[Closed] Singletrack Decide Not To Cover the Danny MacAskill Playboy Video

Well said Graham.

The poor standard of the video (compared to previous Danny vids) just makes it worse - like they have added a plastic toy to a box of bran-flakes.

Personally I'm quite happy to align myself with those viewpoints.

If you'd rather be on the Its-PC-Garn-Mad side then take a good look around at your fellow commenters:

[img] [/img]

Is that for my horse or your petard Jamie?

Anne Knott (in the post a few above) seems so angry she has become confused, Danny MacAskill is best known for being a street trials rider not a mtb rider.
I think her standpoint is absolute rubbish there are many female role models to look up to in the world of mountain biking and there always have been.

I can't understand why you posted that GrahamS

I went out in my Danny MacAskill signature shoes the other night. Ended up in a gentlemans club.

I demand Danny personally refund me any money I may or may not have spent in there

Anne Knott (in the post a few above) seems so angry she has become confused

Well you know how they get eh?

WTF was the swimming pool comment about?! I take it Mark owns STW and is free to have his Ratner moment, either way polarizing a brand's customer base in order to push a personal opinion is foolhardy at best imo.

Not really a Ratner moment, just stating the STW editorial stance on the issue.
So now we know what side of the fence they are on when it comes to bicycles and ladies with big ears. Ooh, did someone say Jessica Rabbit!!
[img] [/img]
I'm sure that will offend somone on here.

WTF was the swimming pool comment about?!

Missed that. Where?

I'm sure that will offend somone on here.

For the umpteenth time, [b]no one is "offended". [/b]

It just suits the PC-Garn-Mad crowd to pretend that people are "offended" because it means they get to misrepresent them as overly-sensitive naive prudes, like Victorians fainting at the sight of a sexually provocative table leg.

Now please, stop beating your wife.

Now please, stop beating your [s]wife[/s]meat.

To a picture of a sexy rabbit too. 😯

Weird...

Nothing weird about the love betwixt a man and his rabbit.

I even hear of women who have a soft spot for rabbits. It's more rampant than you think.

It's the correct stance for STW to take IMO and it was right for them to point out their position. But i do take issue with the contempt that STW has shown for its users and magazine buyers in its tweet.

Mark just said he's given up on trying to please everyone. Fair enough, but it seems his sense of superiority has become so great that he basically sits on his pedestal picking out plebs he feels are just about worthy of associating with him.

Some of you need to get a life. I've watched the vid. Its not sexist etc, its worse its just not very good. Abit dull really. Possibly Danny did it for the American market?

Stop tripping over yourselves to be offended on someone elses perceived-behalf.

I find his videos and riding very dull. Yes he's got some skills but seems like many of his videos need a gimmick to make them entertaining, which in my opinion has back fired. I'd much rather see his bike skills applied to a trail or other challenging settings, I guess similar to Chris Akrigg's videos. Ive found all his videos since the giant toy one very boring to watch and have never managed to watch them all the way through. The playboy thing doesn't offend me, but I just cant see the point of it.

The irony of all this is that if STW [i]hadn't [/i]said anything, we'd now be several pages into a thread discussing the video anyway and saying it's not good enough how STW were just ignoring it and couldn't even do us the courtesy of an official statement.

Can't bloody win.

It gives the un-outraged a chance to get outraged at the lack of outrage by those supposedly [i]outraged on behalf of X[/i]*.

*a phrase of the intellectually bereft.

The irony of all this is that if STW hadn't said anything, we'd now be several pages into a thread discussing the video anyway and saying it's not good enough how STW were just ignoring it and couldn't even do us the courtesy of an official statement.

Can't bloody win.

Nah. I reckon it would have just blown over.

Stop tripping over yourselves to be offended on someone elses perceived-behalf.

Stop tripping over yourselves to be offended

No one is offended, it's about having standards.

Someone may have said this earlier: Didn't "stuff" magazine acknowledge recently that having bikini'd models posing lustily with iPods was outdated?

here we go: [url= http://www.theguardian.com/media/2014/jul/02/stuff-gadget-magazine-drops-female-cover-models-lads-mags ]link[/url]

isn't this kinda the same thing?

Not offended by it in any way, it's just a crap visit to be honest.

We'll done STW!

As a husband of a lady who could kick most of you're mincing backsides on a down hill and the father of a little girl who will be raised to do the same (if she wants), I detest this kind of vid.

