Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

Sig_Arlecchino

Member since Jan 2016 • Last active Apr 2021

Most recent activity

  • in Current Projects
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    This guy seems to have a pair ;) jokes aside, bike is looking strong!

  • in Bikes & Bits
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    Great builds! And kudos for picking some unusual stems. Have you checked the weight of the MBK frame? I can’t imagine it’s anywhere near that specified 1.68kg with a lugged (mostly) max tubeset.

  • in Bikes & Bits
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    Ratty 1x10 Batavus SLX with long SKS raceblades + DIY extensions & flaps.

  • in Current Projects
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    That’s a very cycling-friendly size for a dog :)

  • in Current Projects
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    Frame is a Raleigh Montage.

    https://youtu.be/SPFCHuEegsk

    The finished Bike looks amazing! Well done! May I ask how large/heavy your doggo is?

  • in Bikes & Bits
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

  • in Bikes & Bits
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    I agree in principle. But if someone still displayed one of said ads from the 80s next to his own contemporary series of photos in a similar style, he shouldn’t be surprised if people assume that he’s condoning a sexist practice despite recent changes in societal norms.

  • in Bikes & Bits
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    Well, that’s true but if somebody argues along the lines of “you can’t erase/deny the past”, the obvious counter-argument would be to embed those sort of commercials in a wider frame of reference that questions the practice at the time. It’s similar to the whole confederate statues argument revolving around how and where they should be displayed appropriately.

  • in Bikes & Bits
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    The owner of that Bike (not sure if he’s also the photographer) seems to be into this sort of sexist marketing. Here’s a photo of his shop:

  • in Bikes & Bits
    Avatar for Sig_Arlecchino

    I’m not a fan of either one of the Cinelli Laser photos but one could argue that (other than the weird top) the woman in the second photo is at least wearing functional cycling kit, whereas the first photo seems like the photographer mainly hired the model as a prop without any connection to the bike judging by the outfit and those shoes in particular. For the sake of gender-equality in body-objectification, I’ll leave this here:

Actions