Response to Flash Foxy & Outside Magazine Article

Dan Evans wrote :
A novel defending creepers.

Colonel Mustard wrote: That's funny, I also judge anybody climbing in solutions in the gym to be overshod. All those crazy foot beta intensive routes in the bouldering cave.... huh?

In my mind, the progression is:

1)first pair of newbie shoes
2)then you think "if only i had solutions I could flash that 5.9" so you buy expensive pair and realize they help a little but they can't climb for you.
3) you just use a comfortable shoe at a good price point when you are in the gym.

Mitchelle Kelly wrote: In my mind, the progression is: 1)first pair of newbie shoes 2)then you think "if only i had solutions I could flash that 5.9" so you buy expensive pair and realize they help a little but they can't climb for you. 3) you just use a comfortable shoe at a good price point when you are in the gym.

You'd think, but lots of these folks are pretty strong boulderers. Maybe some of them are just using their old outdoor shoes or they take their gym projects pretty seriously? Granted, I climb a couple v-grades lower than many of them, but I just don't run into indoor problems that require the really precise footwear in the gym.

You said this:

ClimbLikeAGirl wrote: I can only hope based off of similar diatribes on other threads. If he is for real, he probably supports Drumpf.

Then you were offended here:

ClimbLikeAGirl wrote:Right, I'm so silly! I totally forgot. Since I'm a woman and I hate Trump, I must totally be over the moon about our other political option. Thanks again for reminding me. Can you also remind me again how to use the clippy thingy that you put on your harness??

this isnt particularly relevant and since i skipped half the (boring repetitive) posts in this thread i dont really expect anyone to read this.

I ran into the classic over enthusiastic guy who talked for too long about all the sick routes he loves and got an unwanted monologue about how great bowlines are and was even offered a free knot tying tutorial. He was affable but longwinded.

Female partner got stuck in the same convo and was very upset that she got mansplained about climbing knots just because she is a woman.

this anecdote supports my belief that gender is erroneously brought into play for a lot of these microaggression things. Some people just want to share their love of bowline knot and can't tell the audience is uninterested, male or female.

edit- 10 pages! good job people!

Rick Blair wrote:You said this: Then you were offended here:

Getting like Law & Order up heRR or Menace to Society

You bought the bottle of beer at 11 o clock?

I bought the bottle of beer at at 11 o clock yes 11.

You bought the bottle of beer definitely at 12?

Barrett Pauer wrote:C'mon 10 pages!

Called it! What a milestone

Mitchelle Kelly wrote:this isnt particularly relevant and since i skipped half the (boring repetitive) posts in this thread i dont really expect anyone to read this. I ran into the classic over enthusiastic guy who talked for too long about all the sick routes he loves and got an unwanted monologue about how great bowlines are and was even offered a free knot tying tutorial. He was affable but longwinded. Female partner got stuck in the same convo and was very upset that she got mansplained about climbing knots just because she is a woman. this anecdote supports my belief that gender is erroneously brought into play for a lot of these microaggression things. Some people just want to share their love of bowline knot and can't tell the audience is uninterested, male or female. edit- 10 pages! good job people!

Is true.

Unwanted bromancing deserves recognition too.

ubu wrote: Is true. Unwanted bromancing deserves recognition too.

I personally see more beta spraying for dude-on-dude than dude-on-dudette.

Eric Carlos wrote: I personally see more beta spraying for dude-on-dude than dude-on-dudette.

Anytime you give someone a move-by-move replay of a route you climbed on a previous day, god kills a kitten. This goes double if you are reenacting with hand motions.

"and then its 20 feet of unprotected stemming to this one finger pocket and you have to dyno to a bomber handjam in the next crack system its like totally rad"

Bill Kirby wrote: Getting like Law & Order up heRR or Menace to Society You bought the bottle of beer at 11 o clock? I bought the bottle of beer at at 11 o clock yes 11. You bought the bottle of beer definitely at 12?

