Girls don't cycle?? What's up with that?

[Himalaya]

As a mother of boys I have vaguely noticed that you don't see many teenage girls on bikes these days.

I cycled to my son's secondary school today to drop something off, and in the bike shed counted 40 definitely boy's bikes, 1 definitely girl's bike and 3 that could have been either.

Being able to get around on a bike gives an important measure of freedom and independence to teenagers IME (as a girl, and as a parent). It seems like just another important, fun, freedom-giving thing that girls are missing out on more than they used to.

Anyone got any idea why? What is preventing more girls cycling? Is it parents being more protective of girls/more willing to drive them places? Cycling (helmets?) having an image problem amongst girls?

Slug, I wouldn't disagree that men's professional sport is far more widespread. But take the example of a minority sport like hockey or water polo. Lack of coverage of either should not lead to people saying 'oh, I can't be arsed to play'.

I do think it's ironic that in the early days, cycling was a feminist issue, and yet now it does seem to be spurned by teenage girls. I always got around on my bike, loved bike rides with friends, went to school on it for 7 years, college, work... trying to get dd (year 7) to cycle to school is like pulling teeth. She did it twice and mysteriously got a puncture on both occasions

I will certainly not be driving her to school so she has a long (half hour) walk there on her own every day instead of about 12 minutes on the bike.

She definitely objects to wearing a helmet -the school requires this and so do I, so that puts her off, for sure. Basically it's just not cool to cycle, and there are perhaps more boys who are less image-conscious or for whom being 'sporty' is perceived as a positive image rather than a negative one.

BTW she has a very 'boyish' bike, black and red mountain bike.

Going back to the original question about teenage girls on bikes, surely a fair bit of it must be the way girls are accustomed to dressing?

I remember cycling everywhere as a teenager, and for me it was definitely about independence. But I was generally quite dressed-down, didn't wear much or any makeup and rarely wore short skirts. I was usually cycling to and from the stables with a faint whiff of horse dung about me, or going for long muddy mountainbike rides. In both those contexts appearance isn't really an issue.

But cycling does get you warm, sometimes sweaty, a bit red-faced. It's not really safe to cycle in heels, and it plays hell with your makeup. So if you've internalised since well before puberty the idea that this is the sort of look that's expected of you, I can easily see how getting on a bike might not seem like an option.

I wonder how much it is the focus on it as an activity in itself that has put girls off - the rise of BMX instead of teenage bikes being primarily for transport might be part of the cause of the polarization.

I don't know why people are engaging with Sanjeev's "oh but that doesn't matter" crock. 18 dozen facets in which women always do worse but it can't possibly be anything to do with the general lack of take up because his wife and girls are engaged. Obviously it's because women and girls in general are lazy shits and nothing to do with culture.

It's got nothing at all to do with professional sport Sanjeev, that's just an excuse. If the media only covered professional sport we would not have to endure the bleeding boat race on the Telly every year.

Women's sport as a whole is not taken seriously. Take a look at the BBC sport's website for example. The national teams are either the "GB Team" and the "Women's GB Team" As is so common, the male is the norm and the female is the other. It's subtle but insidious. The message is you will never be as important as the men.

Take also the case of the GB Men's football team. This is a team that has not won a major tournament since 1966. Yet the discussion about who will be the manager has been front page news for months. Endless media time is taken up discussing the permutations. Yet the women's cricket team are world champions. Did you know that? Nope, didn't think so. They beat NZ a couple of weeks ago. Zilch mentions in the sports media. The UK women's rugby team have held the 6 nations' championship medal for 6 consecutive tournaments. I could go on.....

Sanjeev,

Yes I agree that men also are subject to comments about their appearance, the point is that it has a different impact on young women. The abuse that Martin Johnson gets is not more acceptable than what Rebecca Adlington got, it is just less likely to put boys off sport.

Personal experience of women in sport, such as your family and the other stories here, can be illuminating but I'm also trying to share some of the research available. Don't write off all inactive women as merely lazy, it's lazy thinking on your part.

