So, does she have a point?

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

http://www.velonews.com/race/cyc/articles/13802.0.html

What's keeping from women from organizing races with that type of pay
structure rather than trying to force legislation?

If the men's list exceeds the UCI minimum, what has she accomplished? What
if the men's list is partially supplemented by cutting the depth of the
women's list? She indicates that this is not an issue for her. Is she
speaking for all women?

With TV and internet broadcasting, prizelists for international caliber
races have not kept up with total revenue for the sport, but in many cases
rider salaries have made up for that. In fact, I believe that it is more
likely for a rider to receive bonuses from their team of greater value than
the prize money for the placing in the race.

Magilla says - I look forward to hearing from all the insightful people
in here who will write 1 or 2 sentence replies to complex social issues
such as this.

...Magilla's correct. GiGi (I prefer the two upper case G's) needs to
up the salvos...she should link arms with EVERY International
Professional sports PERSON...track & field, long distance runners ,
golfers, tennis, skiers (you get it)...BECAUSE you can bet the UCI will
be lobbied strongly by every counterpart sanctioning body (primarily but
not exclusively European) to stomp this potential wildfire out quickly.

This can't be JUST a woman cyclists problem. There must be other
professional sports women who are discriminated against ($$$) because of
gender.

The other group that needs to feel the pressure are the sponsors. What
product maker and/or service provider wants or needs to be outed for
contributing to sexual discrimination?

And finally, were are the fans in the equation?

Best Regards - Mike Baldwin

Michael Baldwin said:

Magilla says - I look forward to hearing from all the insightful people
in here who will write 1 or 2 sentence replies to complex social issues
such as this.

..Magilla's correct. GiGi (I prefer the two upper case G's) needs to
up the salvos...she should link arms with EVERY International
Professional sports PERSON...track & field, long distance runners ,
golfers, tennis, skiers (you get it)...BECAUSE you can bet the UCI will
be lobbied strongly by every counterpart sanctioning body (primarily but
not exclusively European) to stomp this potential wildfire out quickly.

This can't be JUST a woman cyclists problem. There must be other
professional sports women who are discriminated against ($$$) because of
gender.

The other group that needs to feel the pressure are the sponsors. What
product maker and/or service provider wants or needs to be outed for
contributing to sexual discrimination?

And finally, were are the fans in the equation?

Best Regards - Mike Baldwin

Women's professional tennis already had their awakening when Nillie Jean
King threatened to boycott tournaments back in 1972 when BJK spearheaded
the WTA. At the time, King was earning $100,000 (in 1972 money) and
was 27 years of age (same age as Gould).

The reality is most women cyclists do not have the constitution or
personality to rock the boat. They're too busy with trite excitement
about the upcoming team training camp in Solvang and sprinkling their
favorite recipe in their race diary reports on cyclingnews.

Women cyclists are prom queen protestors. I think all those miles they
put in day after day just drains them of the pent-up energy that their
more well-padded ancestors in the suffrage movement and other sports had.

Sure, they'll all sign an online petition. it's easy to tap a few keys
on the keyboard. But that has no threat behind it. Women won't sit
down at a start line or refuse, as one cohesive group, to start
Redlands. When it comes right down to it, they're pussies. That's just
what the facts show.

Magilla

In article <[email hidden]>,

MagillaGorilla said:

Second, this sounds a lot like the suffrage movement in 1920. Except

Do you care to research this and find a better date?

--
Michael Press

"WeaselPoopPower" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Women's professional tennis already had their awakening when Nillie Jean
King threatened to boycott tournaments back in 1972 when BJK spearheaded
the WTA. At the time, King was earning $100,000 (in 1972 money) and was
27 years of age (same age as Gould).

Apparently people dozed back to sleep after their "awakening".

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9803EED61338F933A25757C0A96F958260

"The women say they are united on the question of equal prize money."

Right. Will the women who don't boycott be called scabs? Not every woman is
going to leave that money on the table. They (with the possible exception of
Wimbledon) are called "Open" for a reason.

