there is no way there is any justification for a riders rights group calling for the banning of any bike club
& therein lies the rub... I have to ask myself why would I want to join a riders rights group that wants to ban certain other groups of riders?
Em: Many folk who ride around on sports bikes wouldn't actually consider themselves to be "bikers", they're just folk who happen to have bikes, often as well as motors and like to have fun out on them at the weekend... so it wouldn't necessarily enter their minds to join a riders rights organisation in the first place. I don't think they can really be criticised for accepting the benefits that various riders rights groups have "won" for them.
Do any MAG reps/associates on here make an active effort to recruit sports bike riders? Or do they, like so many (myself included), stand here sniggering at the humps on the backs of their leather babygros? The fact that there seem to be very few sports bikes riding members of such organisations is surely the fault of the organisations failing to drum up interest and recruit them?
Many MAG types seem to look down their noses at both ends of the spectrum, from the hardcore custom chop rider to the pocket rocket babygro brigade... From that point of view, ("politics" aside) the BMF has always seemed more welcoming to folk of all backgrounds/persuasions and you don't feel like you need to go out and plaster "jokey" patches all over your cut-off & sport a tankard chained to your belt to be accepted by them! & yes, I'm taking the pi$$. Stereotyping's so easy.
But it's a 2-way street. What you like to wear, carry or ride, shouldn't enter into it. The mere fact that you're out there on 2-wheels, vulnerable to so much more than those in 4-6-+ wheeled transport should be enough to unite in a "common cause".
prof i was there to so we will have to agree to differ on the details but i stand by the fact that no riders right organisation should ever call for the outlawing of a bike club and in doing so mag lost any integrity they had in my eyes and many others alienating part of the biker comunity in the process
Its a bit like refusing to join a union but accepting all the hard won benefits !
Oh lawd, don't get me started on unions!! Having had experience of three of the biggest transport unions I know of their underhand tactics such as claiming victories on things that were going to happen anyway without their intervention or an Irish plant asking a Scottish plant to slow their workers down as they were making the Irish look bad... (then strike cos they lost their productivity bonus!). And yes, I have walked through many picket lines...
As I said, I like to walk my own path and even if I should be grateful to these organisations for what they say they have achieved I can't really feel it. Certainly not enough to give them funds anyway.
Sorry guys, especially those involved in the early battles, but the modern MAG organisation has really jaundiced my views and has unfortunately overshadowed any of their earlier work (which is probably why I distance myself from them and fail to feel gratitude).
I was put off unions over 20 years ago... first full time job... duly joined up as was expected of me... paid my dues... then came annual pay review time and we had a big ol' union meeting... as a fully paid up member, I wanted to have my say but when I attempted to do so, I was told off by the union rep who said I had to sit down and let the MEN talk it out as they were MORE IMPORTANT and weren't just working for "pin money".
WTF???!!!!!
I told 'em to poke their stupid union there & then, stormed out of the pointless meeting, telling them what a bunch of dinosaurs they were and went and negotiated my own pay review.
I was a single woman, living alone, but even if I HAD been married and my husband was the main breadwinner, what the hell kind of difference should that make? You work full time, you pays your money, you hold the same level of membership and therefore the "right" to have your voice heard at a general meeting. Feckin' eejits! I'm not some bra-burning, dungaree-wearing right-on-sistah feminist, but sheesh! Get with the feckin' programme!
To bring it kicking & screaming back to topic, I don't know enough about MAG to hazard an opinion on whether they're sexist in any way, but I definitely have a perception of it being an "if your face fits" kind of organisation.
MAG does try to recruit sports bike riders and presents itself as MAG Sport, not it has to be said very succesfully. As to sexism, not that I have seen in the past but why not ask Jane Chisholm chair for the last 3 years. MAG isn't a "club" it doesn't have rules about who can join or afaik any rules about being snotty with group X.
Like any other human organisation it is made up of people with their own views and beliefs, I have no doubt that some local groups are stand offish and cliquey just the same as Neighbourhood Watch, the local school's PTA or the Ladies Church Guild.
There's an old saw about "people get the Government they deserve" , the same principle applies to any democratic institution, they are run by the people who put the time and effort in. My local group had around 80-90 "occasional" members, ones who turned up on sunny summer evenings and runs out. When it came to meetings in winter, writing letters, organising runs, attending highways meetings, serving on local council consultative groups, organising rallies, attending regional meetings etc it was the same half dozen people doing everything. Now that could be because they were a self serving clique maintaining their personal empire, or it could be because they were the ones who worked their behinds off trying to achieve something. By strange coincidence the people who did all the work tended to be the ones who were elected as group officers.
Again like any other organisation lots of people liked to tell the Rep how they should do things but when asked to help organise an event or whatever they were always too busy to actually do anything other than moan about other folk not doing things how they liked them.
