Cycling UK seeing sense

[PauliesWalnuts]

I don't doubt there isn't a need for an inclusive awards, but given the number of women who don't ride due to women-specific obstacles (kit, bike frames, traffic, abuse, safety etc) it's good that we've got an awards to ourselves:

'Do we need to exclude people even more?' – Cycling UK's 100 Women in Cycling criticised for not accepting nominations for trans women | Cycling Weekly

Yes please - I'm a member.

DM sent! Anyone else? It's only a quick survey, and doesn't ask for any personal details. It's an easy opportunity to thank an organisation for respecting the Supreme Court! Deadline Mon 2 March 9am.

Yes please! I will be cross if this is stopped before I get featured on the list - genuinely! I know lots of brilliant women in cycling yet to be featured. But mostly I want to retain a women-only award, because there is too much ‘women+’ and ‘underrepresented genders’ nonsense for my liking. Women as a single-sex category deserve our own spaces, awards and recognition.

It's so fucking sexist isn't it?

Straight Men.

Everyone else.

Because what is significant is simply that we are not Straight Men. Our actually individual differences don't matter, all that matters is that we are not Straight Men.

They think they are outside the box but they are fucking defined by the box.
😡

Women as a single-sex category deserve our own spaces, awards and recognition.

As there's phrasing being used now like "where females suffer a physical disdadvantage....", doesn't this make female-only competition where there is no physical factor (chess, for example) harder to justify? Surely if you concede the point about physical disadvantages, you lay yourselves open to this. Is the "a separate comp for females only, just because that's what we want" line too difficult to hold/?

I’ve heard ‘gender-affected’ sport being used. It’s like there isn’t a system of oppression based on biological differences related to sex, favouring males, where historically women have had to fight for rights and access to public life, whose effects continue to permeate across society.

Hello, I’ve just found this thread. I saw Emily Chappell in conversation at a theatre once after having loved her books. She came across as a posh, privileged twat who never had to worry about money so could do literally anything she liked in like, with very little consideration to the financial consequences. Her blog is unsurprising but still disappointing.

Anyway, I received the email from Cycling UK too as a past recipient. They used to have a trans trustee. I wonder if it’s all kicked off internally.

@SummerDaisyFields I've sent you the link. Absolutely right! And I hope you make it to the 2026 list. I think I was only on the list because my friend who nominated me is really good at writing. Yes, the "women+" winds me up too. Like - we're not good enough for an award of our own and have to share it! Yurk. The "+" people are not three years old! I'm sure they can learn to deal with the disappointment of not having a certificate. 🙄

Anyone else want the link? It does say "members [of Cycling UK] and supporters" which could be anyone really.

@SweatyChamois (nice! can recommend Cavilon) that's interesting, about a trans trustee. Most of the trustees have sort of passed me by - there's been so many.

There's definitely some reading between the lines on this issue. I wonder why they felt the need to do a press release to say that 100 Women in Cycling would follow the Supreme Court - I'm surprised they didn't just do it but keep quiet about it. It feels to me like CUK have been quieter on the trans issue than they could have been - in a good way! I feel like, apart from the brief rainbow laces thing (what a stupid idea - who has laces on their cycling shoes!), they've largely side-stepped it where it could have been embraced. The magazine is a bit rubbish on hearing about member groups, though, so you can't really tell what's going on in other member groups.

Thanks Sweaty for that insight about Emily Chappell. I really fangirled her when she was on the desk for the women's dorm at LEL, and then felt so disillusioned to read that blogpost. I am sure you're right; she's evidently lucky enough to have never have had an appalling man experience, and lacks the imagination to see that she's lucky. And will most likely (I do hope) continue to be lucky, and not have an eye-opening experience all of her own. Such a lack of imaginative empathy is saddening.

edited to add: actually, I've just remembered that I did have a pair of cycling shoes with laces - about 20 years ago and they were off the reduced shelf then...! Can't really see rainbow laces going with the Italian leather cycling shoes aesthetic - no wonder that scheme didn't last.

Thanks for sharing the link - have expressed my views.

I am concerned about how this process is being carried out - Cycling UK don’t seem to be trying too hard to consult with the groups they say they are consulting with. I am a member but had to find out about and get the link from elsewhere.

Also, I don’t like how the questions have been framed. They should have asked - Do you want to see 100 Women in Cycling continue? Instead they asked about (paraphrasing here) whether an award initiative celebrating people working on achieving diversity and inclusion in cycling should continue? I suspect they do not want to know the answer to whether the existing initiative should continue.

It was hugely disappointing to see their apology for complying with the Supreme Court Ruling. As you say, they could have implemented this change quietly and without any fuss. This would have avoided controversy and the protests that were made by people refusing or ‘giving back’ their recognition.

Instead it affected the recognition for the women included on the list, somewhat diminishing the celebrations around their inclusion.

Cycling UK had an opportunity to support the protection of women-only spaces, instead they appear to be favouring the dismantling of them. Not really surprising, given the current landscape - such as British Cycling continuing to support trans-women’s inclusion in Breeze and so many cycling clubs and groups choosing to focus on ‘women+’ and ‘under-represented genders’ - whatever nonsense that is meant to mean ….

If I’m correct about the trans identified trustee, I imagine the Supreme Court ruling is the reason they will cite for changing the rules over and over is because they will have used it to shut up the trans identified man. Sorry Bob, we must change the criteria because our lawyers have advised us to is easier to say at Board level than Sorry Bob, you’re not a woman so wind ya neck in!

@YerWot please can I have the link too

@Camelos PM sent. Fingers crossed we get one more year at least.

