By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Washington Post: Is your spin class too young, too thin and too white?

 

How do you feel about your spin class?

Yes 0 0%
 
No 4 40.00%
 
The meaning of peace is t... 6 60.00%
 
Total:10
sundin13 said:
o_O.Q said:

"So do you believe that blackness impairs an individual in the same way a missing leg does?"

its not about impairment, its about categorisation and marketing to a particular category

an example with race would be for example that i wouldn't market hair straightening products to white women but i would do so for black women

 

"As for the "endgoal" statements, it seems that you sort of pulled that out of nowhere as a bit of a catchall."

well if you don't understand that this is the end goal of marketing then we can't have much of a discussion

the purpose of marketing is to demonstrate how a product can put a person in a position where they have solved some problem they have

in this case i'm assuming its the need for exercise and recreation

 

"The whole point is that the "messaging" doesn't show people who aren't already fit."

yes which was my point

 

"Again, unless you think the only people who have "being fit" as their endgoal are already fit"

""or have being fit and active as their endgoal?""

 

"a substantial portion of that demographic isn't adequately represented"

so if i understand you correctly you expect them to use unfit people in marketing for fitness classes?

Unless your argument is that black people don't belong at a spin class like a no-footed person doesn't belong at a shoe store, there is no reason to go down this path. The argument was never that it is bad that out-groups exist, the argument is about the particulars of these in-groups. 

Also, if you think white women don't use hair straighteners, you are very wrong.

And yes, I do expect them to use unfit people in their marketing if they are trying to market to unfit people. Planet Fitness built a very successful business out of doing just that. Otherwise, you run the risk of creating a specific in-group of attractive, fit young people and making unfit people feel as if they aren't welcome, which (surprise) is what the article is about, so this line of thinking shouldn't come as a surprise.

"Unless your argument is that black people don't belong at a spin class like a no-footed person doesn't belong at a shoe store, there is no reason to go down this path. "

where are you pulling this nonsense from about racism against black people?

 

"Also, if you think white women don't use hair straighteners"

obviously not anywhere near to the same degree that black women do, can you guess why?

and which group would it make sense to market the product to?

 

" I do expect them to use unfit people in their marketing if they are trying to market to unfit people."

um question for you why do we see the opposite in 100% of advertising for fitness programs? here's a hint we covered it already - advertising is mean't to convey what the product will do for you not the initial condition

what is common across all of these ads?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NTEDDmCjd1k

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xU52XbJYd3E

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5zvqNHDTf8Y

 

"Planet Fitness built a very successful business out of doing just that."

really? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdccUsn8N4Y

where are the unfit people in these ads?

you could make the argument that these ads are about ridiculing people who take fitness too seriously... but that's not the same as your argument

 

"Otherwise, you run the risk of creating a specific in-group of attractive, fit young people and making unfit people feel as if they aren't welcome"

and yet every fitness program for decades now has done just that and as far as i know its a successful industry

 

"which (surprise) is what the article is about, so this line of thinking shouldn't come as a surprise."

the article is delusional nonsense



Around the Network

I mean the hypocrisy of this type of thing bugs me somewhat (replace white w/another race and see what happens), but at the end of the day, who the hell cares. Maybe I'm just used to seeing this sort of thing crop up by now, but I've kinda reached the point of "meh, so what..?" It's the title of some dumb article of a single publication. I can't say I'm such an advocate for free speech and then turn around and condemn this.

And I don't really see why anyone should take this personally anyway..  At the end of the day most of us are middle class white dudes living in the Western world. As one of my current favorite comedians Bill Burr says, "ya really can't have much of a better starting point than that."

My philosophy here is - it's not as if you control how you're born so who cares? You do however control whether or not you're a racist; a trait this lady has to live with and is basically exposed of with this article, even if she tries to deny if or legitimize it in some way.

 If people want to be racist (or try to be 'edgy' for clickbait, which is more likely the case for this) that's their problem, it ain't mine.



 

"We hold these truths t-be self-ful evident. All men and women created by the.. Go-you know the.. you know the thing!" - Joe Biden

DarthMetalliCube said:

I mean the hypocrisy of this type of thing bugs me somewhat (replace white w/another race and see what happens), but at the end of the day, who the hell cares. Maybe I'm just used to seeing this sort of thing crop up by now, but I've kinda reached the point of "meh, so what..?" It's the title of some dumb article of a single publication. I can't say I'm such an advocate for free speech and then turn around and condemn this.