I find it strange to be the one defending MAG as I haven't been an active member in 10 years and I disagree with the current policies as I have said previously. I don't poke a finger or moan about it as I am not willing to put the time and effort in to change things so I figure I dont have the right to criticise the folk who do.
There wasn't actually an accusation of sexism, it was only supposed to be a sarcastic way to bring my post back to topic after I'd been tempted into veering off course about stupid trades unions.
I stand by the "if your face fits" comment though. It's my perception of the organisation as a whole, from lots of different areas, not just local MAG reps. I don't have that perception about the BMF.
Thanks for the bit about MAG Sport. Never heard of it. Hopefully the sports bike fans have. What about scooter riders? Both the fans of a bygone age on their lovingly restored vintage Lambrettas & Vespas and those who do the daily commute on their Piaggio or whatever. Anything done to encourage membership from those sectors?
And as for moaning about it instead of doing something about it, as I asked previously, why would I want to join an organisation that wishes to ban certain groups within the riding "community" as a whole?
2 wheels is 2 wheels is 2 wheels, whatever you wear or ride.
I wouldn't join MAG, on that principle, let alone my wider general perception of their organisation. I'd possibly consider membership of BMF.
To join any such group before I'm a licence holder/bike owner seems somewhat hypocritical, although getting on for 20 years ago, the reps on a BMF stand at a show said that shouldn't discourage me as they considered raising awareness with non-riders really important and they'd be more than happy to welcome me into the organisation and help me out with learning to ride if they could, whereas the MAG people couldn't even be bothered to talk to me.
WB - I didn't take the sexism comment as an accusation I thought it was a question so I answered it as best I could.
I think if someone threatened to kill me because I'd asked them to pay for a ticket to an event like everyone else does and not to intimidate people who had paid for entry I'd be fairly pissed with them as well. I wouldn't be surprised if Liversedge couched the request in less than polite terms as usual but I doubt Mutchy or Henry Marks were rude about it.
There are a number of scooter clubs affiliated to MAG but I'm not aware of any specific drive to recruit scooter riders, having said that I'm not particularly up to date on policies and campaigns these days.
prof sorry mate but that was not the case mutchy has been around long enough to know how the bike scene works the local senior patch club visit a local event as guests it's been that way rightly or wrongly for years and at the time i believe mutchy took that view and liversidge decided to ignore him and common practice and ask for payment which was viewed as an insult as he knew it would be allowing him to get on his hobby horse
Why is it an insult to ask people to pay for entry the same as anyone else?
I have to say I have never understood why patch clubs believe they have the right to wander into events without paying. I pay for my ticket even when I have been organising or marshalling.
I've had my share of death threats in my time. Admittedly only one
which I considered serious enough (and had recorded evidence as
undeniable proof of) to take to the authorities.
But I wanted
them to charge the individual, not the entire "group" he belonged to.
He happened to be a "Traveller" I believe is the correct PC terminology
these days.
The individual, other than leaving a threatening
message on my voicemail, had last been seen brandishing a Samurai sword
and threatening to kill the entire team working the door at the club
he'd been ejected from. Obviously, he was barred from future entry to
the club. It wasn't even contemplated that we might bar ALL
"Travellers" from the place.
Regrettably the CPS finally
decided against prosecution, much to my irritation, but that's a whole
other argument. (Despite CCTV footage of the sword incident and the
recorded death threat on my voicemail!)
I think it illustrates
the point I'm trying to make here though. You direct your anger, fear
&/or outrage against the individual(s) making the threat, not
against a whole bunch of people who happen to have something in common
with that individual.
Or at least, that's how I operate.
Additionally,
I'd not even been present when the man was ejected from the club - it
was just that my position as Ops Manager meant my phone number was
freely available to anyone who wanted it 24/7. It also meant that I
served as an easy target for him to wreak his "revenge". When you're in
a position of authority, you're also in a position of responsibility.
It goes with the territory.
It's not pleasant living in fear
over something as seemingly pathetic and inconsequential as being ejected from a nightclub, or a million other excuses
people use to offer up death threats, but in my opinion, there are ways
and means of addressing such situations, avoiding escalation of them
and alienation of whole groups of people.
Obviously having never been a member of any such club, I can't offer an opinion or an insight... the closest I
can come to a comparable situation is working on the doors... I never
paid entry to a nightclub when I was working them... If an individual
was known to be a doorman elsewhere, particularly in your locale, you
let him in for nothing. One day, he might have your back. And yes, if a
venue tries to charge any doorman entry, it is taken as insulting and
disrespectful.
Personally speaking, I would always be happy to pay my way, but that's
the culture that's grown up around the profession. Rightly or wrongly.
Different situation but comparable in some ways, perhaps?
Demanding payment for entry from a doorman would be akin to poking a
sleeping tiger with a sharp stick and then acting surprised when it
wakes and tries to take your head off. Ill-advised, maybe?