I am finally reading the latest magazine, and got to a call for motions for the AGM on Friday 18 September. Deadline for motions is 9am on 15 April. Does anyone here have any good ideas about how to phrase a motion on keeping 100 Women in Cycling going, for one more year at least?

I am out of my depth trying to understand how best to phrase a motion for the Cycling UK AGM, and need to do it today. Does anyone have any guidance? I've tried googling sample AGM motions, and not coming up with anything helpful.

Ooh in related news I've just seen this: https://www.cyclinguk.org/local-groups/resources/ride-event-management/group-ride-guidance

The FAQs spell it out, including things like:
"Who is eligible to take part in women-only rides?
Under the legal advice Cycling UK has received, rides described as women-only or women’s rides should be limited to people whose biological sex is female. This means trans women should not be included in these rides. Trans men and non-binary people whose biological sex is female may be included."

I think most of it is pretty good. I'd love to know who is behind it, whoever it is deserves a pint!

That’s really clear guidance from Cycling UK. It just shows it’s not had to include everyone whilst also making sure women are included. It’s a shame British cycling can’t do the same for their recreational rides.

@SweatyChamois good innit!

For posterity, here's British Cycling's Breeze rides as of today, Tuesday 14 April:

https://www.letsride.co.uk/breeze

"Inclusive led bike rides for women!
Breeze offers fun, free, inclusive led bike rides for women of all abilities across the UK.

[...]

Our Breeze Champions will lead the group, and make sure everyone stays safe. With inclusion at its heart, the Breeze programme has also always been open to transgender females and non-binary participants who most closely identify as female."

(edited to add ellipsis, to make it clear the explanation is further down the front page)

Do you want it conciliatory or debate provoking?

@YerWot Any use?

Title:
Continuation and reporting of the “100 Women in Cycling” programme

Motion:
This AGM notes that Cycling UK’s “100 Women in Cycling” initiative, established in 2017, was created to increase the visibility of women in cycling and address their underrepresentation in participation.

It further notes that women remain underrepresented among people who cycle regularly in the UK, and that targeted initiatives are widely recognised as necessary to address barriers to participation.

The AGM recognises that the “100 Women in Cycling” programme contributes to Cycling UK’s charitable objective of increasing participation in cycling through visibility, recognition, and encouragement.

This AGM therefore resolves that Cycling UK should:

Continue the “100 Women in Cycling” programme as an annual initiative;
Maintain its focus on supporting and increasing women’s participation in cycling;
Ensure the programme is appropriately supported as part of its participation work;
Report annually to members on how the programme contributes to increasing

@MissGendering aww, thank you so much! Sadly I have already submitted my motion proposal - the deadline is tomorrow at 9am, I got my seconder this afternoon and sent it off straight away as I couldn't bear to think about it any more.

Would anyone like to submit @MissGendering 's proposal?
Details here: https://www.cyclinguk.org/agm-2026
You need to download the form there, find your Cycling UK membership number, get a seconder (and his or her membership number), submit by tomorrow (Wednesday 15 April) at 9am.

In my proposal, I referred to the 2024-2029 strategy: https://www.cyclinguk.org/strategy which specifically mentions 100 Women in Cycling on p10-11.

It's probably poor form for me to second someone else's proposal on the same subject. But it would be really good if we can get another proposal in - it would show strength of feeling. All proposals have to be considered by some selection panel, so it might not make it anywhere. But at least we've tried!

I went for brief, light and women-focused in my proposal. Figured the less I say, the less likely I am to dig myself into a hole. Keeping it women-focused was central. I was over the moon to be on the 100 Women in Cycling list: I'll be blowed if other women don't get that brilliant feeling just because someone's bullied you out!
Hopefully my proposal won't make it to the AGM because they already feel that they've committed to 100 Women in Cycling in the 2024-2029 strategy. This is also fine, I just want it to carry on at least one more year!

How much government and lottery funding do these clowns get?

I’m not sure Cycling UK received any government funding. British Cycling, on the other hand, receive millions

Regarding Cycling UK getting government funding - according to their Charity Commission accounts, last year it was £438.94k from government contracts and £6.47m from government grants.

https://register-of-charities.charitycommission.gov.uk/en/charity-search/-/charity-details/5026584/full-print

I don't really understand any more than that. But my impression is that this money is mainly spent on the bigger expensive projects that happen in specific locations. Like an e-cargo bike trying out scheme in Manchester a year or two ago. I think they are very poor on reporting things like that in the magazine - for example the Manchester project I only knew about because a family member tried it out, and a trustee at the time was telling me about the scheme.

I don't know anything about how British Cycling are run - presumably it's very different as they are getting sporting funding? (as well as their money from Shell? don't really know anything about either) I see on the Charity Commission website that there is a British Cycling Foundation which has recently been set up.

Gosh I am so nervous about my motion proposal. In a way, I really hope it doesn't make it to the AGM because the board feel like they've already made a commitment to 100 Women in Cycling in the 2024-2029 strategy, and so it has to go ahead in its current form.

Interesting to see MrsO's reported comment above in that light. The spokes person can want diversity and inclusion etc etc, but the 2024-2029 strategy refers to 100 Women as is. And the strategy predated FWS, but now the language is on the side of women. Interesting times!

Good digging there @YerWot
British Cycling receive millions for their podium programme but they also receive substantial amounts for their Breeze programme - the one to encourage women into cycling because they are massively underrepresented but also allows men into dressed to attend.
I think the money comes via Sport England who used to be all over gender ideology