Quoted message said:

Sixth, women cyclists should boycott any race - whether its UCI
sanctioned or not, road or cross - until those promoters pay out equal
prize money.

Yeah they should, but then what are they going to do when they find
out nobody gives a [censored] that they aren't racing?

In article
<[email hidden]>,

Quoted post said:

http://www.velonews.com/race/cyc/articles/13802.0.html

Women's division and Open division.

I have never seen a "Men's" race that didn't permit any proper-cat woman
from participating, if they wanted.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"My scenarios may give the impression I could be an excellent crook.
Not true - I am a talented lawyer." - Sandy in rec.bicycles.racing

Carl Sundquist said:

<[email hidden]> wrote in message

news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

http://www.velonews.com/race/cyc/articles/13802.0.html

What's keeping from women from organizing races with that type of pay
structure rather than trying to force legislation?

Does Gidget Gould-bug have a point? No. It is an old-fashioned
strongarm attempt to sieze assets by force of regulation rather than
earn by contractual agreement. Why earn when you can more easily
steal from your neighbors?

There is so much silly in her comments, that one could scarcely know
where to start. But taking one from her letter, first quoting the
UCI:

"'The UCI will carry out its activities in compliance with the
principles of: a) equality between all the members and all the
athletes, license-holders and officials, without racial, political,
religious, or other discrimination.' We ask the UCI to honor its
commitment to equality."

If Gidget sees "equality of result" as the definition of equality,
then why not just call everyone a winner and award the same for
everyone. Where does the equalization stop? What does "equal" mean?
Some ideas, and food for thought are given in the article located
here:

Equality: The Unknown Ideal -- by Roderick T. Long
http://www.mises.org/article.aspx?Id=804

Also:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gidget

We can hope that Gidget will grow up. But we see she looks more
likely to have a "promising" career in politics.

Quoted message said:

With TV and internet broadcasting, prizelists for international caliber
races have not kept up with total revenue for the sport, but in many cases
rider salaries have made up for that. In fact, I believe that it is more
likely for a rider to receive bonuses from their team of greater value than
the prize money for the placing in the race.

Exactly. And the contract between the rider and team is by mutual
agreement.

MagillaGorilla said:

...everybody in this sport is a goddamn [censored]
when it comes to politics and asserting their rights.

I'll diverge for a moment on your terminology: What Gidget is trying
to do is not about "rights." It is about power, the principle subject
of politics.

Quoted message said:

And I look forward to hearing from all the insightful people in here who
will write 1 or 2 sentence replies to complex social issues such as this.

It isn't a "complex social issue." She wants to take money by force.
It is that simple.

Paul B. Anders said:

BTW, everything he says here about women's cycling, and he fact that
male pro cyclists are too stupid and powerless to form a union, is
spot-on. In fact, nearly everything Magilla says is amazingly well
thought out. Too bad he's too big a coward to own up to it. At least
he's funny, I guess that's enough of an accomplishment.

No Brad, he's wrong. As Carl points out, the women are paid less is
because they're a smaller group, they have less of a following and it
costs proportionately more to put on women's races. This all adds up
to the same situation with any marketed item - thems whats gots gets.

Though I do agree that he's too big a coward to admit who he is. After
all, then it would be a real opinion and not a cartoon device.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Sixth, women cyclists should boycott any race - whether its UCI
sanctioned or not, road or cross - until those promoters pay out equal
prize money.

Yeah they should, but then what are they going to do when they find
out nobody gives a [censored] that they aren't racing?

lol

"MagillaGorilla" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

http://www.velonews.com/race/cyc/articles/13802.0.html

Thanks for asking me to address this question. Georgia Gould (herein
called "Gigi"😉 is a bit misguided but I suppose it's the proverbial
thought that counts in this case.

Call her what you want. I prefer Laura Ingalls Wilder.

Quoted message said:

First of all, you don't write letters to international federations whose
entire rulebook is laced with overtones and denotations of decades-old
discrimination clauses such as disparate prize money, unequal protections
in minimum team salaries, etc. You simply don't join such an
organization. By taking out a UCI license, Gigi and the rest of the
skirts already agreed to be prostitutes and have been prostituting
themselves for the last few decades.