And I don't really see why anyone should take this personally anyway..  At the end of the day most of us are middle class white dudes living in the Western world. As one of my current favorite comedians Bill Burr says, "ya really can't have much of a better starting point than that."

My philosophy here is - it's not as if you control how you're born so who cares? You do however control whether or not you're a racist; a trait this lady has to live with and is basically exposed of with this article, even if she tries to deny if or legitimize it in some way.

 If people want to be racist (or try to be 'edgy' for clickbait, which is more likely the case for this) that's their problem, it ain't mine.

Being an advocate for free speech doesn't mean you can't criticize or make fun of what someone says.



o_O.Q said:

"Unless your argument is that black people don't belong at a spin class like a no-footed person doesn't belong at a shoe store, there is no reason to go down this path. "

where are you pulling this nonsense from about racism against black people?

"Planet Fitness built a very successful business out of doing just that."

really? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdccUsn8N4Y

where are the unfit people in these ads?

you could make the argument that these ads are about ridiculing people who take fitness too seriously... but that's not the same as your argument

and yet every fitness program for decades now has done just that and as far as i know its a successful industry

the article is delusional nonsense

Unless you wish to assert that messaging "spin classes" as predominantly white is due to logic (in the same vein as marketing shoes to people without feet), there is no reason to go down that route of discussion.

And here is another ad from planet fitness about an overweight man: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wQ9pCDahkU

I mean, the fact that marketing exists with fit people doesn't really prove your point. While gyms make money, the "gym" industry is notorious for being unable to keep customers and while there are a lot of reasons for that, people being uncomfortable being "unfit" in a gym is one of them, which is pretty much the mantra behind Planet Fitness. 

I'm not really sure what the argument we are having right now is. This article is calling out a feeling of exclusion within a specific industry. Showing examples of that industry doing a poor job at including a certain demographic doesn't really prove any point.

contestgamer said: 
sundin13 said: 

Like people who do not fit within that specific in-group, which does include those who are fit and extends beyond that. The article spells that out pretty clearly.

And would it be expected for an exercise program to cater primarily to people who are already fit? I don't think so. I mean, I don't know where you live, but around me, the gym advertisements I always hear emphasize how the environment isn't just for fitness buffs in order to create an environment where everybody feels comfortable.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l324lEp9x-8

This only is a problem for people that need to see others of their own size, race, gender, age and orientation to feel comfortable. Racists, ageists,   and a bunch of other -ists that want their environment to resemble themselves. 

People want to feel like they belong. Being the only fat person working out alongside 100 bikini models would make most anyone feel uncomfortable. A similar principle applies to race and age. It isn't prejudice against other groups, it is simply wanting to be made to feel like your group, whatever that is, isn't being excluded and that you belong. 

I know that I don't think I'd ever do a yoga class because they are typically all women, and I would feel super weird being the only guy doing yoga in a class of women. That says nothing about me hating women, but instead it says that I don't feel welcome in those groups because I am not part of the in-group of those classes.



sundin13 said:
o_O.Q said:

"Unless your argument is that black people don't belong at a spin class like a no-footed person doesn't belong at a shoe store, there is no reason to go down this path. "

where are you pulling this nonsense from about racism against black people?

"Planet Fitness built a very successful business out of doing just that."

really? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PdccUsn8N4Y

where are the unfit people in these ads?

you could make the argument that these ads are about ridiculing people who take fitness too seriously... but that's not the same as your argument

and yet every fitness program for decades now has done just that and as far as i know its a successful industry

the article is delusional nonsense

Unless you wish to assert that messaging "spin classes" as predominantly white is due to logic (in the same vein as marketing shoes to people without feet), there is no reason to go down that route of discussion.

And here is another ad from planet fitness about an overweight man: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9wQ9pCDahkU

I mean, the fact that marketing exists with fit people doesn't really prove your point. While gyms make money, the "gym" industry is notorious for being unable to keep customers and while there are a lot of reasons for that, people being uncomfortable being "unfit" in a gym is one of them, which is pretty much the mantra behind Planet Fitness. 