Not because of the the sight of skin - come on this is 2014 - there's skin everywhere and it's no big deal. I detest it for the role models it shows to us. Man does pointless (all be it cool) tricks, women fawn over said man.

As a Husband and Dad, I constantly have to support my girls from a never ending stream of this BS. Are men subjugated to this to the same degree?

I'd rather see Danny riding with a cool chick, them both doing awesome tricks , than this sexist junk.

Oh how about we replaced all the girls in the video with men - all acting in the same fawning manner - man that would get the insecure homophobes going!

Its not a harmless piece of fun, it's propaganda to put women back in their place. I feel sorry for Danny for being so naive and I feel sorry for the defenders of the video who cannot relate to the BS their Mums, wives, daughters, lovers etc.. have to put up with every minute of every day.

Now please, stop beating your wife.

GrahamS , you really are a bit special.

So now playboy readers or people who have no problem with such a publication not only can not be respectful of women but are now wife beaters.

That is on top of being compared to jimmy saville on this thread and the other.
Really shows what kind of people we are dealing with here.

Must admit I liked the Asian American's in the clip. Mighty-fine 8)

I think it's time for my favourite quote which always seems so pertinent in its application to STW..

[i]I hate offended people. They come in two flavours - huffy and whiny - and it's hard to know which is worst. The huffy ones are self-important, narcissistic authoritarians in love with the sound of their own booming disapproval, while the whiny, sparrowlike ones are so annoying and sickly and ill-equipped for life on Earth you just want to smack them round the head until they stop crying and grow up. Combined, they're the very worst people on the planet - 20 times worse than child molesters
[/i]

I hadn't seen that video, I don't think I'll actually bother anyway, I like Danny Mac and if he's earned from it then good for him, it's tough enough to make actual cash from being a pro biker I imagine. I'm with the school that think it's a band wagon STW have hitched themselves to. I don't particularly care for their pc attitude either, I'm intelligent enough to make my own decision what to watch, for what it's worth, I also think it's pathetic them blocking links to the Daily Mail on the one hand whilst hosting a forum with infantile threads about pooeing oneself in varying situations on the other, the word hypocrisy springs to mind, still they say there is no such things as bad publicity.

I also agree with this view..

[i]Do Vulpine think they own MacAskill? What is with this nonsense? "He's a role model, so he has to conform to our agenda and be of service to us". How about this as an alternative, he should live for himself.

And let us not forget, they decry him for appearing with Bunny Girls, but "vulpine" means "foxy", that's right, their team is called the Foxy Women's Cycling Team.

Feminists are the sexual perverts I worry about most, because it's their dogmas which infect every corner of society, and to the highest levels of government. They're the misogynists who propagate the view that the women who enjoy their sexual radiance and choose to share that aspect of themselves with the rest of us can't be self-aware and intelligent but must necessarily be victims of male heterosexuality. And it's the Feminists who are the man-haters who relentlessly promote the ideology that healthy male heterosexuality must be suppressed and hidden because it is dangerous, dirty and deviant.[/i]

Feminists are the sexual perverts I worry about most, because it's their dogmas which infect every corner of society, and to the highest levels of government. They're the misogynists who propagate the view that the women who enjoy their sexual radiance and choose to share that aspect of themselves with the rest of us can't be self-aware and intelligent but must necessarily be victims of male heterosexuality. And it's the Feminists who are the man-haters who relentlessly promote the ideology that healthy male heterosexuality must be suppressed and hidden because it is dangerous, dirty and deviant.

That's one of the most idiotic things I've ever read and a classic misrepresentation of feminism.

I hate offended people

Yeah, move along people, I don't like y'all questioning my view on life. I might have to think about someone else for a change.

As a husband of a lady who could kick most of your mincing backsides on a down hill...

Punchy!

Yep and true

They do say the best form of defence, is offence.

I just try and get people to open up their minds a bit. But unfortunately that's a hard thing to do as they are afraid of change and. equality with women.

I hate offended people. They come in two flavours - huffy and whiny - and it's hard to know which is worst. The huffy ones are self-important, narcissistic authoritarians in love with the sound of their own booming disapproval, while the whiny, sparrowlike ones are so annoying and sickly and ill-equipped for life on Earth you just want to smack them round the head until they stop crying and grow up. Combined, they're the very worst people on the planet - 20 times worse than child molesters

Seriously? You couldn't articulate quite how unoffended you are so you pick this weaselling pile of shite to Di the job for you. Have you missed the countless posts where it's been pointed out that nobody's fainting with shock.

