Photo in Bicycling Magazine - Cycling Mob: Road Cycling, Mountain Biking and More

04-17-2004, 07:46 PM

I finally checked out that photo that Claire Petersky mentioned. It was just
as outrageous as Claire's description.

However, it seemed to me that it was obviously a total joke. Of course it
looked ridiculous in that magazine- it's obviously supposed to. I doubt they
expect any woman cyclist to dress like that. It was a jab at the whole idea
of "Style". The word itself automatically conjurs up images of fashion
magazines, bored-looking anorexic models wearing just that type of idiotic
getup, and ads for Dolce and Gabanna or whatever.

That being said, I think the fact that they did fall back on that kind of
dumb image is in itself sort of pathetic, like they couldn't think of a
better joke? Very infantile, really. It's like "The Man Show." Does any man
really think that's funny?

04-17-2004, 08:54 PM

Marlene Blanshay wrote:

> I finally checked out that photo that Claire Petersky mentioned. It was just
> as outrageous as Claire's description.
>
> However, it seemed to me that it was obviously a total joke. Of course it
> looked ridiculous in that magazine- it's obviously supposed to.

Sorry, Marlene. As a certified guy (although a non-typical one), my bet
is they put it in there to sell magazines to the hormone-addled teens
and 20-somethings.

Check out the photo on page 25. The bikini bottoms aren't a joke,
they're more testosterone bait.

And check out the article on Copper Canyon. See page 66. "make
training seriously f-ink harsh - and seriously f-ink fun" ... "the
ultramarathoners got their CoolMax asses kicked"... "The little *****
turned out to be Al..."

Bicycling is hoping that loud, crude, and fairly stupid guys are where
the money is. They're hoping their advertisers believe that, and
they're out to lure more of those "dudes" to buy that bitchin' magazine.

What seems odd, to me, is that the board members of the League of
American Bicyclists thinks this magazine is a great perk for its
members. It seems odd even if most of them are now bike industry
shills. Seems like a major piece of cognitive dissonance to me!

> I doubt they expect any woman cyclist to dress like that.

The boys they're hoping to sell to have intense daydreams about women
who dress like that. And they don't involve bicycles at all.

--
-------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]

04-17-2004, 08:54 PM

Marlene Blanshay wrote:

> I finally checked out that photo that Claire Petersky mentioned. It was just
> as outrageous as Claire's description.
>
> However, it seemed to me that it was obviously a total joke. Of course it
> looked ridiculous in that magazine- it's obviously supposed to.

Sorry, Marlene. As a certified guy (although a non-typical one), my bet
is they put it in there to sell magazines to the hormone-addled teens
and 20-somethings.

Check out the photo on page 25. The bikini bottoms aren't a joke,
they're more testosterone bait.

And check out the article on Copper Canyon. See page 66. "make
training seriously f-ink harsh - and seriously f-ink fun" ... "the
ultramarathoners got their CoolMax asses kicked"... "The little *****
turned out to be Al..."

Bicycling is hoping that loud, crude, and fairly stupid guys are where
the money is. They're hoping their advertisers believe that, and
they're out to lure more of those "dudes" to buy that bitchin' magazine.

What seems odd, to me, is that the board members of the League of
American Bicyclists thinks this magazine is a great perk for its
members. It seems odd even if most of them are now bike industry
shills. Seems like a major piece of cognitive dissonance to me!

> I doubt they expect any woman cyclist to dress like that.

The boys they're hoping to sell to have intense daydreams about women
who dress like that. And they don't involve bicycles at all.

--
-------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]

04-17-2004, 08:54 PM

Marlene Blanshay wrote:

> I finally checked out that photo that Claire Petersky mentioned. It was just
> as outrageous as Claire's description.
>
> However, it seemed to me that it was obviously a total joke. Of course it
> looked ridiculous in that magazine- it's obviously supposed to.

Sorry, Marlene. As a certified guy (although a non-typical one), my bet
is they put it in there to sell magazines to the hormone-addled teens
and 20-somethings.

Check out the photo on page 25. The bikini bottoms aren't a joke,
they're more testosterone bait.

And check out the article on Copper Canyon. See page 66. "make
training seriously f-ink harsh - and seriously f-ink fun" ... "the
ultramarathoners got their CoolMax asses kicked"... "The little *****
turned out to be Al..."

Bicycling is hoping that loud, crude, and fairly stupid guys are where
the money is. They're hoping their advertisers believe that, and
they're out to lure more of those "dudes" to buy that bitchin' magazine.

