SOCKGATE: SEXIST SOCKS ARE NOT THE PROBLEM. YOU ARE. DISCUSS.
So, Save Our Soles made some socks with two girls in thong-back bikinis designed on them, then they handed them out at the Interbike Show in Vegas and everyone went bat-shit crazy. I suspect you’re expecting me to do the same, but here’s the thing, I didn’t care when I saw them. Yes, I can see that they could be or even are offensive, but they didn’t offend me. In fact, I felt sorry for the guys who were given these socks in the assumption that they would want half-naked women on their ankles. After all, sexism should include men too. Now, I’m not saying that these socks were a great idea, but when I read the many rants from other journalists, both male and female, I seemed to simultaneously agree and disagree with them on most of their points. It’s a tough one, because I would like women to be taken seriously in the world of cycling. I wouldn’t have written my rant (here) about podium girls if I didn’t care about women being objectified in the world of cycling, but there is a fine line between being taken seriously and taking things too seriously.
While the socks were a little distasteful, the whole debate got me thinking; why is it women are campaigning and longing so hard to be taken seriously as cyclists, without any hint of sexualisation? It seems I’ve been swept up into a world-wide campaign to be seen solely as a cyclists, and nothing else, and to be seen as anything but just a cyclist would be an insult. Sure, I don’t want to be seen as an object, nor do I want to be patronised or belittled as a cyclists just because I’m female, but I am a female cyclist. I am different to male cyclists. Maybe not in attitude, but in many other ways. I like to wear make-up and dresses, my male friends do not (well, most of them). I have long hair, long nails, breasts (yes, it’s true, women have them) and other physiological things that make me different to men. Personally, I like being different to men, and I like to be seen as different to men. After all, it wouldn’t make sense to start campaigning to do away with female race categories would it? No, because we’re different. We want the same opportunities as men, not to be the same as men, right? We want wages to reflect the hard efforts we put into races, just like the men do, right? And we want to be on TV and in magazines as much as the men, right? And so if men get sponsorship deals based on the fact that they look good, we want that too, right? Oh hold on a minute… we don’t? Hmm.
Sure, I don’t want to be seen as an object, nor do I want to be patronised or belittled as a cyclists just because I’m female, but I am a female cyclist. I am different to male cyclists.
So why is that when a pretty and skinny woman advertises a product, it’s sexist, but when a topless man with rock-hard abs who’s blatantly on the verge of starvation to look that good, it is not seen as a problem. Let’s talk about the Cyclepassion calendar for a minute. If there were a male version, with Chris Hoy draped over a velodrome in a pair of Calvin Klein boxers, or Peter Sagan “working out” in a gym with his ripped thighs glistening in the light, would I buy it? Bloody right I would! Would that make me sexist though? And by buying it, am I saying that these boys are only good for drooling over? No, not really. I’m buying it because I’m a lusty, and probably slightly immature woman, and I think they’re hot, but they are still very definitely cyclists. In fact, if they weren’t cyclists, I probably wouldn’t find them as attractive. To me, they are attractive because I know what they have to go through to get where they are. To even be considered for the calendar is surely a nod to their talent. And I feel the same way about the Cyclepassion calendar. No one has gone knocking on Manon Carpenter’s door asking for her gold medal back because she did a photoshoot in her undies. No-one’s stopped thinking of Emily Batty as a damn good rider just because she was once on the front cover of a magazine in a bikini or because she wears mascara during a race (shock horror). And neither of them got to the top of their game because they did those photoshoots or because they look good. They got to the top of podiums by training damn hard, not by looking good, and the latter does not mean they get taken any less seriously as athletes.
No one has gone knocking on Manon Carpenter’s door asking for her gold medal back because she did a photoshoot in her undies.
Frankly, the whole “being treated equally” thing is getting out of hand, and I’m tired of women thinking that they need to devoid themselves of femininity in order to be taken seriously. I’m also tired of hearing women moan about other women wearing make-up, like it’s undoing decades of feminist work. It’s not. Some women like to wear make-up, and some do not. If you are judging that woman based on her make-up choice, then it is you who are hindering the progression of women in sport. Women should be able to do and wear what they damn please and still be taken seriously as an athlete; that’s feminism. Just like a woman should feel comfortable wearing lipstick and a skirt suit to work and still being taken seriously in an office. I don’t feel you have to look like a boy to receive the same respect as one. If anything, this whole non make-up wearing cult is hindering the fight for women to get treated equally. We should be fighting to get treated equally regardless of our gender and indeed the differences that come with it.
Read more of this article at Bikesoup.com/SexistSocks
