# is it just me



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

... or does this thread continue to be filled with well meaning but ultimately condescending posts like, 
http://forums.mtbr.com/passion/does...have-image-problem-971685-6.html#post12122566



> Groups of women tend to be more supportive of each other than groups of men. The men tend to be more competitive which may lead to faster progress at Mountain biking which can be an intimidating experience. My wife and her girlfriends are mountain bikers.* As they have progressed from beginners to fairly advanced riders it has always been a challenge to find the right trail for them. A trail that will challenge and entertain them but not be over whelming.*
> One of the ways that men progress is through peer pressure. One guy does the gap jump so now all of his group have to try it. Some succeed but some fail. I don't think women operate this way.
> My daughter rides with the "Mud Bunnies" race group and has a great time. They are advanced riders for the most part. They also do a group ride with options for all abilities.


----------



## the-one1 (Aug 2, 2008)

Ride at your own pace whether you are male, female, trans, Klingon or Vulcan. Quit obsessing over what others think. <-- That's about it right there.


----------



## Andrea138 (Mar 25, 2009)

formica said:


> ... or does this thread continue to be filled with well meaning but ultimately condescending posts like,
> http://forums.mtbr.com/passion/does...have-image-problem-971685-6.html#post12122566


Translation- "women's rides aren't dick-measuring contests, and I don't know how to feel about that"


----------



## Deep Thought (Sep 3, 2012)

How is that condescending?


----------



## JACKL (Sep 18, 2011)

I like turtles.


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

formica said:


> ... or does this thread continue to be filled with *well meaning but ultimately condescending* posts like,
> http://forums.mtbr.com/passion/does...have-image-problem-971685-6.html#post12122566


So much truth to that statement... *sigh*



Stripes said:


> Nice to see MTBR continues to devolve into Pinkbike.


Also this.


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

This conversation is the same as the conversations people were having 10 years ago on both sites. The demographic is older, but the supporting ideas are the same from group to group.


----------



## jeffscott (May 10, 2006)

formica said:


> ... or does this thread continue to be filled with well meaning but ultimately condescending posts like,
> http://forums.mtbr.com/passion/does...have-image-problem-971685-6.html#post12122566


Not sure why that is condencending.....

If you highlight women tend to be more supportive of each other....and my daughter rides with the Mud Bunnies race group and has a great time....

I also have trouble finding trails for my duaghters and wife in the same vein....but we do it.

There is a difference between men and women and vive la difference.


----------



## stacers (Oct 29, 2012)

I'm not sure I find it condescending. I think that there *are* some differences in the way men and women approach mountain biking, in general, especially when learning. Of course, every person is different and so sweeping generalizations about one gender tend to offend those who don't fit said generalizations. I sense that some of the ladies in this forum have many years of experience and are fairly confident technical/downhill riders, so a generalization like the one bolded in the OP might not agree well with you, but in my experience it isn't untrue.

I ride with a large women's mountain biking group (20+ women at many of our weekly social rides) and lead our race team, and I do find that trail selection is extremely important when getting women on mountain bikes. Take the average female beginner (I say "average" to indicate that I understand this is a generalization that all don't fit) on an intimidating techy trail too soon, and she's likely to not return. Not sure guys are the same. We start with easier trails, and progress throughout the summer so that our gals can get comfortable with increasing difficulty in smaller steps, in a group of encouraging women who will focus on proper technique over competition. Most of the guys I know just go out there and go for it, and if a trail is too hard, don't really let it intimidate them. I'm not trying to be condescending here - this is just an honest observation from riding with many many beginning and intermediate female mountain bikers who go on to be super badass riders. 

Every summer I meet handfuls of women who have had bad experiences riding with boyfriends who were well-meaning but started them on super difficult trails that just about turned them off of mountain biking forever. Once these gals have a chance to ride an easier trail and build some confidence while having fun, they see that maybe this is something they really want to learn to do. A trail that "will challenge and entertain them but not be overwhelming", if you will. 

I also spend a lot of time talking up my beginner gals on race team, pre-riding courses with them, assuring them that it's okay if they walk an obstacle during a race, talking them in off the ledge about passing etiquette... They tend to be more intimidated about entering races, and need more support than I assume the average guy would. But we support each other, and keep it positive, and I think they get out there and build a ton of confidence by racing courses that inititally intimidated them. Again, sweeping generalization, but most guys I know just jump right in if they want to race. I don't think it's condescending to say the two genders approach competition differently, just an observation (which, admittedly, might not fit 100% of riders).