@ Sanjeev: it isn't about the possibility of taking part though, is it? It's about the probability of taking part. No one is arguing that it is impossible for girls to get involved with sport, just that not a lot of them do. So why? If you want to assume they are all lazy individuals fair play to you - I prefer to look at some wider pressures too.

And dress vs. cycling - never stopped me or my friends in the '80's. I cycled in long skirts, short skirts and kitten-heeled court shoes. The only one that defeated me was the long, tight, fish-tailed skirt Impractical teen girl clothes have been around a long time. So what has changed?

Right. So I am copping the 'crock' comments because....ooooh, can't think why! Other people have made all sorts of comments like 'well you can't do it in high heels, and it messes up your make-up', and that is okay! Where have I said anything doesn't matter?? Is that what offering a reasoned alternative viewpoint boils down to? Where have I said women and girls are lazy shits? Putting words into someone else's mouth seems to be a common tactic here.

I am not being abusive. I am not being dismissive. I am trying to have a reasoned discussion, and to address certain points. Am I not allowed?

By the way, if the 'lazy' thing is from my water polo comment, that was a gender-neutral point. It was a point about minority sports.

sanjeez This is where you said women and girls were lazy shits: "I think some people hide behind lazy excuses when they just really can't be arsed.".

Sorry about misspelling your name that was not intentional.

It's also cultural. Some cultures represented in Britain do not go in for much sport (either men or women), over weight, diabetes, girls in cultural clothing which makes sport less likely. They also don't get enough sun and can be deficient in vit D.

My daughters virtually lived at their riding stables as teenagers so dirt, mess etc was just part of normal life for them. Parents should try to ensure they encourage girls to take risks and be active.

No worries about the spelling SP

I stand by my comment about people. Not women, not girls - people. I would wager a pound to a pinch of shit that anyone on here who is active themselves will have an active family. Xenia is spot on.

You are talking within the context of the fact girls and women don't participate in sport as much as boys and men. Commentators were giving many reasons - you (poorly for the most part and with what would an be astonishing lack of awareness if it weren't so common) argued that none of those reasons were relevent because they affected men too, and offered as the reason people might not participate was that they couldn't be arsed. That was basically calling women and girls lazy compared to men and boys.

Xenia's arguments about being exposed to an active and sporting lifestyle are also true, but do not account for the difference between male and female participation, unless, for some reason, families with girls tend not to be as sporting.

This has made me :(. I love cycling when I met dh it was my primary form of transport. We regularly go on bike rides as a family and I am hoping to get dd's stabilisers off this summer. It would be so sad if dd didn't enjoy cycling as much as the rest.of us in her teenage years. Maybe what Xeina says is right and as long as the rest of us continue to cycle she will follow suit. However peer pressure is massive in senior school...

Xenia talks much sense.

Sanjeev, I'm sorry you feel you are being the unfair target of criticism but your arguments seem too trite to me.

Children do not blithely follow their parents' example, in sport or in anything else. Yes parental influence is a contributory factor but it's not the be all and end all. That just ignores all of the other influences on a child's life - society, education, personality, media...

Children have become less active over the years (a trend which is reversing, although the effects are uneven over gender, income levels, ethnicity and disability). So they are (overall) doing less activity then their parents.

If there is a girl and a boy in the same family, where the parents are active and encourage the children to be active, the girl is more likely to be inactive. Fact.

I disagree about single sex schools. My daughter's large mixed comp is VERY sporty, and both boys and girls excel and do not even bother playing the other two schools in town as the results are embarassing (for the other schools!) I think you will get better facilities in a large mixed school than for example in an all-girls faith school. Most people are in state, not private education - I know there are some fine facilities in both mixed and single sex private schools, (but not all - some are very poor.)

Millfield, anybody?

Xenia makes good points, though incomplete (apparently). I make trite and unaware comments! And yet we both miss the same point.......

There are almost certainly other reasons besides bone-idleness why people don't participate in sport. I never said this was the only factor. But look at this quote;

'If there is a girl and a boy in the same family, where the parents are active and encourage the children to be active, the girl is more likely to be inactive. Fact.'

