BB200 - a few thoughts.

[psling]

You can never be one hundred percent inclusive because it's human nature that somebody will feel excluded. And somebody else will be offended on their behalf....

[godivatrailrider]

Allowing someone out who you suspected had little idea of what they were doing doesn't rest easy.

You've let me loose at a few WRT's and I'm as clueless as they come!
And you can't keep "lowering the bar" to cater for stupidity.. there's ALWAYS more stupidity. Just as there's always more 'offended' people, you'll never win that one.

My opinion is worthless.... but frankly , f*ck 'em.
I personally deem BB200 etc outside of my ability, I simply don't have the fitness nor the mental fortitude nor desire to do it, so I don't. Am I offended? Not in the slightest. Embarrassed at my own weakness,? Slightly. But that's for me to deal with not for you to accommodate.

Keep doing what you're doing, until you too can't be arsed. You've got it right.

[Asposium]

I have always felt we are a welcoming group.
Seen little discourse here that would lead me to conclude otherwise

However, we seem to "welcome" a certain type of person.

Or, to put another way, one has to be a certain type of person to wish to be part of this community

Doesn't the above make us elitist? Of course not, just on the fringe of -cycling- society.

[godivatrailrider]

Truth !

I ran a bike club for years. A certain type of person is attracted to Mountain Biking or bike packing. Birds of a feather. Despite being a very welcoming XC club, the most likely newcomer would fit a certain demographic.
It's the same with Archery, (ok , maybe not longbowers Stu) it attracts people who like the 'process', the repetition.
All sports attract their following and they're not all the same, though there will be some cross over. I have zero interest in football, the fascination with it leaves me cold.
You can't have a requirement to be fully representative of the population. But you'd be more than welcoming to everyone that shows an interest. That's about all you can do.

[RIP]

I have always felt we are a welcoming group.
Seen little discourse here that would lead me to conclude otherwise

However, we seem to "welcome" a certain type of person.

Or, to put another way, one has to be a certain type of person to wish to be part of this community

Doesn't the above make us elitist? Of course not, just on the fringe of -cycling- society.

I think this is an important point. We can be welcoming, and indeed are, but the victim, sorry I mean New Friend That We Haven't Met Yet, has to make an equal effort to be welcomed..... it's a two-way thing... ask a few questions... go on a little trip and let us know how they got on... etc.

Obviously as we've all said, our welcome will be a certain type of welcome , and it's up to people to fit in not for us to dramatically change.

I've noticed we're perhaps not quite as ribald as we used to be though.... must be getting old... and IMHO sometimes getting a little bit too interested in "pre-set" named routes rather than winging it as punkrock bikepackers... IMHO of course

[psling]

I've noticed we're perhaps not quite as ribald as we used to be though.... must be getting old

The trouble with being an old git Reg is that "most people" seem to think miserable old git

...and IMHO sometimes getting a little bit too interested in "pre-set" named routes rather than winging it as punkrock bikepackers...

This is indeed a thing but perhaps a different thing. "Viva la difference" as a revolting person may have once said

[Boab]

This is obviously a gross over generalisation, but whatevhas. If you look at the photos from the other Welsh based event that was posted about recently, the number of lycra clad gravel bikers far out weights those on MTBs; plus, there are a number of those gravel bikes sporting tri-bars. I've ridden in Wales less times than the number of fingers on one hand, of those four rides, two have been on on my gravel bike and the other two on the MTB; at no point have I considered the need for tri-bars.

When I think of inclusiveness, I immediately think about gender, race, etc, not what kind of bike people would rather be riding. While cycling is largely white men, it's been nice to see at things like the WRT and Jenn Ride that it's not just MAMILs who've bought a high end gravel bike (and all the bikepacking kit) to go alongside their high end road bike. There's plenty of events out there that cater for people who want a 50% / 50% riding / party split, or want to ride fire roads all day. I don't think events like the BB200 are not inclusive, but I do think they're not for everyone; just like events like the The Dirty Reiver or Grinduro probably aren't for me.

As has been pointed out, we're not necessarily "normal", which is why we've all gravitated here. Plenty of other places for folks to hang out and plenty of other events from them to enter. If I wanted an easy 200KM ride, I'd do it from my front door; I come to Wales to find out what my limits are, not for an easy life.

... and IMHO sometimes getting a little bit too interested in "pre-set" named routes rather than winging it as punkrock bikepackers... IMHO of course

I also agree with this to an extent.