And chip, I can see why GrhamS' attempt at subtle humour can be so dangerous. If you didn't get that, well, hmmm, I just dunno...

deadlydarcy - Member
And chip, I can see why GrhamS' attempt at subtle humour can be so dangerous. If you didn't get that, well, hmmm, I just dunno...

Yep, really shows the kind of people we are dealing with here.

I can't help feeling that all of this could have easily been solved by filming an episode of "This is Peaty" or an episode of Cedric Gracia's "Through my Eyes" at the Playboy mansion rather than a dull video with Danny 😀

The video is very meh for me and isn't what I would associate with Danny. My only issue is it is below Danny's standards previously set in many ways. It is just a bit of a shonky video by his standards. I feel the issue here is Danny himself and in fairness to him we are probably setting too high a set of standards for him as a role model. If if were Ratboy or CG going nuts in the Playboy mansion then chances are no-one would care because the expectations from those guys are completely different. Be far more entertaining too

And chip, I can see why GrhamS' attempt at subtle humour can be so dangerous. If you didn't get that, well, hmmm, I just dunno

Yeah let's ignore the sexism here... Nothing to see.... Those women couldn't actually be people. Anyway they probably liked it secretly. Nothing gets a girl going like a guy on a trials bike....

Seriously? You couldn't articulate quite how unoffended you are so you pick this weaselling pile of shite to Di the job for you. Have you missed the countless posts where it's been pointed out that nobody's fainting with shock.

You sound offended, DD, you ok? 8)

Anyway, isn't that a quote from Mr C. Brooker? I thought he was beloved on here?

GrahamS , you really are a bit special.

So now playboy readers or people who have no problem with such a publication not only can not be respectful of women but are now wife beaters.

I was alluding to the famous example of a [url= http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question ]loaded question[/url]: [i]"Have you stopped beating your wife?"[/i], because that's exactly the type of loaded trap that you and others have tried to set by accusing people of being "offended" and being "prudes".

I'm sorry I had to explain that to you.

Now please, stop murdering kittens.

Good point Graham. You had to bring [url= http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_(magazine) ]loaded[/url] into this.

Anyway, isn't that a quote from Mr C. Brooker?

Aye, that it be.

batfink - Member

Someone may have said this earlier: Didn't "stuff" magazine acknowledge recently that having bikini'd models posing lustily with iPods was outdated?

I think that was just their way of admitting that they were fapping over the ipod rather than the model. Phwoar, look at the gigabytes on that!

Yeah let's ignore the sexism here... Nothing to see.... Those women couldn't actually be people. Anyway they probably liked it secretly. Nothing gets a girl going like a guy on a trials bike....

Of Course they're people, what a stupid thing to say.
No they probably did not like it and were disappointed danny did not do the loop d loop.
Danny may be good but every one knows a really long skid is the way to impress the ladies.

People (like your mum, wife, daughter, etc..) not just objects fantasy objects. Oh never mind...

Skids are cool *

*except on the trails folks

Not just no , but have you seen my mum all doll'd
Up. They are queing up at the Wednesday afternoon tea dance.

because wife beating is a barrel of laughs.

That's one of the most idiotic things I've ever read and a classic misrepresentation of feminism.

What if a mum, wife, daughter etc really wanted to be a Playboy Bunny, it was all they ever dreamed of, attracted to the lifestyle and glamour, worked hard for the opportunity but were stopped from doing so by their son, husband, brother etc because they thought it was a harmful message to be sending out that objectified women.

Would that be ok?

Own petard and all that

Someone smashing their wife in the face is appalling reading playboy is not.

So you've stopped then? Good. Now what about those kittens?

chip - two words for you namely 'self' and 'respect'.

HTH 🙂

This is a woman who lives in the real world and acknowledges people including women are sexual beings with sex drives.
[img] [/img]

chip, I'm running out of steam a bit on this, but your understanding of the points that C_G and people are making is so weak that you're just straw-manning in a rather dull way.

No-one disagrees that "women are sexual beings". But the representation of female sexuality and what female sexuality is for is a fairly problematic area for many feminists, and many people would suggest that the representation of female sexual agency that Playboy and its ilk specialise in is not an especially constructive one.

That's enough to put plenty of us off.

