RoadBikeReview.com's Forum Archives - Non-Cycling Discussions


Archive Home >> Non-Cycling Discussions(1 2 3 4 )


Need to Vent!(41 posts)

Need to Vent!jtolleson
Aug 12, 2002 6:15 PM
Okay, the thread isn't new, but frankly I never bothered to read it (the cycling chick photo thread in the General forum): http://forums.consumerreview.com/crforum?viewall@@.efb1f71 since it didn't appear to interest me.

Well, the word "dyke" (misspelled "dike" in classic redneck fashion) did pop into my view tonight, and upon reading the entire thread, see that it appears in maybe 1/2 dozen places.

Ummmm, since when are epithets just part of the humor? Not to mention how women, whether gay are straight, get the clear "not welcome here" message from the thread.

OK, time to tell me I'm hypersensitive, right? But what other epithet could be used with such impunity on the board? And do these people (I won't generalize and say "everyone") really want to drive away the female minority here by not only using anti-gay epithets but by clearly maligning athletic-looking women?

OK, ranting. Long day at work. But it is really under my skin right now.
re: Need to Vent!spankdoggie
Aug 12, 2002 6:35 PM
Yeah, I have to agree. Not all women look like the quintessential model, you know?

One can tell when pictures are real life not fantasy. They are athletes. I mean, hey, I am against homosexuality, but you won't see me throwing down the d (yke) word or f (ag) word, man...

Peace, and fast riding,

spankdoggie
I saw your response on the general board &.........Len J
Aug 12, 2002 6:46 PM
thought it was well spoken.

I read the thread & suspected it was an (undisguised) attempt to get a rise out of the women on the board by some very juvenile trolls. As such, I didn't think that it was worth giving them the pleasure of getting down in the mud with them.

I hope that you can recognize that these are the minority and that you will not let the majority of genuinely helpful people be drowned out by this lot.

Len
I agree.spankdoggie
Aug 12, 2002 7:24 PM
People post pictures of real women athletes, and you get all the jackasses making fun of them...

Ditch the pornography, and jump into the real world, guys.
I saw your response on the general board &.........jtolleson
Aug 12, 2002 7:55 PM
Yes, yes. I know it is a minority. Lots of folks here I'm very fond of! : )

xoxoxo
re: Need to Vent!Spinchick
Aug 13, 2002 5:15 AM
You're not hypersensitive, this sh*t just gets old after a while. There are plenty of intelligent, respectful men and women who post here regularly. The rest of the little boys are best just ignored.
What they said...MXL02
Aug 13, 2002 5:40 AM
I think there will always be crap like this on a public board....the best thing to do is ignore it, and try to believe that most of the men here also ignore it as juvenile prurient garbage.
I agree...that word is not a good one to use (nm)ColnagoFE
Aug 13, 2002 6:33 AM
Blame memr_spin
Aug 13, 2002 6:41 AM
I should have never done the post that started that thread. It was just an idiotic attempt at humor and I had no idea it would go where it went. In no way was I questioning her sexuality.

I treated that photo as if it were in the photo caption contest, where the people are anonymous and in a good natured way, we can make fun of them. lonefrontranger snapped me back into reality when she said she knew the woman. Suddenly I realized that woman might read this stuff or hear about it, and I can't imagine it's going to feel too good if she does.

I'm sorry for my post and all the posts that followed, and for giving the rednecks a reason to post their crap.
Thanks for your sincerityKristin
Aug 13, 2002 7:01 AM
This was a nice post. I agree, if either of these women read the posts it would really suck. You should post this to the original thread too. I might help if they are reading it.

Okay, back to the books!
partial blame here tooColnagoFE
Aug 13, 2002 7:06 AM
i should have known better than to start a discussion based on the physical attributes of the cyclists. sorry!
theBreeze is who you need to apologize tokoolaid
Aug 13, 2002 8:03 AM
So lonefrontranger "woke" you up? An hour and a half after she posted you wrote the following "but those tattoos make her look like a sailor who has seen too many ports. The muscular body doesn't help." You wrote that in trying to defend your childish behavior to theBreeze. You also need to apologize to her if you really mean what you say now. I find it strange that you apologize here after jtollesons post but said nothing about your change of mind in the original thread. I hope the name you're using isn't what your doing now.