What seems odd, to me, is that the board members of the League of
American Bicyclists thinks this magazine is a great perk for its
members. It seems odd even if most of them are now bike industry
shills. Seems like a major piece of cognitive dissonance to me!

> I doubt they expect any woman cyclist to dress like that.

The boys they're hoping to sell to have intense daydreams about women
who dress like that. And they don't involve bicycles at all.

--
-------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]

04-17-2004, 08:54 PM

Marlene Blanshay wrote:

> I finally checked out that photo that Claire Petersky mentioned. It was just
> as outrageous as Claire's description.
>
> However, it seemed to me that it was obviously a total joke. Of course it
> looked ridiculous in that magazine- it's obviously supposed to.

Sorry, Marlene. As a certified guy (although a non-typical one), my bet
is they put it in there to sell magazines to the hormone-addled teens
and 20-somethings.

Check out the photo on page 25. The bikini bottoms aren't a joke,
they're more testosterone bait.

And check out the article on Copper Canyon. See page 66. "make
training seriously f-ink harsh - and seriously f-ink fun" ... "the
ultramarathoners got their CoolMax asses kicked"... "The little *****
turned out to be Al..."

Bicycling is hoping that loud, crude, and fairly stupid guys are where
the money is. They're hoping their advertisers believe that, and
they're out to lure more of those "dudes" to buy that bitchin' magazine.

What seems odd, to me, is that the board members of the League of
American Bicyclists thinks this magazine is a great perk for its
members. It seems odd even if most of them are now bike industry
shills. Seems like a major piece of cognitive dissonance to me!

> I doubt they expect any woman cyclist to dress like that.

The boys they're hoping to sell to have intense daydreams about women
who dress like that. And they don't involve bicycles at all.

--
-------------+
Frank Krygowski [To reply, omit what's between "at" and "cc"]

04-17-2004, 10:26 PM

On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 23:54:46 -0400, "frkrygow"
<"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> wrote:

>The boys they're hoping to sell to have intense daydreams about women
>who dress like that. And they don't involve bicycles at all.

But, in a very "broad" sense, they involve handlebars...

04-17-2004, 10:26 PM

On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 23:54:46 -0400, "frkrygow"
<"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> wrote:

>The boys they're hoping to sell to have intense daydreams about women
>who dress like that. And they don't involve bicycles at all.

But, in a very "broad" sense, they involve handlebars...

04-17-2004, 10:26 PM

On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 23:54:46 -0400, "frkrygow"
<"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> wrote:

>The boys they're hoping to sell to have intense daydreams about women
>who dress like that. And they don't involve bicycles at all.

But, in a very "broad" sense, they involve handlebars...

04-17-2004, 10:26 PM

On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 23:54:46 -0400, "frkrygow"
<"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> wrote:

>The boys they're hoping to sell to have intense daydreams about women
>who dress like that. And they don't involve bicycles at all.

But, in a very "broad" sense, they involve handlebars...

04-17-2004, 10:43 PM

On Sat, 17 Apr 2004 23:54:46 -0400, "frkrygow"
<"frkrygow"@omitcc.ysu.edu> wrote:

>Marlene Blanshay wrote:
>
>> I finally checked out that photo that Claire Petersky mentioned. It was just
>> as outrageous as Claire's description.
>>
>> However, it seemed to me that it was obviously a total joke. Of course it
>> looked ridiculous in that magazine- it's obviously supposed to.
>
>Sorry, Marlene. As a certified guy (although a non-typical one), my bet
>is they put it in there to sell magazines to the hormone-addled teens
>and 20-somethings.
>
>Check out the photo on page 25. The bikini bottoms aren't a joke,
>they're more testosterone bait.
>
>And check out the article on Copper Canyon. See page 66. "make
>training seriously f-ink harsh - and seriously f-ink fun" ... "the
>ultramarathoners got their CoolMax asses kicked"... "The little *****
>turned out to be Al..."
>
>Bicycling is hoping that loud, crude, and fairly stupid guys are where
>the money is. They're hoping their advertisers believe that, and
>they're out to lure more of those "dudes" to buy that bitchin' magazine.

....because mountain biking is the sport of the young, the male, and
the 'extreme'--who are 'extreme' because the rest of their existence
is comfortably taken care of (they have the time and money to devote
to cycling as a hobby.)

-Luigi
is not averse to some cheesecake on occasion, either.