Friday, August 12, 2011

BSNYC Friday Failed Search For Meaning! (Now With 60% More Despair!)

Subsequent to yesterday's post, entitled "Lying Down On The Job: Wet Hot Recumbent Riders," there was a great deal of discussion regarding the complex relationship between glasses and helmet straps. Indeed, in the cycling world, the dance between accessories is a highly choreographed one, and the slightest misstep can render cycledom's self-appointed panel of judges apoplectic. It can also touch off lengthy debates--especially if helmets are in any way even remotely involved.



Another contentious subject is cycling shorts. For some, a simple pair of half shorts is sufficient. For others, nothing but bib shorts will do, and anybody who forgoes stretchy suspenders is a subject of scorn. This could be why the Wikipedia entry for cycling shorts features a model wearing bibs:



The above link was sent to me by a reader who felt compelled to bring the bib short model to my attention, and I do agree that whoever edited this particular entry made a bold choice, for he does look rather nonplussed:



I'd really like to know the backstory behind this photo. Did he pose specifically for the Wikipedia entry? Or did he have aspirations to be a Performance catalog model and this is an outtake from his portfolio? Was there a Michelangelo Antonioni's "Blow-up"-slash-Austin Powers-esque fashion photographer kneeling in front of him and shouting, "You're nonplussed! Show me nonplussed, you sexy animal!"? Or are all of these scenarios totally off, and the Wikipedia editor simply pulled the photo from the Craigslist "Casual Encounters" section? The truth is, we may never know, because I'm not about to go sifting through the "Casual Encounters" section to find out.


Either way, it's doubtful that the Wikipedia cycling short guy could ever attain the lofty heights of being an Assos model, which calls for someone who looks like he spent 17 hours lying on a tanning bed and as such can no longer move or see:





There is one argument in favor of half shorts though, which is that they're slightly better for "portaging:"



The shorts above are part of the new "Primal Wear After Dark" collection.



Speaking of naughtiness, another reader alerted me to the following photo from Cyclingnews:



If you're a cycling photographer who wants to visit a Dutch sex worker but doesn't want to pay for it, I can't think of a better way of turning it into a legitimate business expense.


Lastly, on Wednesday I posted a picture of a PVC cockpit, and via the same reader comes this truly magnificent "catpit:"



Though the pussy in question does look somewhat nonplussed:



It's tough to tell from the angle whether the cat is wearing half shorts or bibs, though either way he really should be wearing a helment.



With that out of the way, I'm pleased to present you with a quiz. As always, study the item, think, and click on your answer. If you're right, your life will once again have meaning and darkness will give way to light. If you're wrong, you'll look deep into the recesses of your soul and find nothing, and you'll also see a compelling documentary about cycling in the Netherlands.



Thanks very much for reading, ride safe, and always wear your glasses under your bibs.




--Wildcat Rock Machine






("You maniacs!!!")


1) According to a Daily News editorial, the maniac's bicycle of choice is the:



--Felt

--Cannondale

--Specialized

--Serotta










("All you haters suck my diktats.")


2) According to roadie "weird style diktats," helmet straps are to be worn:



--Over your glasses

--Under your glasses

--Behind your ears

--Between your buttocks













3) After happening upon a marijuana patch while out on a Wednesday ride, a California cyclist immediately:












(My First Fixie™: Collect them all!)


4) Customizing your bike is "out;" customizing your u-lock is "in."












5) In a recent short film about Flying Pigeon bicycles, what are these?










6) This bicycle was spotted in Portland, Or.


--Duh








7) The Cervelo P3. It's not a bike. It's a _____:








***Special Fred Velocity Bonus Question***






In certain circumstances, 42mph is sufficient to make a Fred go "Woo-hoo-hoo-hoo!"




No comments:

Post a Comment