LizBeth
you talking to me?ColnagoFE
Aug 13, 2002 9:12 AM
Don't know if you're talking about me and what I posted, but I don't see why I can't state I find the pink hair and tattoos unattractive and sailorish. She might be the nicest person in the world, but I just don't like the look. I was apologizing for starting the whole physique thing in the first place and creating the place for the inevitable homosexual slurs to come--not really taking back my comments that I found the look unnatractive since I do. I never questioned the sexuality (nor really cared about it either) of anyone in the pictures--nor did I make any sexual slurs. That's just wrong.
you talking to me?????koolaid
Aug 13, 2002 10:34 AM
Is your name Travis Bickel and are you looking into a mirror? Did you read my post? Is that your quote? Read posts with a little more attention!
O.K. I blame you, you fool.MB1
Aug 13, 2002 9:01 AM
Now do you feel better?

I was amazed at all the nasty things said about a young woman who judging from the first picture posted seemed to be friendly and accomodating to a photographer/fan.

I too hope she never sees that thread and if she does that she is very forgiving.

What were people thinking?
agree about epithetsDougSloan
Aug 13, 2002 8:32 AM
On the one hand I think there are far too many epithets used, and on the other hand we need to strike a balance with not being too thin skinned or hypersensitive, especially where legitimate attempts at humor or heat argument is concerned. The main problem is anonymity and the inability to really know and see the person speaking.

Just think about all the epithets used. What about "classic redneck fashion (as you stated)?" While Jeff Foxworthy no doubt made the term ubiquitous, even fashionable, you certainly used it in a derogatory sense. In effect, you called someone a "white, dim-witted, country hick," right? I only point this out to show that we all do this from time to time; what seems perfectly natural and and acceptable to some ("redneck") is offensive to others.

Some epithets are obviously horrible to use, and some not so obvious. Think about "whitey, honky, nigger, dyke, fag, yuppie, hick, white-trash, urban, Fred, dork, eunuch, limey," etc. Some of these might make you cringe at even reading them hear. Some you might question whether they are even derogatory at all. No doubt people would differ as to which is which, and it might well depend upon the circumstances used. (Recall the rap group "NWA"?)

I guess my point is in no way to condone name calling; nonetheless, I think we all need to be aware of this and at the same time not be over sensitive. Sometimes it's an obvious call, sometimes it's subtle. In any event, I agree with you and will certainly chime in to help keep the board civil and welcoming to everyone.

Doug
Redneckjtolleson
Aug 13, 2002 10:24 AM
As a native Arkansan (sixth generation) I can assure you that "redneck" is not an epithet along the lines of the kinds we've talked about here. In addition, "redneck" is about attitude, not skin color (in my book, ANYONE can be a redneck). I think that some folks don't understand the sting of epithets because they don't belong to a group where one can be hurled at them. The combination of pain and rage is pretty hard to describe.

If you are calling me a bigot just because I used the term "redneck" to describe the use of anti-gay epithets on this board, then we'll just have to agree to disagree. I ain't buyin'.
just an exampleDougSloan
Aug 13, 2002 10:44 AM
I was not calling you anything. I was trying to make the point that many of us frequently use terms like this, and sometimes without the same meaning intended as viewed by another.

Yes, I believe the term "redneck" can be derogatory, and you certainly used it that way. You were not (ostensibly, at least) using the term to describe someone who merely drives an old pickup and chews Skoal. You meant it as an insult. To paraphrase you, the term is about behavior and a way someone thinks, even if not skin color. How is "dyke" any different? Maybe anyone can be a "redneck" (I disagree), but then anyone can be a "dyke" or "fag," too.

I don't like being labeled negatively, either. I fully understand that. I was not calling you a bigot, but merely trying to raise everyone's awareness of the various derogatory terms, not just one type of them. To be fair, we should all refrain.

Don't get me wrong, I'm on your side.

Doug
just an examplejtolleson
Aug 13, 2002 11:07 AM
Sorry. I know you are on my side. But comparing a politically-laden label like "redneck" with an epithet like dyke I think does a disservice to those who have suffered the sting of real epithets.

Does anyone want to cry because an angry motorist has screamed "redneck" at them? I don't think so. Do people lose their jobs because it is discovered that they like Budweiser and Rush Limbaugh? I doubt it.
I understand (sorry to drag this out)DougSloan
Aug 13, 2002 11:55 AM
I understand that the terms are not equivalent in their abilty to provoke emotional responses. No one made a million dollars doing jokes about "You might be a dyke, if..."

No one should be made to feel badly about things that either they can't do anything about or are mostly private. I doubt any of use could bear public scrutiny of all of our private thoughts and actions.