I'm not really sure what the argument we are having right now is. This article is calling out a feeling of exclusion within a specific industry. Showing examples of that industry doing a poor job at including a certain demographic doesn't really prove any point.

contestgamer said: 

This only is a problem for people that need to see others of their own size, race, gender, age and orientation to feel comfortable. Racists, ageists,   and a bunch of other -ists that want their environment to resemble themselves. 

People want to feel like they belong. Being the only fat person working out alongside 100 bikini models would make most anyone feel uncomfortable. A similar principle applies to race and age. It isn't prejudice against other groups, it is simply wanting to be made to feel like your group, whatever that is, isn't being excluded and that you belong. 

I know that I don't think I'd ever do a yoga class because they are typically all women, and I would feel super weird being the only guy doing yoga in a class of women. That says nothing about me hating women, but instead it says that I don't feel welcome in those groups because I am not part of the in-group of those classes.

 

"Unless you wish to assert that messaging "spin classes" as predominantly white is due to logic"

quick question... are the populations of white people and black people the same in the us?

no? so if that's not the case would you expect 50/50 representation in any area? wouldn't that be a stupid expectation?

furthermore there's the difference in economics between both populations, white people having more money to spend on leisure, for example

and yes this obviously ties into past racism and oppression but that's not what this is about - the argument is about current factors

 

"I mean, the fact that marketing exists with fit people doesn't really prove your point."

well it pretty much does when you are arguing incorrectly that they have to advertise in a particular way that is the opposite of what they have always done(99% of the time) and fitness programs being more popular now than ever

 

" While gyms make money, the "gym" industry is notorious for being unable to keep customers and while there are a lot of reasons for that"

fitness programs whether it be gyms or otherwise are more popular now than they ever have been

 

"people being uncomfortable being "unfit" in a gym is one of them"

insecurity because of lack of proficiency in any area affects people across all criteria and is not a problem that can ever be done away with

 

"This article is calling out a feeling of exclusion within a specific industry. Showing examples of that industry doing a poor job at including a certain demographic doesn't really prove any point."

my point is that your framing of standard advertising procedure as bad or ineffective because its exclusionary is silly

advertising as i said before is about two states - the state of the person initially before buying a product and the state of the person after buying the product

the goal has always been to show the end result and as a result influence the person to buy into the product

a consequence of that is to present the initial condition as being unsatisfactory or excluding it entirely, which obviously results in exclusion

why do people work out? to be fitter and often to be more attractive so images are presented of what can be done by buying into a fitness program

why do people buy hair loss products? to not be bald so images are presented showing men or women with full heads of hair

why do people buy one type of phone over another because that phone is presented as having unique features not found anywhere else

and you can go right through advertising and see the same pattern and its there for an obvious reason

 

"I know that I don't think I'd ever do a yoga class because they are typically all women, and I would feel super weird being the only guy doing yoga in a class of women. That says nothing about me hating women, but instead it says that I don't feel welcome in those groups because I am not part of the in-group of those classes."

63% of the us population is white

and 13% is black

how would you deal with that?

Last edited by o_O.Q - on 25 March 2018

Around the Network
sundin13 said:
Just finished the article. It seems to be a fairly well written but overall fairly uninteresting piece in the Style section of WaPo. I struggle to see anything of substance to comment about, or more broadly, why this was even posted.

Look beyond the article and look at the user. That’s when you find intent. The user, check his history. What does it say about him? More than that, look at his threads. Before this thread it was: Do you consume soy?, How video games are fueling the far-right, Britain’s ‘Worst Ever’ child grooming scandal, NK talks about abandoning it’s Nuclear Weapons, Italian Election Results, US to overtake Russia/Saudi as top Oil Producer, etc etc: On top of gems such as “New World Order”. 

He does it to stroke the fears of the scared, anger the marginalized, and divide the common ground with half-truths and sensationalism. Control the narrative by misconstruing the intent of the information. Let’s look at this, the article, as you said it is nothing. It’s a boring and for the most part innocent story. Well as you can tell by the comments: Most didn’t read it, didn’t care to read it, and most of the commenters came here to fight for their side of the political spectrum. By knowing most won’t read it, he can write nearly anything he wants and cherry-pick any part and cause fight for it. Because he controls the narrative it is more often than not unchallenged. 

