CBC piece: Whistler riders have differences of opinion on privilege

One woman wrote on a Whistler Womens blog on Feb 11th, some thoughts about women making it in the sport (sponsors, events, etc):

"In short, stop complaining and start riding. A lot."

https://web.archive.org/web/20220222190937/https://www.wfmbike.com/stories/2022/2/11/hf0t4s96s22u50yqwazx4g5ul73sbd?fbclid=IwAR1CSws147QaturNuVwaXzSAjkQ6-ml3CgCB3-tSbsoc85LKsN6Se50mOzg

A couple months later, April 7, CBC reports that another Whistler woman takes issue with it.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/diversity-in-mountain-biking-marketing-blog-post-1.6405749

Any thoughts from the community here?

"The article refutes all systemic barriers that centuries of colonialism have established, suggesting that the reason we don't see women of colour in upper echelons of outdoor sports is due to their own poor choices and a lack of hard work or work ethic," said Naidu, the first professional downhill mountain biker of Indian descent and an ambassador for MEC.

"In a world where Eurocentric features remain the most sought after, white privilege is advising that racialized women would be included if they just made themselves more marketable."

Neither article is 100% right or wrong. They both bring some truths and they both miss the mark.

It was a bone head self-goal on the part of the Adidas employee. There was no need to post that.

In terms of content it was off base. It would be like a wealthy successful white guy telling women the way to achieve employment equity in their company is for them to work harder and network better. Nobody [reasonable] thinks women are less capable at business roles yet they are not equally reflected in senior roles and they earn less than men in the same roles.

^^^

That's not really what Selig's article was all about tho. And your analogy is way off.

Posted by: syncro

^^^

That's not really what Selig's article was all about tho. And your analogy is way off.

I don't think I am, but we can agree to disagree.

Telling women to work harder and market themselves better as the solution for the lack of diversity in the women's field is the same thing.

Posted by: Vikb

Posted by: syncro

^^^

That's not really what Selig's article was all about tho. And your analogy is way off.

I don't think I am, but we can agree to disagree.

Telling women to work harder and market themselves better as the solution for the lack of diversity in the women's field is the same thing.

That's not what Selig's article was about, but it was the twist that the CBC article put on it.

Posted by: syncro

That's not what Selig's article was about, but it was the twist that the CBC article put on it.

Her article was about why the same women's riders were always featured. She told the complainers to stop complaining and work harder and market themselves better. The problems the CBC article pointed out are embedded within the biases/assumptions present in the original article. My criticism stands. If you don't agree that's fine.

Anita has been posting about this for weeks on her Instagram stories. Ironically she never posted a link to the story so I guess one also had to be in a clique in order to find out what she was going on about?  Just a whole lot of 'smash the patriarchy', 'white privilege' type stuff and endless selfies of her drinking coffee, but zero context. Not exactly a marketers dream.....

On the other hand, Leo is awesome and a positive role model:

https://www.instagram.com/landosteezy/?hl=en

https://www.marinbikes.com/ca/riders/national-team/leo-smith

Posted by: Vikb

Her article was about why the same women's riders were always featured. She told the complainers to stop complaining and work harder and market themselves better. The problems the CBC article pointed out are embedded within the biases/assumptions present in the original article. My criticism stands. If you don't agree that's fine.

Yes, Selig's article took a look at why it's "always the same 10 women at freeride events", but she lays out some pretty reasonable reasons why that might be and how to change it. Her article was directly about athletes being at the top of the sport and getting a chance to compete at events.

The CBC article went out into left field with with the whole "white wealthy" thing, which is a part of the inequity in many sports, but that's not what Selig's article was addressing. So when you talk about diversity, what are you referring to exactly? Ethnic diversity as highlighted in the CBC article or a less innocuous meaning of diversity that refers to more than those typical 10 riders getting invited to a comp? Those are two very different things and is a huge problem in the CBC article as it misrepresents the Selig article.

Edit: the more I re-read the CBC article the worse it gets in how it misrepresents what Selig was speaking to. While the CBC article does touch on an important topic, the manner in which it does it is closer to defamatory click-bait trash than good journalism. If they want to address the issue of racial inequity in outdoor sports that's great, but doing it off the back of someone who wasn't even speaking to that issue is disingenuous and troublesome.

Edit #2 : Naidu even lies when she says this; "The article refutes all systemic barriers that centuries of colonialism have established, suggesting that the reason we don't see women of colour in upper echelons of outdoor sports is due to their own poor choices and a lack of hard work or work ethic." Selig doesn't bring colour into the argument at all and Naidu fabricates reasons that simply did not exist in Selig's article. That type of thing harms social justice, it doesn't help it.

feel bad for Selig on this one...  nothing was said with race originally.  Everything gets placed out of context as new media looking ways to spin things....  funny how politicians can say pretty much anything and no consequences

Yea, I didn't see anything about race in there originally either, although I only skimmed the article. 

I wonder if it would be like saying "It's been raining a lot lately, sure could go for some sun around here" and someone says "You aren't considering those that live in the desert and don't have the privilege or opportunity of regular rain!"  

And then a news outlet has been looking for articles with a new spin on rain, so decides to report on it.

Posted by: syncro

Posted by: Vikb

Her article was about why the same women's riders were always featured. She told the complainers to stop complaining and work harder and market themselves better. The problems the CBC article pointed out are embedded within the biases/assumptions present in the original article. My criticism stands. If you don't agree that's fine.

Yes, Selig's article took a look at why it's "always the same 10 women at freeride events", but she lays out some pretty reasonable reasons why that might be and how to change it. Her article was directly about athletes being at the top of the sport and getting a chance to compete at events.

The CBC article went out into left field with with the whole "white wealthy" thing, which is a part of the inequity in many sports, but that's not what Selig's article was addressing. So when you talk about diversity, what are you referring to exactly? Ethnic diversity as highlighted in the CBC article or a less innocuous meaning of diversity that refers to more than those typical 10 riders getting invited to a comp? Those are two very different things and is a huge problem in the CBC article as it misrepresents the Selig article.

Edit: the more I re-read the CBC article the worse it gets in how it misrepresents what Selig was speaking to. While the CBC article does touch on an important topic, the manner in which it does it is closer to defamatory click-bait trash than good journalism. If they want to address the issue of racial inequity in outdoor sports that's great, but doing it off the back of someone who wasn't even speaking to that issue is disingenuous and troublesome.

Edit #2 : Naidu even lies when she says this; "The article refutes all systemic barriers that centuries of colonialism have established, suggesting that the reason we don't see women of colour in upper echelons of outdoor sports is due to their own poor choices and a lack of hard work or work ethic." Selig doesn't bring colour into the argument at all and Naidu fabricates reasons that simply did not exist in Selig's article. That type of thing harms social justice, it doesn't help it.

Upvote, if I could.  You analyze this well and make it easy to understand why the articles seemed off to me.  Thanks, I couldn't get my mind quite all the way around why things seemed fishy.

Well said Syncro. 

The CBC article months later strikes me as nothing but an attempt to get some exposure and to push a narrative that isnt what the original article is about.