March 16, 2017

Cycling is Still Bro

Throughout high school, I played competitive basketball at the top level in Ontario. While basketball players are not at the very top of the jock-scale, there was still enough trash-talking, inflated egos, and shitty masculinity (which I regretfully participated in at times) to turn me off of the sport by the time I got to university, at which point I almost stopped playing altogether.

In comparison, road cycling has to rank pretty close to the bottom of the jock-scale. This is both a cultural product and a result of the physical nature of the sport itself. Bicycles, even well outside of the context of bike racing, are seen as un-masculine. As we all know in North American culture, “real men” drive cars. Big, powerful, expensive cars. Within the sporting context, the equipment of the sport are also seen as un-masculine. Cyclists wear tights. They wear funny shoes. Ironically, one of the ways of showing your seriousness as a bike racer is by shaving your legs. Physiologically, the best cyclists in the world do not match any stereotype of the ideal masculine forms. They are scrawny by athlete standards. And cyclists cry a lot.

These are all factors that initially drew me to the sport, and have since bolstered my love for it. As I started to dig myself deeper into the sport and the culture surrounding it, I found it was populated by people who had developed a great deal of reflexivity about these issues. When you find yourself asking your wife for tips on how to avoid razor burn, it’s hard to hold on to presumptions about masculinity.

Against this backdrop, cycling has led me to innumerable confrontations with the prevalence of misogynistic, chauvinistic, and homophobic attitudes. When random assholes routinely call you a “f****t” and heckle you for wearing lycra bike shorts as they drive by, it prompts you to reflect on the assumptions that people are making about you. It has also forced me to consider the instances where I myself have made similar assumptions about others. Most importantly, such instances lead me to reflect on those who must suffer the most from such assumptions, like those who aren’t as privileged as to be riding around on an expensive bicycle for recreation. Cycling has encouraged me to contemplate cultural expectations of “being a man,” and allowed me to understand that these expectations are “toxic,” as they have been aptly described.

But shitty masculinity, while relatively subdued compared to other sporting cultures, still exists in cycling.

Competition easily slips into extreme forms with adverse effects. There is a marked qualitative difference between friendly competition and the desire to dominate. No one exemplifies this better than Lance Armstrong. Of all his transgressions, it is this I think I find the worst (yes, more than the doping). Lance Armstrong is the quintessential bike bro. And it is not difficult to find hyper-competitive men, exuding hyper-masculine attitudes, in pelotons of all sorts – shaved legs and all. (However, anecdotally, I’d say such men are more often amateurs than top-level pros).

And of course, there are the issues of podium girls and inequalities between funding and promotion of men’s and women’s races; any internet discussion about these topics is sufficient to reveal all kinds of persistent sexism.

A question is whether sports can exist without succumbing to hyper-competitiveness and dominance. Can competition be undertaken healthily, or is it unavoidably damaging (whether confined to sports or more broadly)? This is obviously a weighty issue, demanding a much deeper reflection than I can offer here. My short answer is that, insofar as it is not fetishised, I believe competition can be very beneficial. And nor do I believe that competition is inherently a masculine trait. There are women bike racers, and they compete passionately. The construction of masculinity is not merely about defining the confines of acceptable behaviour for men, but also for women. Just as men are expected to be competitive, women are expected not to be, lest they be considered masculine. Masculinity and sexism go hand in hand.

The whole point of talking about “toxic masculinity” is to understand that masculinity is not intrinsic, but determined by social and historical forces. Thus, the detrimental aspects can be filtered out, and whatever positive attributes we might find do not need to be thought of as unique to a particular sex, let alone gender. In this way, women who play sports are not “masculine,” but they are also prone the problems of hyper-competitiveness.

For what it’s worth, I’d estimate cycling (at least road cycling) does a lot better than most sports in this regard. There is a general intolerance for aggressive competitiveness, a conscientiousness about masculinity, and a healthy self-consciousness about how to make it a welcoming, inclusive sport. But it still has a long way to go.

I’ll end with some typically broad questions. I’ve pointed to various incidental factors in road cycling that I think contribute to its reflexivity about questions of masculinity and gender. But are there broader cultural factors at play here? Is the fact that bike racing is a European sport, rather than North American one part of the equation? And how do issues of privilege factor in? Might the demographics of the typical cyclist also have something to do with it? And is there something about the sport itself that allows it to evade the worst kinds of competitiveness (i.e. you don’t have direct opponents; there is little physical contact)? Can other sporting cultures – hockey, for example – shed hyper-masculinity?

Join the conversation! 4 Comments

  1. There is definitely some “bro” in cycling, even in the club ride when guys start to crank it up the hills or on the sprint towards the cafe stop! The Lycra and leg shaving does keep it a little under control though. Although the sport of bodybuilding is pretty damn “bro” and they shave (everything??) wear thongs and get spray tans, hehehe!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply
  2. Shitty masculinity? Some groups of people can be jerks and assholes regardless of gender. You’re either unaware that the language you’re using promotes the smearing of men in today’s victimhood, outrage, social justice phase or you’re a believer in it. You must be a leftist.

    Like

    Reply
    • I know your comment is not a genuine attempt at discussion, and does not stem from an earnest attempt at self-reflection, but is rather a rehearsal of defensive rhetoric meant mainly to allow you to flippantly dismiss the issues I raise without seriously thinking about them. I’d say the most probable scenario is that you simply read the first paragraph, and found what you needed to feign indignation (how ironic!). But let me respond anyway.

      Your rhetorical question is curious. Perhaps you misunderstand the role of the adjective “shitty.” You seem to think that the term means that all masculinity (you even suggest all men) is shitty. But if you had actually read the post, you would see that I do not hold masculinity to be an inherent quality of men (masculinity is not maleness – and since it seems to be needed to be said repeatedly, gender is not sex), but rather a set of ideals that are contingent and variable. Even the most cursory survey of different contemporary and historical cultures should sufficiently show that there is no timeless and universal masculinity that defines all men everywhere and always. Which is simply to say that masculinity (or masculinities) is a cultural value, which are defined and enforced by people. So, in enforcing masculinity, we can either perpetuate shitty values or better ones. Some alternatives: conscientious masculinity, thoughtful masculinity, tolerant masculinity, etc.

      The rest of your arguments, such as your words can be generously construed as conveying any, are ridiculous. “This is a shitty hamburger.” “You know, some food can taste horrible regardless of whether they come from a cow. You must be unaware that your language is smearing the cattle industry.” Using the adjective “shitty” to describe certain masculine ideals can only be imagined to “smear men” if you think masculinity is an absolute and inherent quality of men, which we just established it is not.

      What I think is quite evident is that you take the term personally, and I would estimate that this is true of most men who have angry knee-jerk reactions to critiques of masculinity. This is certainly a marker of identity insecurity – either you’re insecure that the kinds of masculine ideals that are being called shitty are the ones that you think are great, or your personal identity is so shallow that it amounts to being a man.

      And of course I’m a leftist, I ride a bicycle, duh!

      Like

      Reply
    • It takes a special kind of person to take the time to purposely seek out this guys personal blog (which is by no means popular enough to come up in a search by chance) just to rage about the guys thoughts on masculinity…pathetic. Don’t get all butthurt about the fact that he was able to both deconstruct your argument, and identify your deep seated insecurities.

      P.S. Bernty isn’t wrong.

      Like

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Category

Bicycles, Ethics

Tags

, , , , , ,