You might consider it wrong to allow doormen free entry to your nightclub, but you also know that if you did try to charge them, there would likely be consequences of some degree. How you dealt with those consequences would be your choice.
prof it's an insult because you are breaking a unwritten comunity law the same as doormen dont generaly pay to get into clubs that situation with patch clubs has been hapening for decades and if you are going to try and change it don't do it in a confrontational way then complain when you are confronted mutchy was working with the press secetary of H.A.M.C ENGLAND at the time so negotiation would not have been difficult
PD in RSA it is an unwritten rule that club Presidents dont pay entry to any events cos they bring paying members with that supports the occasion , there is also a Presidents only event that is solely to discuss and dismantle grievances , now with over 2000 clubs even this event is fully loaded , however i believe each club sponsors his presidents attendance + 1 nominated snr member .
I wonder how many people from MAG voted with one hand to ban patch clubs while clutching a Bulldog or other such event ticket in the other.
Was it a membership vote or who decided to ban clubs?
I don't see any "patch" run events excluding MAG members from attending because of MAGS overall ban of clubs.
I don't dispute that patches getting in free has been going on for years but I repeat the question, why should being a member or prospect of a patch club grant you free entry into chargeable events? Do patches get into BMF events free, MotoGP, the local cinema?
Excaliburs comment about the South African "unwritten rules" seem more equitable, you give the pres a freebie because he brings lots of paying members with him.
As for the doorman argument, the Bulldog, Rock and Blues, Shires, Patriot Games etc. don't let everyone who is a member of an MCC, BMF, MAG, HOG, IAM etc in for free so not really the same mutual scenario.
As far as I recall there wasn't a membership vote, just the same way as the Government don't run a referendum for every action they take (even when they promise to!!). It is known as representative democracy. You elect representatives then they make decisions, if you disagree with their decisions you vote for someone else next year or if you can't wait you get enough other members to vote for an extraordinary AGM where if the majority agree the representative is removed and a new one elected. Even if there had been a vote anyone clutching a ticket to the Bulldog would have paid for it. There is also the point that MAG don't ban patch clubs, the flyers say "No Colours to be worn on site please"
If the patch clubs wished to ban MAG members from attending their events that would certainly be their right to do so. It would be economic suicide especially if you count affiliated clubs in that number not to mention that as they don't necessarily wear badges or colours they would be kind of hard to spot "Are you now or have you ever been a member of a riders rights organisation?" it would cause a hell of a queue on the gate!!
MAG, BMF, IAM, HOG, RAT, VSOC etc etc are not MCCs. These groups don't subscribe to the MCs "unwritten rules" governing MC/MCC relations and I can't really see any valid reason why they should.
I appreciate that my doorman argument wasn't the same mutual scenario as this... which is why I presented it as a different situation but perhaps comparable in some respects.
I'm not a member of a MC and never likely to be in this lifetime, so I can't speak for them... I can only offer comparisons with other similar things that I know of which happen outside the biking world.
"No colours to be worn on site please" equates to a ban in my opnion.
No MC member is going to attend a bike-related event and not wear his colours. Why should he hide his patch as though it's something to be ashamed of? He's proud of his club membership and has worked hard to achieve it (sometimes bloody hard!) So the banning of wearing colours is the equivalent of banning those who wear the colours.
I still think they approached it with a somewhat sharp stick/sleeping tiger attitude... As PD says, why did they do it in such a confrontational way? There was no need.
When something's been going on for decades and has become "standard practice", no matter how wrong you believe that practice to be you can't reasonably expect people to immediately agree to it changing simply because you say so. A little respect and a little negotiation could've been exercised instead. Human beings respond much better to that sort of approach than to being told off with a "you're not allowed to" dictum.
I don't think anyone here has stated that it's "right" for some people to get free entry to something that others pay for. I certainly haven't and can't give you an answer to your question.
prof i did not say it was right or wrong just standard practice again neil liversidges arrogance caused the problem as i said before he could have negotiated before the event the statement no colours on site is an indication of mag being out of touch with reality the colours are hard won and being told you can't wear them is an insult backpatch clubs by prior arrangement is more respectful usual and good practice because you know what clubs you have on site
Free entry to rallies and events by all backpatch wearers would never be able to work in SA because every club wears colors / backpatches , i think this being the reason that presidents only are given this privilege in SA , the largest rallies there are organized , planned and marshaled by BIKESA the popular bikers monthly magazine , these rallies are very proffesionally staged and popular with all clubs . I've been on a tangent again sorry Prof did'nt mean it.
![MAG Members (3) - Forums [Biker Match]](/images/backgrounds/strips/8mobileLQ.jpg)
![MAG Members (3) - Forums [Biker Match]](/images/backgrounds/strips/8desktopLQ.jpg)