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

The key phrase that makes that condescending to me is "As they have progressed from beginners to fairly advanced riders..."

I totally understand what you're saying, Stacers, and I don't disagree. But I do think it's condescending to, in one breath, call a group of women fairly advanced and then assume they can't handle the same trails men can? Or do we have a different standard of what makes men and women advanced riders? That right there is what frustrates me about those kinds of statements.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

This one sentence is the one that stood out to me as condescending.


> A trail that will challenge and entertain them but not be over whelming.


Would that be said about progressing men? A trail to challenge, entertain, and not overwhelm?

Do with that what you will. As chuky says, nothing has really changed in this conversation in ten years.


----------



## jeffscott (May 10, 2006)

formica said:


> This one sentence is the one that stood out to me as condescending.
> 
> Would that be said about progressing men? A trail to challenge, entertain, and not overwhelm?
> 
> Do with that what you will. As chuky says, nothing has really changed in this conversation in ten years.


Nor is it likely to because that is just about exactly my exprience riding with my daughters and wife. Also when riding with their boyfriends and my son the opposite is true.

I sent one daughter to a riding camp for her birthday. she enjoyed it and rides better because of it. One daughter is a trail runner with great aerobic fitness and a very capable snow boarder. One daughter is very light and agile and fit....

All three stay back and go much slower than they can ride or need to....to stay within thier abilities.

The boyfriends and my son need to be held back and tend to ride beyond thier capabilites even with cautioning....they all crash basically.

I am an old guy so I ride more like the daughters (no crash stay within ability) then the boys....but I am still faster than most of the boyfriends (tee hee)


----------



## stacers (Oct 29, 2012)

littlebird said:


> The key phrase that makes that condescending to me is "As they have progressed from beginners to fairly advanced riders..."


I see your point for sure, but I guess I didn't take his statement that way. I guess I thought he meant that while they are developing along the way to becoming advanced, finding the right trail matters - not so much when they are advanced riders? I guess it could be taken either way...


----------



## stacers (Oct 29, 2012)

formica said:


> This one sentence is the one that stood out to me as condescending.
> 
> Would that be said about progressing men? A trail to challenge, entertain, and not overwhelm?
> 
> Do with that what you will. As chuky says, nothing has really changed in this conversation in ten years.


I don't necessarily think it would be said about progressing men, but I don't think that's being condescending - I think it's being realistic. This is just my experience, but many beginning and intermediate women *are* easily overwhelmed by the wrong trail, beginning and intermediate men not so much. It's why we have women's mountain biking groups, and skills camps aimed at women. Because women and men approach mountain biking differently (not just mentally, but physiologically).

And honestly, I'm the mountain biker in my family and I'm just trying to get my husband into it. He's a very athletic guy and can clear things I've been working on for years, but I wouldn't hesitate to say that when I take him mountain biking, I do exactly that - choose a trail that is just the right mix of challenge and entertainment, without overwhelming him. I don't think that's an insult or being condescending? It's just me making sure it's a good experience for him.


----------



## Deep Thought (Sep 3, 2012)

Stacers is spot on. 

And so is Chuky. This conversation hasn't changed in years, nor has this chip-shouldered forum.


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

Deep Thought said:


> Stacers is spot on.
> 
> And so is Chuky. This conversation hasn't changed in years, nor has this chip-shouldered forum.


Misandry often results in annoyance. Misogyny often results in death.

And you can **** right off.


----------



## shenny88 (Sep 24, 2009)

formica said:


> A trail to challenge, entertain, and not overwhelm?


Would this not be the perfect trail for every individual rider?

Seems like this thread is complaining about someone not being PC enough... what a fun world the PC one is...

If that thread is condescending, then this thread is condescending. And the whole women's forum may be considered condescending. Where will you draw the line?


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

Look, here's the thing. 

Walk up to any woman at an endurance, enduro, DH, whatever race. Not just a pro, any woman who is showing up and toeing the line. Or anywhere else you'd find "fairly advanced" women riders. Pat her on the back and tell her, "What we need to do is find you a trail that will challenge you but not overwhelm you"--and see the response you get. Feel free to do the same with "fairly advanced" men. 

If it comes off as "well-meaning but ultimately condescending" to so many of us, then maybe, *just maybe, it is.*

And I won't apologize for calling out sexist ******** when I see it, even if it's stuff that other people see as only "not PC enough." Many women are fortunate to never have experienced the war of attrition that is sexism in our culture, but far too many others have, and we're sick of it. 