That isn't necessarily either a dull or academic set of points, and indeed spending some time appreciating what female constructions of their sexuality which aren't heavily influenced by a very male-centric concept of how women are supposed to relate to sex look like can be downright erotic. It would (I respectfully suggest) be a better use of your time this morning than bickering with actual womenz on here about whether Hugh Hefner is liberating women from patriarchal oppression by paying them to wear little ears.

🙂

Would this thread be as long if the statement had said.

"We're not covering the new Danny M vid cos it's a bit shit and quite tacky"?

What if a mum, wife, daughter etc really wanted to be a Playboy Bunny, it was all they ever dreamed of, attracted to the lifestyle and glamour, worked hard for the opportunity but were stopped from doing so by their son, husband, brother etc because they thought it was a harmful message to be sending out that objectified women.

Would that be ok?

Sorry mate who was talking about stopping people doing what they want to Do?

If you are a woman who does not agree with woman stripping off for the sake of being viewed by others, don't get your kit off .

If you are a man who does not agree with women stripping off for the sake of being viewed , don't do the viewing .

But I think you will find most societies who enforce the above rules are the most oppressive to women of all.

people including women are sexual beings with sex drives.

Phew, I'm glad we cleared that up.

You've completely defeated that argument that [i]absolutely no one was making[/i]. Well done.

Here's the [url= http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ ]UN's Universal Declaration of Human Rights[/url] which says women [i]DO[/i] have the right to an education and freedom of thought. Ha!

Chip has any one in the last 6 pages objected about a woman taking her kit off?

Yes unless it's the bunny ears you don't like.

Find me a quote then

chip - I started work in the 70's, in an office. Many office walls were adorned with calendars, in a prominent position, of half or mostly naked women. It wasn't just garages or workshops that displayed these calendars. Thank goodness that's no longer acceptable.

I personally feel that Danny Mc has lost his self-respect by having a vid shot in premises owned by an utter sleazebag. Would these women be fawning over Heffner if he wasn't rich? Seriously?

I'm really pleased that tables have been turned and women are no longer exploited in that it's the women exploiting the men for their ... er ... insert your own word here! Women such as Katie Price have made a very lucrative income so this type of work is no longer the preserve of those who're less than bright but had big knockers.

Danny Mc is a role model cum hero for many youngsters, what kind of message is being sent by a. filming it in Heffner Towers and b. why are those women dressed the way they are? Perhaps you could explain titillation to children and explain the attire worn?

I apologise if this comes across as a bit rambled but hopefully you'll get the gist. 🙂

Heff could be a hoot , and a joy to be around for all you know .
And if women are just out for his money who is exploiting who .

So did you find a quote, Chip?

how else do you expect woman (or men in fact) to dress when they are in a pool?

attractive people like to show their bodies off, whats the big ****ing deal here.

There was no titalation in that video, there was less skin on show than what you would see on a spanish beach.

so its ok for woman like Jordan to "exploit" men by getting naked and leaking sex tapes but some guy on a bike can't cycle about a big house with a couple of woman in bikinis.

There was no titalation in that video, there was less skin on show than what you would see on a spanish beach.

Yes, because that's the issue here.

[img] [/img]

The big deal is not the attire (get over the clothes thing), the deal is that it plays to and reinforces the idea that women should fawn over some guy riding a bike, rather than riding themselves. I want to encourage more girls to ride bikes, videos like this have the opposite effect.

Katie Price Aka Jordan is ok but Playboy bunnies are not? Mixed message C_G.

So did you find a quote, Chip?

Really! This whole thread is about the boycott of Danny's film because of its association with playboy.
So if it is not playboys publication of naked women you have a problem with, what is it.

Is this disappointment and boycott of Danny's films going to be an ongoing thing here or will all be forgiven in time for his next film .

There was no titalation in that video, there was less skin on show than what you would see on a spanish beach.

If you really think those two things are the same then you're just a bit dim aren't you.

Really! This whole thread is about the boycott of Danny's film because of its association with playboy.
So if it is not playboys publication of naked women you have a problem with, what is it.

Still haven't found a quote, then?

The exploited here are not the women in the video. They are most likely being paid large amounts of money and are probably quite happy about that. The video is produced by Red Bull and it has cost them money to arrange, shoot, edit and distribute. You get to watch it for free.

So what is it for?

It's designed to attract the maximum number of eyeballs and it does this by resorting to the cheapest gag in the marketing manual - sex.