[Taylor]

wrinkled soaked scrotum

[RIP]

...and IMHO sometimes getting a little bit too interested in "pre-set" named routes rather than winging it as punkrock bikepackers...

This is indeed a thing but perhaps a different thing. "Viva la difference" as a revolting person may have once said

Oh aye, agreed, plenty of room, but I wouldn't want to lose the balance between routers and trampers. Very important to keep up our rep (oh, <DING!>, elitist again!) as fearless practitioners of the sordid and seedier side of BP..... scratching the dark underbelly..... wallowing in the filth so they don't have to... etc etc etc.

(And MOGs? From my recent experience on "Wye Not?", quite the opposite - not had such a giggle for a long time! )

[RIP]

wrinkled soaked scrotum

Eh??? Wot you on about man? Have I missed summat important?

Or was that a What3Words location on the BB200? If so, I can guess where it was.....

Old Scrotum, The Wrinkled Retainer of Rawlinson End

[Bearbonesnorm]

Eh??? Wot you on about man? Have I missed summat important?

It was how I described my face Reg

[RIP]

I reckon it's simple: when we're little kids, we love jumping into muddy puddles and screeching with delight. Parents/carers will either say "get out of there this minute" or they'll say "yeah that looks fun!". The 0.001% of kids who get the latter response end up as Bearboners, and the rest, well, don't .

[RIP]

Eh??? Wot you on about man? Have I missed summat important?

It was how I described my face Reg

Ah! I tried searching the forum but couldn't find it (censored probably).

"A new study published in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology posits there’s a good chance you can tell if someone is rich or poor just by looking at their face".

Yes, well, of course the big mistake, the big mistake, they're making is thinking we're talking about financially rich or poor. Now your face, Stu... shows richness of a much more important kind

[psling]

Eh??? Wot you on about man? Have I missed summat important?

It was how I described my face Reg

Ah! I tried searching the forum but couldn't find it (censored probably).

You need to broaden your horizons Reg and read the linked blog/ feature!
Inspired by it currently being conkers season I believe Stu may have spent a lifetime of washing his face in vinegar, going for the 'hard but winning' look

[RIP]

(Shirley you mean "bonkers season"

[ledburner]

Speed reading this thread.
The main points that stand out are...
Elitest Inclusive Scrotum Conkers Bonkers miserable Old Git.

[Bearbonesnorm]

litest Inclusive Scrotum Conkers Bonkers miserable Old Git.

i feel a sticker coming on.

[jameso]

Ooh, stickers? I feel like a banter-pooper posting this now

but normally you need the under represented groups to explain why they don't feel included

But you'd be more than welcoming to everyone that shows an interest. That's about all you can do.

I'm quoting two comments as a lead in because my point isn't meant to be 'against' anyone in particular. More about a general way of seeing inclusivity that I think is relevant to most of us. And, since this started from a suggestion that BB isn't very inclusive and most of us are the usual cycling demographic - as Stuart pointed out I can't be sure but since this is 'cycling' I'll make the assumption for now. Plus apologies if I'm repeating things that have come up before and undoubtedly have been said better by others.

The point being, it's been pointed out well enough why and how a group of mostly white middle aged men isn't an inclusive, welcoming image to some people. That's just how it is. I know we can say 'but we're nice people who welcome anyone' and I know that's true but just that, or to say it's for someone else to want to be welcomed and to take the step towards joining, isn't enough to be what many would call inclusive. Someone from a group that has had bad experiences doesn't know what attitudes I have when they meet me, they might just see that potential for bad experiences again based on their past (I don't feel that as some sort of racism towards me as a white male as I've heard it suggested, or feel a guilt for why it's happening - it's about just realising how it can be). It's that point about having to over-correct something to regain balance. I heard it described as what some of us need to do sometimes to get past issues that we might not have been seeing, because if we're not racist, homophobic or sexist ***holes we won't be told we're that and it's about a more hidden thing in the way others can be around people. It came up from BLM, the Me Too movement and others. And we know that cycling isn't free of bigotry, look at any facebook etc post relating to inclusion for proof. It's there so maybe some people want to find groups to ride with where they know it won't come up again.

The point I'm getting at is that if you're a guy like me and you're doing something that you want to be inclusive you need to be pro-active about it. You need to be show that the space you're creating is welcoming, and some other spaces will be far more comfortable for some people. Plus, if we don't do anything while other groups are doing more the balance has shifted and we're left more to the side. And that's not saying it has to be taken on by someone who's already putting so much back into UK bikepacking either. Maybe some of us just get on with something in the background. All you might need to do is reach out to people and invite them along, tell them why it's great, ask if they think it's for them.