Ok let's see if I can speak your language to respond.

Gidget can do what she wants. As for prostitutes, the men are in the same
boat wearing all those logos for various companies, but the gay colors of
spandex are hardly western ideals of macho men. Most men wouldn't be caught
dead in those things. If they were in the military wearing those things,
they would probably get gangbanged, nothing to do with being gay, everything
to do with looking like girls or sisseys in spandex. If the girls are going
to play the role as you suggest, then at least they are quite attactive in
those gay colors of spandex. In the military, like prison, they bang guys
just for being cute, not gay. I prefer to see men in Football uniforms
knocking the [censored] out of each other, much more macho, not cage fighting, but
better when you can charge someone with a running start of 50 yards and hit
someone with full body lethal force, breaking bones, and sometimes doing
serious damage. Now that is a man's sport. Cycling unlike Rugby, should be
left to women, and let the men do a real man's sport. If you don't want to
go flippin extreme, however I used to enjoy cycling before I found out
everyone was juiced to the gills, now it's just fodder for the drug obsessed
fans in here, about the last thing I enjoy is talking about guys doped to
the gills, and their pathetic cases in court. That's what they get for
following the wrong pied piper. Women for the most part, race quite clean,
compared to the men. Often they have to chip in their own money to race and
travel, food and lodging. Unlike the pimps on the mens side, their pimps
don't pay for everything, and the women don't get paid nearly as well for
turning tricks like the men do. It was worth it to dope to turn those tricks
winning the tour with millions of dollars on the line. There is no incentive
to dope on the women's side, and that's the way I like it. In time, if big
money enters the sport, corruption and scandals are likely to follow, so on
the whole, I would rather them race clean for much less money then be doped
to the gills like the men.

Quoted message said:

Second, this sounds a lot like the suffrage movement in 1920. Except it's
90 years late. What's their excuse given that they surely had a better
education than those women from the 1920's, or black people from the
1950's? Female cyclists are the last known species of female on this
planet who actually patronize unequal treatment and never do anything
about it. This patronization by women cyclists is tantamount to tacit
approval of their own subjugation. And they've been doing it for years if
not decades. If I didn't know any better, I'd think they actually ENJOY
BEING abused.

Dummy, most top women spend all their time training, racing and scraping by,
traveling huge distances unlike in Europe where all the races are just over
the border, a 200 mile drive in any direction will land another major world
cup gig. It's the older retired cyclists like Mari Holden or Linda Jackson,
and so many other retired cyclists who have more time and command respect to
make changes. Certainly they command much more respect then Gidget. The
problem with Gidget is she doesn't speak from experience or authority. Women
should start their own racing organzations, and have full control. Its hard
to make a difference with complaints like Gidget, because men run most
everything, its the same in Europe. Their hands are basically tied. Even
mass protests would do little as you suggest. They need real power and
control, that's the only way. The problem with that is that there is not
enough popularity at women's races or with promoters, so it would never be
taken seriously. But if they actually had real bargining power or ownership,
then they can mold the future of the sport, the way they want, regardless of
popularity, the rest comes later with promotion. But it takes big money, and
also big stars. The Leontiens of the sport are extremely rare, as are the
Super Marios, but someone who is a moviestar or a rock star who also happens
to be cycling star could make a huge difference.

Quoted message said:

Third, even if Gigi gets the ceremonious UCI rule change for psycho-cross,
this will not stop promoters from continuing to pay more money to the men
than women, thus making GiGi's efforts moot for all intents and purposes
(see Billie Jean King, 1972 - Women's Tennis Association philosophy). You
see, GiGi isn't fighting for an equal purse rule - she's fighting for
equal minimum, a completely different animal. In other words, she's
fighting for a loophole the size of a diesel locomotive that every
promopter will use.

Fourth, Gigi's beef is really with promoters, and not the UCI, because
promoters are currently NOT required by the UCI to pay women less. They
simply chose to do so. GiGi hasn't figured that out yet.