My ex was a perfect gentleman--despite his casual sexism--right up until the point he pulled a gun on me to intimidate me and put me back in my place. And that's just one story out of millions that women could tell. Thankfully, I made it out alive, but many don't. This is why we care. If you think that means I have a chip on my shoulder because I cringe every time a dude pulls out the "poor little tsk tsk" act, then so be it. 

I'm done explaining and I won't apologize. If you don't like our attitude about being "PC" here in the WL, then please, exit stage left. No one is making you read.


----------



## MtbRN (Jun 8, 2006)

Yeah, that's a deep thought for sure. Feel free to not drop by for a few more years.


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

Deep Thought said:


> Stacers is spot on.
> 
> And so is Chuky. This conversation hasn't changed in years, nor has this chip-shouldered forum.


"PC" is a belittling term used to dismiss important conversations. So is the chip/shoulder reference.

The reason many women ride at the back is because they weren't taught that it was ok to get hurt when they were kids, nor did they acquire basic athletic skills before the age of 10 like boys do, because they are too often not included in the fun. Learning to read gravity is a lot harder in your teen and adult years and leads to a lot more caution - in men and women - it's just a lot more rare in men to miss out on the early years. It isn't inherent to gender, it's inherent to the gendered way kids are raised. Raise women with the same expectations of athletic achievement and inclusion and you see an entirely different result.

I have a boy on the way right now and you wouldn't believe the number of times I've been told "That's great! you can ride with a boy, boys are so much more fun!". Ugh.


----------



## stacers (Oct 29, 2012)

chuky said:


> "PC" is a belittling term used to dismiss important conversations. So is the chip/shoulder reference.
> 
> The reason many women ride at the back is because they weren't taught that it was ok to get hurt when they were kids, nor did they acquire basic athletic skills before the age of 10 like boys do, because they are too often not included in the fun. Learning to read gravity is a lot harder in your teen and adult years and leads to a lot more caution - in men and women - it's just a lot more rare in men to miss out on the early years. It isn't inherent to gender, it's inherent to the gendered way kids are raised. Raise women with the same expectations of athletic achievement and inclusion and you see an entirely different result.
> 
> I have a boy on the way right now and you wouldn't believe the number of times I've been told "That's great! you can ride with a boy, boys are so much more fun!". Ugh.


I agree with this 100%. I didn't get to do stuff like this as a kid, and learning as an adult has been HARD for me. I've got an 8 year old daughter and I'm trying to make this stuff second nature to her - she goes mountain biking with me. She fell and had to have her chin stitched up by a plastic surgeon a month ago, and we were back out on the trails today, learning that when you get hurt, it's not the end of the world. I suspect that as these younger kids grow up, we'll see less of the "conditioned" male/female athletic roles. I've seen some awesome little girls tearing it up on mountain bikes.


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

chuky said:


> "PC" is a belittling term used to dismiss important conversations. So is the chip/shoulder reference.
> 
> The reason many women ride at the back is because they weren't taught that it was ok to get hurt when they were kids, nor did they acquire basic athletic skills before the age of 10 like boys do, because they are too often not included in the fun. Learning to read gravity is a lot harder in your teen and adult years and leads to a lot more caution - in men and women - it's just a lot more rare in men to miss out on the early years. It isn't inherent to gender, it's inherent to the gendered way kids are raised. Raise women with the same expectations of athletic achievement and inclusion and you see an entirely different result.
> 
> I have a boy on the way right now and you wouldn't believe the number of times I've been told "That's great! you can ride with a boy, boys are so much more fun!". Ugh.


Yep, all of this!


----------



## girlonbike (Apr 24, 2008)

Deep Thought said:


> Stacers is spot on.
> 
> And so is Chuky. This conversation hasn't changed in years, nor has this chip-shouldered forum.


I have no idea why you come here with that attitude.

Consider yourself warned.


----------



## miatagal96 (Jul 5, 2005)

The original post doesn't bother me too much. From my experience, men are more competitive and women are more concerned about safety. If I wanted to be condescending, I'd attribute it to men lacking certain brain cells (joking! - well, not really). 

What does bother me is when men on the trail behave differently to women just because they are women - e.g. when a guy just assumes that you can't ride and jumps on the trail ahead of you, or when they make comments like how surprised they are that you can keep up with them, or when they decide that a group is too fast and then see that a female is in it and change their mind, or when they can't stand it if a female rides ahead of them because somehow that emasculates them. These things don't happen often, but it boils my blood when they do. And the guys who do this usually aren't really great riders (because the behavior is based out of feelings of inadequacy), so it's really easy to put them in place and drop them like a hot potato. Yep, that's fun!