Funnily, this guy says we should avoid a world like 1984, when in fact his post screams and hollers with the same sounds of Big Brother. It’s hypocritical, but people like him don’t care. Or if they do they try to prove they aren’t bias. Or when they fail they redirect. 

 

The OP is misleading and purposefully causing and sowing discord. I spent a fair share of my time watching these types. He’s nothing new or special. It’s a norm, left or right. They all do this shit, Honestly this needs to be a locked thread.



John2290 said:
VGPolyglot said:

Well, ideally the TC would explain themselves in the OP.

Ideally. It's not against the rules though? Strictly? 

Perhaps a spam rule would be in violation here but that's for the mods to decide. Either way, I think Numberwang should be allowed to post first and then speak later in the comments of the thread. I can't see this as being against the rules unless he repeatedly posts articles without ever interacting or participating in the discussions he creates. Even now, you bring this up, we are off topic and in violation of rules. 

You’re supposed to. In reality you’re supposed to put your opinion in the OP. The thread should be shut down for lacking any substance other than to cause intentional problems. And they are intentional.



John2290 said:
VGPolyglot said:

Well, ideally the TC would explain themselves in the OP.

Ideally. It's not against the rules though? Strictly? 

Perhaps a spam rule would be in violation here but that's for the mods to decide. Either way, I think Numberwang should be allowed to post first and then speak later in the comments of the thread. I can't see this as being against the rules unless he repeatedly posts articles without ever interacting or participating in the discussions he creates. Even now, you bring this up, we are off topic and in violation of rules. 

Actually, it is in the rules:

Thread Content:

  • Copy-pasting full transcriptions of articles is strictly prohibited. Instead, you may paste specific sections of the article that pertain to the subject of your thread, along with your own commentary related to that article.
  • Likewise, your thread should never only be a link to the story/article/video/etc.  You must include your own commentary.


John2290 said:
VGPolyglot said:

Actually, it is in the rules:

Thread Content:

  • Copy-pasting full transcriptions of articles is strictly prohibited. Instead, you may paste specific sections of the article that pertain to the subject of your thread, along with your own commentary related to that article.
  • Likewise, your thread should never only be a link to the story/article/video/etc.  You must include your own commentary.

The quote should be enough to suffice and if every mod on the site followed the rules fully and to a T, they would spend all their time banning people to the point that no one would be able to post anything for fear of banning and the site, along with its revenue would die. The rules should be used as a general guide and mods, thankfully on this site mods have their own free will and good judgement to implement the rules clearly without hurting revenue, as opposed to other sites. That is why many come here and stay here. At what cost do you intend to bring the rules to such a black and white understanding that it'll hurt the site financially in the long run? Or have you thought about that at all? Honestly curious here.

The mods here are volunteers, they don't get paid. I'm not intending to bring the rules to a black and white understanding, I can just recognize what the TC is trying to do and I think that the mods should act on it by a lot making him have to state his own views/commentary if he's going to create a thread, I don't see how ensuring that is going to drive away users/make the site worse.



John2290 said:
VGPolyglot said:

The mods here are volunteers, they don't get paid. I'm not intending to bring the rules to a black and white understanding, I can just recognize what the TC is trying to do and I think that the mods should act on it by a lot making him have to state his own views/commentary if he's going to create a thread, I don't see how ensuring that is going to drive away users/make the site worse.

Volunteers or not, the mods here want this site to succeed (From what I've seen anyway) and are conservative in their application of the rules. The fact that they are volunteers doesn't matter. Many sites out there have mods who become so for some perceived power and don't give a damn about the bottom line of the site as long as they get their point made. This is why I love this site so much, the mods don't, in general, go on opinion based bannings and twisted interpretations of the rules. There was a point there where it was coming close to this reality but it changed within a hot minute. 

To you're question about driving away users, yes of course being to heavy handed or opinion motivated in the interpretation of site rules can severely hurt site traffic. One loyal user here who posts threads is tens of thousands of clicks a week easy, either producing with threads of refreshing. If you clamp down on those users you eventually kill the site. Just look at some of the other sites out there, regardless of the other contrevorsies, Neogaf for one was pushing away users on the daily. That site died long before the big death from the media.

You know this is all nonsense.