Toona pays the same for the men as the women. Its also free of the UCI. But
it's not enough, while its a great race, women still need real power, but
more races like Toona is the key for fairness across the board. This year
Toona produced TV coverage for the women only, 90 minutes, but none for the
men. It's the rare exception, but Toona is a model for fairness, except the
TV coverage. Next year, the men may get TV coverage at Toona. Its one of the
rare instances where men were upstaged, but it shows sometimes the influence
of one person can make a difference. Collectively, the women could make a
difference, but more along the lines of cycling women being business and
accounting experts, than protesters and cheerleaders.

Quoted message said:

Fifth, 95% of races for kittens in the U.S. are NOT UCI-sanctioned.
Consequently, GiGi's petition will leave 95% of domestic U.S. women road
pros still earning unequal prize money. How excited should women racers
get about such a trivial administrative victory (assuming the UCI even
changes the rule)?

All of this is fun reading and entertainment in Gidgets article, and cycling
is real entertainment, but Gidget should know that the only real solution is
for women to create their own organizations which men will not run, and even
if possible, promote their own races all over the greater 50. Races like
Tour De l'Aude is strictly a women's race, that whole organzation is a
specialty for women. As is the Grande Boucle. However Gidget should organize
with other women to move forward, and stop thinking in terms of changing the
old ones. She might as well be shouting at the moon or playing the lotto.

Quoted message said:

Sixth, women cyclists should boycott any race - whether its UCI sanctioned
or not, road or cross - until those promoters pay out equal prize money.
You don't need to send letters to people who have made it clear that they
are hardcore discriminators who grew up in Europe during WWII. Black
people didn't earn equal treatment by penning nice letters to their bigot
southern Congressmen, most of whom were high-ranking members of their
local KKK chapter. They did it with boycotts, sit-ins, and through active
civil disobediance that got them arrested, bitten by German shepherds, and
sprayed with fire hoses for YEARS.

That won't do anything, it might get a little press, but the powers that be
will wait until hell freezes over. They need to start from scratch with
their own organizations to command real power, develop their own series of
races, and set their own standards for prize money. The way it is now, they
will always be getting the crumbs from the table, especially now that thanks
to the men, who have managed to wreck the greatest women's team in
existence, T-Mobile. Clap, clap, clap for dopers. But like any new
enterprise, it takes big money on the order of a Ted Turner, someone who
happens to be a fan of the women, it would take a billion dollars, literally
to create a supermodel of success of women's cycling in America, certainly
millions of dollars to start. Money talks, not some girls sitting in groups
out in front of the UCI headquarters. I heard the politics at the USAC are
brutal, not a big secret, and the UCI more brutal. What could Gidget and her
friends do by a sit in, fasting in front the UCI for 30 days?

Quoted message said:

Gigi needs to go back and re-read her 4th grade history book to see what
it actually takes to bring about change. The Barbie approach won't work
with scumbags.

True, only power and big money makes a difference.

Quoted message said:

So that's what I think of both Gigi's efforts and her tactics. Nice girl,
but she's shooting a cap gun at tanks. Too little, too late, and even if
she accomplishes everything in her petition, it won't amount to a hill of
beans. Nor will it require promoters to pay equal prize money (equal
minimum purse is not worth kicking a sleeping tiger).

I think Gidget enjoys the chance to get on Velonews, and knows full well,
its like pissing in the wind. She's not all that stupid, I do give her a
little credit. Most of these girls are at least college educated. You don't
see many poor stupid girls racing bikes, unlike Basketball where one guy
shows up with a basketball at the local high school court, and anyone with
holes in their tennis shoes can play. So I bet Gidget is a bit smarter then
you think.

Quoted message said:

All those skirts who signed the on-line petition are prom queen protestors
who would NEVER engage in a sit-down or boycott a race because of
disparate prize money. It's the same reason male cyclists will never form
a union - everybody in this sport is a goddamn [censored] when it comes to
politics and asserting their rights. I'm one of the few people who
actually believes that Operacion Puerto is just a cover story for the fact
that most male pros actually have a vagina and need to visit a
gynecologist in Spain.