Hey, though, I take a lot of grief for 'fessign up to being a Limbaugh fan. Still, not the same thing, but there would likely be many jobs I would never be offered if that were known. Would the ACLU employ Budweiser-drinking Limbaugh fans? I doubt it. On the other hand, it did defend the right of the KKK to march...

Most people want to feel accepted and liked, or at least respected. I think that's what it boils down to -- respect. People on this board should show respect for each other, which includes refrain from using epithets, even if not specifically targeted at other members. You have my full respect.

As the ACLU has uniquely demonstrated, you can disagree with someone's beliefs very strongly and still support their fundamental rights.

Doug
XOXOXOXOXO (but don't get the wrong idea ....) : ) NMjtolleson
Aug 13, 2002 12:59 PM
Dykes on Bikes.Sintesi
Aug 13, 2002 9:17 AM
That's a motorcycle group I saw at the annual Gay Pride Parade in New York. They "reclaimed" and "owned" the epithet to de-fang it and take away its power to hurt people. I think that's cool. "I'm a dyke, so what of it?"

People are not confronted too often when they use terms like "fag" and "dyke" as pejoratives. If someone started posting "nigger" or "kike" I think the community here would jump on said poster with both feet. However, "dyke" can pass almost unnoticed - that's a double standard. I don't think that makes our community a bad one but we are probably unaware or insensitive because we haven't been confronted by the pain it might cause some people.

I had a similar gripe when we had that "Colorado Cyclist chick" phase a while ago. A little "girl ogling", objectifying, what-have-you is probably harmless (at least I think so) but it was getting to be a juvenile dog pile of stupid posts. I was worried that someone was going to get the wrong impression about this forum,especially women. I decided to try to post in a contrary way and got into a scrape with RRP, who turned out to be a pure troll, and I ended up feeling stupid for getting sucked into the whole affair in the first place. Some of these people just don't care one way or another and they get offended when someone gets upset. "they get offended" Like, "how dare you get upset over something I said." I mean it's almost unbelievable.

Having said all that, I think you're right to confront them and post when you think they're being hateful or too stupid, but there's always the danger of coming across as too uptight. So I say, pick your battles, do the right thing, say your piece and MOVE ON - don't give it too much thought. Probably your plan anyway, right?

What's that saying about getting into a fight with skunks? You can't win and you'll smell bad? Something like that.
re: Need to Vent!critmass
Aug 13, 2002 9:54 AM
Women have enough nonsense to deal with in life. The image advertising consumer industry alone gives them more than enough grief. To have photographs of women posted here accompanied by all manner of disrespectful ignorant third-grade comments shows that this board has its fair share of thoughtless people. I give credit to the woman here for putting up with such behavior. When Jtolleson, Harlet, theBreeze, Kooaid, Spinchick, or any of the others say something it usually is only after it has gone way too far. I don't think this is about them needing thicker skins. It is about the men here who need to have more respect!
The gay bashing and baiting has also gone way too far. Both the comments about dykes and the overt vulgar threads are oppressive behavior.
re: Need to Vent!netso
Aug 13, 2002 10:03 AM
I trained three Ms. Americas, 1 Ms. Olympia, 2 World Champion women powerlifters, one of which was a National Record Holder. One was a Lesbian, all the rest were straight, however they were all derogatorily labled DYKES.
True, they could kick most of your bony male butts, but they were all sensitive, caring people. I hate the term DYKE and FAGS.
re: Need to Vent!netso
Aug 13, 2002 10:11 AM
Two of these young ladies committed suicide because the insensitive remarks, and the fact that they could not fit into "normal society". I rarely answer these posts, but this subject really, really bothers me. I know how these epithets can hurt.
No wayKristin
Aug 13, 2002 10:48 AM
They committed suicide because they were not emotionally healthy, did not know how to cope with or respond to critism, had poor boundaries and either lacked loving relationships or did not know how to ask for help. Yes, lots of people/attitudes/circumstances may contribute to someone taking their own life; but it is always a choice made by the person committing suicide. The chooser is responsible. Besides guilt trips are not good motivators for true change. I think its sad that these women felt so poorly about themselves inside that they took to heart the untrue comments of others and never saw a way out.
No waynetso
Aug 13, 2002 11:00 AM
Kristin,
What you say is true. However, I saw the humiliation these girls faced from their parents, their friends etc. One girl that I trained won the National Powerlifting championship, entitling to a free trip to the World Championships. Then everyone started saying she was a man that had a sex change. She had to go through the ordeal of A dna test. She ended up not competing, even though she was the best. She is still alive, but a very unhappy person.
I don't understandKristin
Aug 13, 2002 11:11 AM
What motivates a person to pursue something that makes them miserable and gives them no sense of purpose? (i.e. I can understand why Rosa Parks wouldn't give up her seat on the bus--though I'm sure it cost her much happiness.) I feel badly for anyone who is ridiculed and wounded by others. No one deserves it. And how can it but damage our relationships and make us frail? At the same time, when we are wounded we have choice. We can let it consume and ruin us, or we can learn and grow--becoming a stronger, healthier person. I feel for your friend, I hope she has someone she can process her pain and frustration with so that she doesn't remain unhappy.