The women are not being exploited and neither is Danny. Both of those parties are probably chuckling all the way to the bank. It's the male viewing public who are being exploited by having Red Bull pluck their basest of strings that makes them go 'Phwoooar'.

Danny isn't the product. The women are not the product. They are tools used to reach the product and in this case it's you.

It's as sophisticated as taking a logo, drawing it on a pair of tits and putting up on a billboard. THAT will get the most eyeballs on your product, guaranteed.

I can appreciate that trick - it's incredibly powerful. The thing I find misguided about the use of that marketing tool in this case is how it is intended to target a single sex when our sport is open to both. It has used a cheap, outdated trick and in the process has managed to pretty much exclude an already under represented half of the population.

Well said Mark.

I vote to just close the thread now - it's going nowhere.

Katie Price Aka Jordan is ok but Playboy bunnies are not? Mixed message C_G.

Not a mixed message at all, I'm happy that both KP and bunny girls enjoy a lucrative living. The key issue here is context, in other words why does Danny Mc feel the need to do his thing in that place with those bunny girls and all its connotations.

Someone smashing their wife in the face is appalling reading playboy is not

So you are offended by wife beating- all your "arguments" work there

If you are a woman who does not agree with woman stripping off for the sake of being viewed by others, don't get your kit off .

If you are a man who does not agree with women stripping off for the sake of being viewed , don't do the viewing

If you object to wife beating dont beat your wife
If you object to wife beating dont watch others do it

Own petard and all that

For the triumph of evil all that is necessary ifs good people do nothing I assume you dont want us to do nothing about the later just the bit you dont mind.

Danny Mc is a role model cum hero

Katie Price Aka Jordan is ok but Playboy bunnies are not? Mixed message C_G.

I can see why you might differentiate people who are tiny, disposable cogs in someone else's machine, with no real control over their promotion and very little access to the rewards of it, and someone who has come up through a similarly structured ("glamour") industry, established themselves sufficiently to be able to take control over their own image and marketing and has made ridiculous amounts of dosh on their own terms with it.

As an aside, has an industry ever been as misnamed as the "glamour" one?

My stepdaughter who'se 14 loves this movie.
Maybe a few of you should watch it.

Agreed, well said Mark.

The thing I find misguided about the use of that marketing tool in this case is how it is intended to target a single sex when our sport is open to both. It has used a cheap, outdated trick and in the process has managed to pretty much exclude an already under represented half of the population.

I don't agreee with that at all.... It's a very simplistic and rather old fashioned view IMO.

In todays world, where the standard sexual orientation is accepted alongside LGBT orientations, an image of a beautiful girl is no longer limited to appreciation from the males of the species.. Many women are quite happy to appreciate the female form..

It may be Mark's view that this is detrimental to equality of the sexes but has he actually taken the time to ask girls what they think? Or is he making assumptions based on his own out of date and out of touch views. ?

The thing I find misguided about the use of that marketing tool in this case is how it is intended to target a single sex when our sport is open to both. It has used a cheap, outdated trick and in the process has managed to pretty much exclude an already under represented half of the population.

This sort of sums it up for me...

...what's bugging me is that this thread has ground on for seven pages of outrage. Why are we continuing to debate this? Surely our collective outrage would be better directed elsewhere - for example I give it at least fifteen minutes before someone announces yet another standard we don't want/need just for the sake of it.

has he actually taken the time to ask girls what they think?

You mean apart from the girls that have expressed their support for his viewpoint on this thread and on Facebook and twitter?

In todays world, where the standard sexual orientation is accepted alongside LGBT orientations, an image of a beautiful girl is no longer limited to appreciation from the males of the species.. Many women are quite happy to appreciate the female form..

I've just asked a gay friend what she thinks of the video. Would you care to guess her answer?

It may be Mark's view that this is detrimental to equality of the sexes but has he actually taken the time to ask girls what they think?

There's only a few of us girlies on here! On a serious note you can just end up rolling your eyes with the sometimes everyday sexism experienced. I'm no feminist but just a little tired of people deferring to a male for a question to be answered when the female is capable of answering it. 😐

In todays world, where the standard sexual orientation is accepted alongside LGBT orientations, an image of a beautiful girl is no longer limited to appreciation from the males of the species.. Many women are quite happy to appreciate the female form..

I could be wrong, but kinda doubt it.