Based upon what? Should I just put 'fact' after all my posts? Because it isn't true in my experience, and I have been shown no proof.

Ah bollocks, I can't be bothered any more. Enjoy your patting each other on the back. The nasty man who tried to be polite and reasonable has been shown the door.

"It isn't true in my experience".

The point is that your experience is limited, whereas people/organisations who conduct research in this field and then write about it (in peer reviewed journals) have information at their disposal which goes beyond their direct experience. I have never experienced domestic violence for example, but I don't doubt it exists.

As SuchProspects said - "Xenia's arguments about being exposed to an active and sporting lifestyle are also true, but do not account for the difference between male and female participation, unless, for some reason, families with girls tend not to be as sporting."

There is a difference between participation rates in sport between men and women which this thread is exploring, particularly with regard to cycling.

I haven't treated you as a "nasty man", your gender is irrelevant to me in this instance.

Children when they are under 10 are largely influenced by their parents. Teenagers of which I have had 3 are influenced by their peers at school by and large.

I dont' know what made my daughters sporty as music is our main hobby at home and also got 1 or 2 grade 8 music exams too. They were at private schools - North London Collegiate - set up in the 1800s by some very leading edge female educationlists Miss Buss and Miss Beale so a good school for feminists and the other at Haberdashers. Both schools have lots of sport. The reason they got into riding was they did it at a school holiday club when they were 5 and 6. The reason they ski is because of family holidays. They go to bikram yoga with me when we all have time.

(Millfield only if you're a bit thick.... although I think 1 or 2 of mine have played rugby there occasionally - sons not daughters and hopefully were not sullied by the lack of brains...)

Back on the themse of the thread which is why do more men than women cycle. In general women are busier because they are silly enough to marry sexist men and do more at home than their men, more fool them. Secondly they may be up more in the night with the baby so might want 2 hours sleep at the weekend than a long cycle ride. Thirdly perhaps they have to cvarry more. I always cycled to the tube and I had to have massive luggage straps for huge bags. It is not easy taking stuff around. One reason my youngest won't cycle to school is because of the msasive music instruments, kit bags and homework bags they carry. If we could restore proper desks at schools, have lots of places to leave things and have most homework uploaded and then easily downloaded so you do not need to carry much to and from school you would find more children able to cycle to school.

Wow, finally something I agree with Xenia about! Yes they do have to carry more to school (although if dd would use the b locker I have paid for I don't think it would be so bad). Also agree (and my own experience confirms this) it tends to be harder for 'married' women to continue sport even if they love it.

Laughing very hard at Millfield comment...you manage to insult so many people with every post, Xenia! OK I know it's not selective but it is not actually a requirement to be thick to go there! (PILs taught there) Did your son's school beat them, by any chance?

BTW just looked up dd's school sports results and see we drew 1-1 with Bedales in a friendly! Any insults you'd like to fling that way?

(That was girls under-16s hockey btw)

I think the sport thing is important and interesting in it's own right (PE teachers etc..) but a bit of a red herring in this case.

I don't think you have to be sporty or trying to get fit to ride a bike for transport.

I wouldn't conclude that boys cycling to school are particularly sporty, just that they like the convenience and freedom of having their own wheels.

...whereas girls seem to be (encouraged to...) value something else (appearance, safety, conformity..?) over this first important bit of freedom and that makes me ...at least where I live (a not particularly bike-ish town)

I agree with nightlark - it can't simply be impractical teenage clothing that is the issue. I have ridden in all kinds of outlandish gear - In fact I remember reading somewhere that motorists of both sexes give you more room if you are wearing heels, a skirt etc.. rather than if you are dressed in Lycra and look like you know what you are doing

It would be interesting to ask some teenage girls why they don't see bikes as being for them as a form of transport.

I'm another one who lived on my bike when I was young and still use one a lot now. Having said that, I did go through a teenage phase where I was more likely to use the bus or walk with friends. Bus journey were for going into town though and it was a bit far to cycle. I used to cycle to the bus stop though.