The women can start their own organizations, but the men have to deal with
the powers that be. In some respects, it may be even harder for the men,
because of the entrenched powers that be. For the women, they can start from
scratch, and then develop a new fan base with a new image. The men will
always have the black eyes of the drug scandals plagueing them, so on the
whole, if the women had the right backing, they might do pretty well. There
is certainly no shortage of girls who show up at races, or want to race and
their image is clean. They have a few aces, if they played their cards
right.

Quoted message said:

Even all the people in here who talk so fake-righteous about how Fraud got
railroaded (like Kunisland Psychlone) are the same jackoffs who don't
think twice about sending their license check to USAC knowing full well
they are agreeing to the very same WADA system they claim is corrupt and
that a part of their check is going to pay for the WADA contract USAC has
with them.

The mentality in cycling is that once you get that coveted fleece team
vest in January with the logo on it, you are happy as a gorilla locked in
the back of a Chiquita semi.

I'm afraid GiGi is going to battle with a Barbazon model army when what
she really needs is some serious heavy metal.

And I look forward to hearing from all the insightful people in here who
will write 1 or 2 sentence replies to complex social issues such as this.

The problem with women racing in America is for one, it's very expensive to
travel such great distances, big cost, more then girls in Europe. Also girls
in Europe have different motivations then Gidget. Gidget and so many like
her, often take up cycling either in College or as a rehab from running. So
it's unrealistic for people to listen to these complaints because also, she
not a respected seasoned pro about to retire, or just retired. Gidget is not
a career cyclist. She is Gidget, a likely newby, who has yet to pay her dues
to the sport so to speak. In Europe from the time they are born, their Ma
and Pa sets Gidget on the bike as soon as she is born, probably a plastic
model of some kind, and they never leave the bike. Kind of like teaching a
baby to swim in the pool after its born. They want to get cycling into their
instincts very early like Tiger Woods did or others. You don't see American
girls raised for the bike like that. So the reasons women race in Europe are
different then America. In Europe, they pay hardly any prize money, much
much less then Toona. They race for market value, not prize money. Some
races pay out as little as 30 dollars for prize money.

The world cup is about market value. They want to make a name for themselves
and get on the best teams, increasing their market value and prospects of a
good career after the bike. In Europe, you don't have to become Lance
Armstrong. In many towns and cities, if you are even remotely successful,
and stay with the game, there is a good chance that you can become the town
or city local hero and be set for life in that town or city. You will be
assured to get a great job in the community, and have popularity and
prominence in that town. That's what they are shooting for, and the world
cup and the olympic games are even bigger markers for market value. Winning
the worlds, games or the cup will also insure success after retirement if
they play their cards right. When Kristen Armstrong won the worlds TT, I
doubt you would see anything like the celebration in Italy, when chapped
lipped Marta wons the road race. She became instance hero, set for life.

Huge celebrations for winners in Italy are a very big deal, even for the
women. What did Kristen get for winning back home? The culture for women
racing in America doesn't lend itself to people like Gidget complaining in
Velonews. In America, its seems to be more about short term prize money or a
secondary rehab sport which they do to boost their image while in college. I
mean, Thorburn works full time for crying out loud, cycling is secondary to
her career. In Europe you see more women ride to become cycling legends like
Longo, but in America, it seems to be more of a social event or for short
term gains, and the Olympics seems to be the bigger thing in their mind, the
potential market value from winning the games for an American is worth
achieving, but other then that, it just a fleeting fancy. They don't seem to
think about much else except getting an Olympic spot on the team, and if
they don't, they retire, unless you are Tina Pic or Laura Van Gilder. So in
Europe, it's a means to an end, and also for career cyclists. Here, it's
perhaps at times, a means to an end, but not much else, except for a few
career cyclist who seem to just love cycling, nothing wrong with that!

InTransit

InTransit said:

Toona pays the same for the men as the women.

That figures.