----------



## chuky (Apr 3, 2005)

miatagal96 said:


> From my experience, men are more competitive and women are more concerned about safety.


But don't you wonder why? It's not biological. That's the problem - people think it is. People also attribute math and science excellence to biology, which has been roundly disproven. In both cases the disparity is caused by opportunity, assumption and inclusion.


----------



## miatagal96 (Jul 5, 2005)

chuky said:


> But don't you wonder why? It's not biological. That's the problem - people think it is. People also attribute math and science excellence to biology, which has been roundly disproven. In both cases the disparity is caused by opportunity, assumption and inclusion.


I don't think it's a bad thing that women are more concerned about safety - look at the crazy irresponsible behavior many teenage/early 20's guys have compared to girls. Look at who commits more violent/risky crimes. I do wonder why. There is good and bad in taking risks - you learn faster if you're lucky, but you can get very hurt if you're not.

As for math/science aptitude, I experienced it myself. I'm a natural at math/science and lied about my test scores in high school to fit in. That was a long time ago, but I'm sure it still happens. When I went into engineering, many people expressed surprise - like it was too hard for a girl. I agree that the same attitude occurs in mountain biking (and that girls are MUCH less likely to practice wheelies or riding in the woods as kids). I try to shatter both of these stereotypes by providing a strong, competent example in the workplace and on the trails (not just by riding strong, but by learning the trails so I can lead groups and by having trailside maintenance skills.) It's unfortunate, but I believe that women still have to prove themselves.


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

^ I can relate on so many levels. My job as a training coordinator in the research field means I need to be adept on many technical skills. I enjoy working on my own bikes as much as possible and learning maintenance. I tend to carry a lot of tools with me on group rides and am usually the go-to person for trail-side mechanicals.

I started riding mtb rather late in life, at 35. I can understand the desire to preserve oneself from serious injury and being more conservative. A year ago I got involved in teaching mountain biking for the university I work for outdoor education program. The ratio of women to men is always pretty small to non-existant and you definitely notice a difference in comfort level in trying new things. I know they appreciate having a female instructor answering questions and addressing concerns.

For anyone else following, here's another example of what we women seem to face on the threads on MTBR: http://forums.mtbr.com/giant/giant-bikes-2016-whats-next-940775-44.html
The actual thread conversation starts around page 42...but it's page 43 and 44 that get the most interesting. Not sure why people can't accept that some women may want a women's specific bike for the simple fact that it fits and feels better than the men's version.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

> Women also tend to not modify their rides for how they should be set up, so maybe the intrigue is for them.


Stuff like this makes my head want to explode. It's beyond twilight zone...


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

formica said:


> Stuff like this makes my head want to explode. It's beyond twilight zone...


Yeah, mine too. I HAVE modified ALL of my bikes. And for that dude to suggest that I can buy a new stem (obviously doesn't seem to know a ton about Giant or their OD2 system they had) or get a new fork. Really...an new fork so I can put on my stem of choice. Wow. That makes sense. The point is, we shouldn't HAVE to make a bunch of changes to a bike to make it fit.

For him to suggest if they were to paint the Trance and the Intrigue black, which would women choose? Because it's all about the color? Then when someone else put up a link to another article about a woman who had the Trance, then switched to the Intrigue and loved it that she was comparing a medium Trance without a dropper to a small Intrigue with a dropper. Holy carp. Seriously. Okay, because it was the dropper and not the bike or the size, etc. that made the difference? Huh? People like this actually exist. The reason we can't wrap our heads around this isn't because we're women...it's because we're PEOPLE and we can recognize a condescending tone when we read it.


----------



## jeffscott (May 10, 2006)

formica said:


> Stuff like this makes my head want to explode. It's beyond twilight zone...


Actually in my experience beginning riders tend not to modify there bikes....even trying to set the saddle height can bring on self doubt, and hesitation as to what feels good or right to them....men and women equally.


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

That is perfectly valid and probably correct statement, ^^ that *beginners *don't modify their bikes; the gender of the beginner is irrelevant.


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

^ Yes, that. Beginners. I teach an intro to mountain biking class for the university I work for. Beginners, men and women alike, don't want to adjust anything.


----------



## targnik (Jan 11, 2014)

An interesting debate. As a dad and husband I'd like to offer my experiences within my own family.

My lovely wife, who is the heart and soul, the rock which our family is perched on - is someone that I've tried (and will continue to try) to get into the wonderful sport of MTB'ing. She will ride on holiday trips, but only as a group ride. We entered a race/tour event together and she did extremely well for a first timer. We've also been on one trip away with just the two of us (and our bikes). We rode a trail where we had to walk the odd section. My thinking was 'that'll be fun on the return' my love verbalized 'I want to ride my bike, not walk it!' She was rather annoyed.