I've not seen those negative attitudes on here and I've no doubt it wouldn't be stood for - I'm not criticising BB here. Just saying that the onus is on us (the generally white middle age straight blokes) too, not just on others to come along or explain why they don't.

[thenorthwind]

Having read this thread the other day, up to the bits that James quoted, I started composing a reply along the same lines, but never got round to posting. James has put it better than I would have, so I'll not try and go over it again, just add my agreement.

It's a bit of a tangent to the original point though, but I can see why there's confusion... I think we need to separate inclusion of people of different genders, ethnicities, etc. from inclusion of the people Stu is talking about in his post. The difficulty of course, is when they overlap, which they do.

[jameso]

I wasn't sure what was meant by the mention of lack of inclusion in the blog tbh, read it as 'maybe it's about the bb200?' but maybe a more general thing. Hadn't intended to take it on a tangent into general inclusivity if I misunderstood.

Back to the stickers if I have..

[Alpinum]

[...]
I've not seen those negative attitudes on here and I've no doubt it wouldn't be stood for - I'm not criticising BB here.

Some will take even different viewpoints personally. You seem not to. Me neither. But from experience with other humans I know many do. I do sometimes read things on here that put me off, probably just as much, perhaps less, as I write stuff on here that puts others off.

I find it funny in a childish way, since I like to celebrate childish behaviour (jumping in puddles, silly jokes etc.) myself, but just imagine what arriving at the WRT in 2022 must mean for a sensitive person having just gotten into cycling or bikepacking with a shiny gravel bike looking for inclusion, a welcoming group an then sees folks wearing gravel w*nker t-shirts (iirc). I knew the context, since I spend time on here reading through the different posts. But without context I can imagine it to be everything but inclusive for some. Or even many.

People often miss context and get upset without looking beyond the initial image infront of them. It happens on here, it happens "out there". We're all humans and we all make mistakes. I lack social awareness but learned that what I see as my own mistake, some don't see as their own mistake but see as non inclusive behaviour.

Just saying that the onus is on us (the generally white middle age straight blokes) too, not just on others to come along or explain why they don't.

doesn't that depend on what your g oal is? Whilst I'm not at all suggesting where BB could or should head regarding inclusivity, I'm sure not every group (white middle aged men or not) wants to include every possible person. Nor needs or has to as I see it. See the many women only rides, group owner rides, club rides etc.
"We" have group rides where you have to be able to ride at a certain speed to be part. All a lovely bunch of inclusive folks otherwise, but you'll be dropped if you can't sustain the pace. Some surely will see this offensive.

Somebody will make a website soon; www.theinclusivitycyclinglist.com where with a grading system of inclusivity, groups, clubs etc. are listed. Problem solved, no?

[jameso]

Yeah it would depend on what the goal was, of course. There's plenty of reasons there are groups for certain people only, may be that they're happier without average bike blokes involved or need space for themselves.

[riderdown]

The point I'm getting at is that if you're a guy like me and you're doing something that you want to be inclusive you need to be pro-active about it. You need to be show that the space you're creating is welcoming, and some other spaces will be far more comfortable for some people.

You mean mansplaining?

It's a difficult area, I attended a BC seminar on how to get women into competitive cycle sport, at least 2/3 of attendees myself included were well meaning middle aged white men who had/ were already doing something in cycle sport to encourage women into competitive cycle sport. My take was unless you are in the social media space that the people you want to attract use heavily you are not going to have a paradigm change. It's the same for all aspects of inclusivity unless someone who the group relates to communicates about it positively then progress will be limited in the eyes of those who aren't joining the fun pushing a bike through a featureless bog in the dark

[jameso]

You mean mansplaining?

No I mean just proactively making the offer or making some effort to consider other needs beyond the your own or the usual, that kind of thing.
You're right on someone groups relate to being influential making a difference, it helps.

[Bearbonesnorm]

I think we need to separate inclusion of people of different genders, ethnicities, etc. from inclusion of the people Stu is talking about in his post.

That's kind of what I took it to mean but I could be wrong. As an example, Gian mentions certain T shirts but as someone who's self-deprecating and in possession of a sense of humour, it's not something I'd ever considered. I'm also not sure which group might feel excluded by someone wearing one ... people with gravel bikes, people without gravel bikes, w@nkers or builders merchants. I know that sounds flippant but I genuinely wouldn't know.