may very well be suitable for taller women. But in the smaller sizes, if you stick with a 700c front wheel, there's no way to get the top tube short enough AND not have toe clip.

I stood in a bike shop one day and listened to a (male) employee telling a woman that if the forward reach was too long for her, they could just move the seat forward. I had to show HIM how to make sure the rider is properly positioned over the pedals (and that he COULDN'T move the seat much forward without violating that aspect of bike fit).

There are times when unisex is appropriate and times when it's not.

Socks, for instance. There's nothing about socks that ought to relegate them solely to people of only the XX or XY persuasion. (Well, discounting frilly socks, pink socks, socks with bunnies or ponies on them . . . )

Let me rephrase that.

There's nothing about PLAIN BLACK COTTON socks that says only males or only females should be wearing these socks.

When I was living in Puerto Rico and had to buy black socks for my son as part of his school uniform, I could not find plain black cotton socks in the boys department for love or money. However, being a non-sexual-segregation type of thinker, I quickly found plain black cotton socks in the GIRL's department. So I bought him six pairs. (Trust me, NOBODY wants to be wearing nylon socks, particularly BLACK nylon socks, in a Puerto Rican summer)

Later at a beach party some guy whose son was also attending the same school was bemoaning to me his inability to find Plain Black Cotton Socks for his son. I found them, sez I (all innocent and unawares). Where? queries he.

I told him where.

He HIT the flippin' ROOF. Well he would have had there been a roof. He started to read me the riot act about dressing my son in, quote, "GIRL'S CLOTHES". I didn't let this guy get to far into this ridiculous rant (he was wearing SOCKS fer cryin' out loud, not frilly undies).

"Maybe we should just talk about something else." quoth I.

"No, we should talk about NOTHING at all!" he screamed, wobbling off in high dudgeon, as if removing his unpleasant and inebriated presence was some sort of loss to me.

Hey, saved me getting rid of the jerk, LOL!

OK, so unisex socks are NOT ok, but unisex bikes are the only right way. WSD bikes are just a marketing ploy. They're no different than men's bikes except they're inferior. So if you're a serious cyclist you should buy a REAL (eg men's) bike.

But heaven forfend we start sock-cross-dressing!

You gotta laugh. And then go buy a Terry.

Sojourner

[Zen]

When I bought my second FX I wanted a high end model.
I need a WSD.

The top of the line for WSD is the 7.6 w/ Tiagra 9 speed.

The actual top of the line (meaning the reach would be too long for me) is 7.9 Ultegra 10 speed.

That chaps my arse.

[ZenSojourner]

That chaps my arse.

They got Bike Short Cream, for men or for women, for that . . . .

[Cataboo]

They got Bike Short Cream, for men or for women, for that . . . .

I heard just a day or so or a page or so ago, that that stuff can't touch mucous membranes.