Now my eldest. She isn't really into sport. She would rather draw, create wonderful things that absolutely amaze me. When I take her and her younger brother out for rides... she is a little resistant in the beginning, but she participates b/c she knows there is a treat at the end. Once we're out on the trails, she will take off ahead while I keep pace with her younger sibling. She gets a big smile on her dial. She will ride things that the mums whilst out on group rides will walk. I swear she'd be a great dh rider b/c she hates the climb but loves the descent (and she rides quicker than most). Once the ride is over, I'll ask her 'how was the ride' 'it was ok dad'.

Myself, I'm a late bloomer - getting back into riding bikes. I really enjoy the sport/pastime for its health benefits and fact that it's something the whole family can do together (my toddler on their balance bike is one of the cutest things you'll ever see). I'm mechanically challenged but am trying to self teach bike maintenance. My personal riding style is I enjoy the slog of the climb (but am a crawler rather than a racer) and like to ride rather quickly on the downs. 

My point (if any)... both my wife and daughter are very different people and when I look at them I don't see gender differences, I see personal differences. One day, I hope to be chasing my kids around the trails. Perhaps my wife and I will do some touring, interjected with some gnar.

A bike, a trail don't consider someone's gender... We are the ones with warped sensibilities.

PS - I think female mtb-ers are badass!

-------------------------------------
Opinions are like A-holes... everybody 
has one & they're usually full of...??


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

Stripes, you get that putting things like a new anodized stem don't count? Women just want the pretty colors. They aren't interested in things like how stem or bar changes can affect performance.


----------



## Lucy Juice (Dec 29, 2010)

My list of performance-related upgrade to-dos is really freaking long... This idea that women don't upgrade for performance is simply laughable. 

I think these guys stating the above like it's fact just don't actually have real conversations with women riders.


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

formica said:


> Stripes, you get that putting things like a new anodized stem don't count? Women just want the pretty colors. They aren't interested in things like how stem or bar changes can affect performance.


Ha ha ha! It's all about the bling!


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

Thinking about things in terms of millimeters is too hard.


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

Newp, it's all about the color now. I said suggesting we only choose bikes based on the color was condescending and he said if it sounded like it was condescending, it was meant to be. And he wondered if they painted the Trance a different color how many women would go for that and how many men would go for an Intrigue if that was painted a different color. He went from geometry and fit to color. Huh.


----------



## jeffscott (May 10, 2006)

formica said:


> Thinking about things in terms of millimeters is too hard.


my thumb nail is 20mm wide


----------



## petey15 (Sep 1, 2006)

jeffscott said:


> my thumb nail is 20mm wide


LOL, okay, that was funny!


----------



## supersedona (Dec 17, 2012)

As someone who has been painting since dad would let me, I couldnt care less what color it comes with. If it's a build up project, I make it work and mod it before deciding the color scheme usually. Sure it will be pretty when done but it has little to do with the feel.


----------



## deanna (Jan 15, 2004)

formica said:


> Thinking about things in terms of millimeters is too hard.


As someone who works in a lab, I tend to forget that most of the US doesn't think in metric. The HVAC guy just about pooped his pants when I told him it was "18 degrees" in the lab last winter. He didn't realize that I was speaking Celsius. Heh. 

As for adjustments when I was a beginner, I started pretty early. After a nasty wreck on one of my first few rides, the toe-clips HAD TO GO!! I went clipless just few rides in and adapted to them quickly. Then stem length, bar width, v-brakes (from cantis) <- am I dating myself?


----------



## formica (Jul 4, 2004)

btw the millimeter comment was a joke.


----------



## supersedona (Dec 17, 2012)

deanna said:


> As someone who works in a lab, I tend to forget that most of the US doesn't think in metric. The HVAC guy just about pooped his pants when I told him it was "18 degrees" in the lab last winter. He didn't realize that I was speaking Celsius. Heh.
> 
> As for adjustments when I was a beginner, I started pretty early. After a nasty wreck on one of my first few rides, the toe-clips HAD TO GO!! I went clipless just few rides in and adapted to them quickly. Then stem length, bar width, v-brakes (from cantis) <- am I dating myself?


If that dates then I'm dated too  I remember when finding a frame for cantis was a big deal over the side pull huffy I had. I didn't crash from clips but my friend's mom broke a wrist. They worked fine for me but clipless has been a no brainer since.


----------