The inside is just as important as the outside!
I don't understandnetso
Aug 13, 2002 11:27 AM
This particular girl was 6'0 tall and weighed 218lbs. She was one hell of an athlete. She is now mid 30's, never had a date. She likes men, but they do not like her. I guess she intimidates most men. She holds the World Bench press record at 408 lbs. How many men here can do that. She was the State champion 100 mile cycling champion. She was an All-American Basketball and Softball player. However, all she wants is to be accepted and wanted. I have seen the way her father treats her, I would not wish it upon anyone.
hmmm...there's gotta be someone out thereColnagoFE
Aug 13, 2002 12:36 PM
You'd think with all the unique preferences people have that some guys out there would really dig somebody that looked like that. i mean aesthetically. i mean there are women that i'd consider VERY attractive physically that i'd never have dated--mainly because of some personality trait i can't stand. then again i find some women very attractive once i get to know then that might not be "my type" physically. just something about them. physical attraction is only part of the equation.
hate to say thisDougSloan
Aug 13, 2002 1:44 PM
J: I just read that thread for the first time and carefully noted who said what, when. Did you see who first used the term?

Doug
LFR? (nm)ColnagoFE
Aug 13, 2002 2:49 PM
Yea, but she just brought out into the open the implications....Len J
Aug 13, 2002 2:51 PM
of the previous posts.

IMO

Len
agreed....DougSloan
Aug 13, 2002 2:53 PM
That appears to be what happened, but then this thread was about the use of the term, I thought.

Doug
I suspect that.......Len J
Aug 13, 2002 3:38 PM
while the term was the focus of the anger, the general tone of the Thread (Which was what LFR was incensed about (rightfully so IMO))is what generated all the emotion that JT is expressing. Let's not lose sight of the substance of her anger by focusing on the form.

Len
"nice dike, er I mean bike,sorry..."critmass
Aug 13, 2002 2:58 PM
That was the use that jtolleson mentioned. It was also the headline to the post. Why would you want to deflect her point?
nopeDougSloan
Aug 13, 2002 3:25 PM
Her point, I thought, was that the term should not be used. Period. Incidentally, she mentioned that some "redneck" used it. Well, that's true, but to be perfectly fair and accurate that was not the first use of the term. Frankly, I was a bit shocked. I'm not trying to deflect any point. I have already addressed her point ad nauseum. But, let's be perfectly objective here. As much as I like and enjoy hearing from LFR, to be fair to all she first used the term. I'm sorry, but that's what happened. Sure, there were implications before that, but this thread was about epithets, not innuendo or implications.

You know what, I've said more than enough on this topic. You have implied that I've done something wrong by mentioning this. I'm done.

Doug
Venting understandable.Steve98501
Aug 13, 2002 2:31 PM
j,

I agree with you. It seems like it's impossible to know someone's sexual orientation from these or any photos, and why anyone would care and make comments is, well, who knows?

A man may not care for muscular women (can't figure that one) or for certain hair colors or for tatoos (I don't care for tatoos, regardless of gender), but I don't understand the energy some people have to criticize that which doesn't affect them. Like homophobic hate; I cannot understand where someone gets all the energy it must take to get so worked up about it.

Steve
any epithet for dumb straight male? use it!colker
Aug 13, 2002 6:18 PM
i understand the rage. i wouldn't like to see a jew this and jew that anywhere as well but as long as "war between men and women" go on, there will be epithets around so pay back and have a laugh. am i taking it all too lightly?
Goober and Gomer ...jtolleson
Aug 14, 2002 4:47 PM
sometimes some words just don't have the same "oomph." When I call someone a Goober all it does is make people smile.
I liked "oink-a-roney" nmSpinchick
Aug 15, 2002 5:27 AM