What? Are chicks chopped liver? NEW girl leathers - sigh

[Roadstergal]

What did you do with Steve in 2000?

[RVertigo]

Well...  As long as we're posting tat pics...  Here's my "Jail Tat."  India Ink drilled in with a sharpened guitar string hooked into a hobby motor with a mechanical pencil body as a guide.   :lol:   I've had it for about 12 years...  And it's not done.



And my other one...  

[Maduro Mistress]

Roadster - I married him - sigh... now I'm divorcing him YAY! lol

nice vertigo - when are you finishing them?

[dionysus]

Roadster - I married him - sigh... now I'm divorcing him YAY!

Ahh. She "took the plunge".

[Jake D]

Mistress, I love that tatoo on your back.  So original and sexy.

I got into this thread pretty late.  But I want to make one point to RG:

Would you rather see them wearing Daisy Dukes and a tube top?

A pic showing off manufacturer's clothing is supposed to show ideal gear-up - because it can.  This doesn't.  Poseur gear just leads to folk spending money on gear that doesn't protect.  Certainly, jeans don't cut it.  But if you're going to shell out for leather pants, I'd far rather have a selection of useful leather pants available.  With this poseurwear, some hetero says "Oh, honey, you'd look so cute in that!" and then they use their resources on pricy fashionwear, rather than useful moto gear.
Road rash isn't sexy.  Yuo can google the pics to prove it.

Honestly, I don't think those pante would be much better than jeans in a crash.  Once they ride up - and they'd ride up in less than a second - it's bare skin on asphalt.

And no matter how much spray they used, those coiffes aren't Snell-rated.

Okay, most of the time, when you see a woman dressed to the 9's, it is for both the benefit of men AND women.  Women see all those glamor fashion mags and get all polished up and go out.  Men are just as attracted to a beautiful woman that is in the grocery store wearing cut off sweat pants and a tank top.  We are able to (and actually enjoy) seeing potential beauty in a woman.  Potential for beauty is as powerful as present beauty.  We think, "put her in some nice low rise jeans, heals, and a cami, and I'd go crazy."  Girls see another girl dressed down and tear her to shreds.  So when you see adds like that, remember, it appeals to the woman's glamor mag side as much or more than to men.

[Roadstergal]

Women see all those glamor fashion mags and get all polished up and go out.

I'm sure the type of women who read fashion mags do.  But what does that have to do with protective motorcycle gear?

Men are just as attracted to a beautiful woman that is in the grocery store wearing cut off sweat pants and a tank top.

What does that have to do with protective motorcycle gear?

Girls see another girl dressed down and tear her to shreds.

Maybe the girls you know.  I have no time for people like that, men or women.  But what does that have to do with protective motorcycle gear?

So when you see adds like that, remember, it appeals to the woman's glamor mag side as much or more than to men.

If you say so; I have no experience with glamor mags and no desire to.  But what does that have to do with protective motorcycle gear?

Like I said, it's fine if you like seeing a girl dressed up.  This has nothing to do with that.  This is about gear that is marketed as protective gear and is, by its very design nature, at best no more protective than street clothes, and at worst less.

[Jake D]

I hear you.  There is no way I can match you on the subject.  You see, you feel as strongly about protective motorcycle gear as I feel about attractive women.  I'm afraid nary the tween shall meet.  I've my passions and you have yours.  

Much respect.

[RVertigo]

when are you finishing them?

Um...  Probably never.  I have more tatts in mind...  Except...  With a real tattoo gun.   :lol:

[Roadstergal]

You see, you feel as strongly about protective motorcycle gear as I feel about attractive women.

I'm not opposed to attractive women, or people who like to look at attractive women.  I'm opposed to BS motorcycle gear, and I don't know why everyone thinks this has anything to do with attractive women.  Those clothes would be just as pointless in a fall if a plain-faced gal were wearing them as they would be if a model were.

[Jake D]

Maybe we can quit calling those clothes protective gear and call them what they are: eye candy!  


And by gawd, I like it!!!

[Phaedrus]

[RVertigo]

call them what they are: eye candy!

I like candy.

I still maintain that they're better than nothing...  

[Roadstergal]

And as such, it is subject to the laws of supply and demand.

And they're not supplying the worthwhile gear that real bikers demand.  They're acting on their own stereotype, not the realities of biking.  And it just makes no sense - people certainly sell construction worker fetish garb.  I'm cool with that; there's a fetish for everything, and it certainly makes sense to market to them.  But if I were an actual construction worker, and saw fetish gear being marketed as real construction gear, I would be as "WTF?" as I actually am.
Let them market this as fetish garb.  We're all cool with that.  I object to them marketing it as biking gear.  It ain't.

As long as the majority of female riders choose style over protection

How do you know?  Where's the study?  This is a niche male fantasy of female bikers.  Just take a look at this thread.  The defenders of the line are all men.  
Let's see if the line tanks, shall we?  Like the Kitty Chaps.  I've seen hundreds of women out in leathers, waterproof gear, etc.  I have yet to see a single pair of Kitty Chaps.  By your logic, since they're "sexy," I should see nothing but.

It all boils down to market interest: There is much more demand for lesser quality, more affordable, more stylish gear than there is for high quality, protective, utilitarian gear.

This gear isn't more affordable than more protective and utilitarian gear.  


OK, marketing.  In the bike world, there's one thing that sells better than sex.  Much, much better than sex.
Harleys.

[Roadstergal]

Oh, MM, the short answer to your rhetorical question is - if you're not chopped liver now, you will be after your first off in JR gear.  

[Jake D]

There is no better way to explain it.  So I give.  You see, men's brains are at least 1/3 bigger than womens, so it is useless.  Or as one of the first males known to man, E. Hemmingway said, "No hay remedio."  

You'll just have to trust me.  Attractive women are protected just fine in bell bottom chaps.

And if you don't believe me, I'll remind you that men invented the wheel, fire, motorcycles, and question marks (though we have learned to regret the latter).

I hope you know I am just kidding.  

*crawls under desk*

[Roadstergal]

And if you don't believe me, I'll remind you that men invented the wheel, fire, motorcycles, and question marks (though we have learned to regret the latter).

Dammit, I hate paying royalties...

[ajgs500]

Men claim they invented that stuff.  They probably saw a women invent it and then beat her over the head and stole the idea.

[Phaedrus]

Men claim they invented that stuff.  They probably saw a women invent it and then beat her over the head and stole the idea.

No, probably not.

[ajgs500]

How do you know were you there???  History is always slanted to those in power.

[pandy]

You silly boys are arguing about the silly bell-bottom, eye-candy, non-moto clothes while RG has that HOT new avatar out there!!    :nana:

DAMN!! It has ME drooling!!  :kiss:  What a FABULOUS pic of a REAL woman with REAL gear on a REAL moto!  

YOU GO GRL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!