Heaves a great big sigh.

Total Women’s Cycling, I thought better of you.

Today’s article on women’s specific saddle research starts with this headline

Selle Royal Determines Female Specific Saddles Superfluous

A quick look at the title of link, though, tells you that what they really mean is female specific commuter saddles are superfluous. I could have told you that. But no, Total Women’s Cycling has to go in for the clickbait because they know women who are serious about their bikes are going to get all riled up if you tell them that they don’t need a female specific saddle. Cuz we all know that saddles are torture devices for our lady-bits.

The scientific testing reviewed in this article is surprisingly gender balanced with a sample set ranging from 30 to 120 of each gender (sex?) for their experiments. That said, note the big frikkin caveat mentioned by their scientists:

The scientists agreed that there would need to be a pressure difference of 100 ‘mbar’ or more for the rider to notice and difference at all…. at 30-degrees – there was a dramatic difference – [of] 157mbar.

30 degrees is the amount of tilt between a rider’s pelvis and and the saddle and is typical of aggressive riding positions common for road and time trial racing. So basically, women don’t need female specific saddles because women don’t ride aggressive genres like road and time trials.

Yeah, fuck you.

In their defense they include a comment in the last paragraph of the article that if you are an aggressive position rider that you might want to check out a female specific saddle after all, or maybe an ISM unisex saddle with a massive (luxurious!) relief zone, but it’s an after thought.

Total Women’s Cycling, you let me down.

Advertisements