Well its a little less complicated than that. She called someone out as being a misogynist/racist and there fore they must vote for Trump. When Clinton foibles were pointed out in response she got offended that she was accused of being a Hillary supporter even though that didn't happen.

Rick Blair wrote: Well its a little less complicated than that. She called someone out as being a misogynist/racist and there fore they must vote for Trump. When Clinton foibles were pointed out in response she got offended that she was accused of being a Hillary supporter even though that didn't happen.

She failed to catch the irony in her statements.

Mitchelle Kelly wrote:Some people just want to share their love of bowline knot and can't tell the audience is uninterested, male or female. e

I'm with you on that observation, which is why resting bitch face is a positive thing.

Andrew Gram wrote: I absolutely consider unwanted staring to be casually oblivious misogyny - it is pretty much the definition of sexual objectification of women, and it is the refusal to consider a woman as a person and to just cater to one's own gratification instead. ........ Of course looking at and occasionally talking to women is not misogynistic. Leering at and patronizing women is though.

Problem is, inferences. One persons look might be leering to another. I think with your standards, you are likely to categorize innocent behaviour as something sinister. Of course, that is the goal of political correctness, to step into the grey areas of life and use those instances as a sociological hammer.

last bump of this thread from me. Do you think this article was intentionally inflammatory and controversial? If there is one post guaranteed to generate 10 pages of useless posts its gross generalization about both genders. What's next from them?--"Booty gear should always be returned or its a crime?"

Searches for flashfoxy spiked after everyone got their underwear of choice in a bunch over it. so props to them for getting lots of attention i guess.

google.com/trends/explore?d…;q=flash%20foxy

Geez. we should fix this sexism issue so ladies feel safe to remain in the gym and everyone else can stay climbing outside. Yep, I'm going to be me at the crags outside. Somewhat crass, somewhat vulgar, & somewhat aiming for fun and inspired. Not too concerned about other peoples feeling of equality.

Mitchelle Kelly wrote:Searches for flashfoxy spiked after everyone got their underwear of choice in a bunch over it. so props to them for getting lots of attention i guess.

Stich wrote:

Ummm, Stich, jeez, 10 pages of this thread and you have learned NOTHING! Look at the photo you chose to represent flashfoxy

1. The placement of the female against a white background makes salient the imagery of women being photographed outside awards shows, a context which only values the looks of the female.
2. It reinforces the notion that women only are valuable or beautiful if wearing makeup.
3. The slight "teasing" smile makes it seem the woman is only good for showing interest in men and thereafter is to be used as a sex object. How dare we show a photo of a female actually looking truly happy (like a full smile), or confident (with a neutral look).
4. The spikey nature of her attire suggests that she is may have a "hands off" personality, suggesting that women are cold hearted, hard to get to know, and thus are only to be used for their body.
5. Black is a color that when worn on the body, makes the body look more petite. This invokes imagery of the ideal woman needing to be petite to math our culture's beauty standards.
6. Furthermore, the black dress implies that women are indeed small, small compared to men that is. I'll bet if you chose a picture of a man he would be in a white tuxedo, Stich, you sexist bastard.
7. The outfit covers most of the woman's body, indicating that she herself is to be wrapped up, by men, who shall not allow her to express herself or embrace her femininity through non-conservative dress.
8. At no point in this photo is she demonstrating safe climbing practices (she isn't even wearing a helmet), reinforcing the notion that women are "unsafe," "wild," and not trustworthy.
9. By captioning the photo "Thanks, MP!" you clearly state your belief that women can accomplish nothing on their own and thus their fame could only be the result of a bunch of men on an internet forum making her famous.
10. She embodies all of these negative stereotypes and then you surround her with cash, need I now make another top ten list of prostitution themes that you have invoked?

You MPers will never learn!

throwaway5000 wrote: I'll bet if you chose a picture of a man he would be in a white tuxedo, Stich, you sexist bastard.