Grumble, moan, rant - sexist equine industry

Auslander said:
This thread is useless without pictures....
Click to expand...
Just to keep you happy

images
 
I feel your pain. Says she, sitting here in a pair of men's Harry Hall (circa 1995, I think).

My boy is 10. He has a 26" waist. But he's the height of a 12/13 year old. Boys' jodhs for his waist come just below his knees. The 28" come half way between his knees and his ankles. The 30" hang around his ankles. Which is not a good look when you aren't long off the leading rein and very conscious that everyone is watching you because you're 10 and not long off the leading rein.
 
William funnel breeches or townend limmerick breeches seem to be the best fit for the taller rider and a waist of less that 34! They fit in the right places and are not clingy!! I find them a better fit compared to the mark Todd's, but that's my personal preference.
 
Last edited:
Very sorry for PM and other chaps' frustration re riding gear on here, but sorry I am quite enjoying the thread esp the fuller fillies chaps! Do you think it could be because the makers dont think men care what colour their jods are? And do they? :)
 
Have you chaps considered riding in polo whites for every day? Potentially expensive but at least they'll fit! That or Mark Todd ones given how good the women's ones are.
 
Last edited:
My son wears Mark Todd breeches day in, day out and has always found them to be great until the last two pairs bought. Right from day one the zips won't stay up, not a good thing when our yard is busy with numerous young girls about. I have since heard of ladies having the same problem so I'm hoping MT change back to the previous type of zip. While it's ok to spend more for competition breeches there is definitely a market for men's hard wearing, comfortable breeches in practical colours at a reasonable price.
 
I'm well aware of this issue as both my husband and nephew struggle to find breeches. The problem is everyday casual jodhs for men and boys. Expensive show jodhs are out there. It is especially difficult for my husband who has very long legs and hates the short breeches, he likes them to come down to his ankles. He also hates pleat fronts ot breeched without enough lycra. He is currently wearing 10yr old gorringe and saddlemaster breeches that get repaired when required because he can't find a suitable replacement. My nephew wears kids breeches from decathlon or old ones of mine from when I was his age (before the days of pink and sparkle). Boots are equally difficult as many stop at a size 8!
 
I don't think the industry is sexist per se, but it is market driven and relies on the fact that unfortunately, the female of the species mind is easily swayed by favourite colours, this stupid matchy matchy phenomenon, wanting a different colour/design for every day of the week and not wanting to appear on the yard in the same pair of jods they wore yesterday and got a bit of a saliva mark on or whatever. Men don't worry anything like so much about looks, its all about practicality. You could argue they are less shallow!

Now if you want a sexist industry, look at football. Women are excluded from a very young age and jeered and laughed at for wanting to not only play but be professional.
 
This is basically what it's like being a woman in most other sports OP. Men's stuff? Loads of choice, loads of nice little technical features - brilliant. Women's range? Two options, and both of them are pink! Why, for instance, can't I buy walking trousers with a pocket large enough for an OS map when the bloke can? Why is all the cycling stuff pink? Why if it's not pink, is it purple? And why do I end up paying more, for a lower quality product? Harumph.

That said we noticed the self-same thing as you when shopping for joddies for the bloke, so there is definitely a gap in the market.
 
Spudlet said:
This is basically what it's like being a woman in most other sports OP. Men's stuff? Loads of choice, loads of nice little technical features - brilliant. Women's range? Two options, and both of them are pink! Why, for instance, can't I buy walking trousers with a pocket large enough for an OS map when the bloke can? Why is all the cycling stuff pink? Why if it's not pink, is it purple? And why do I end up paying more, for a lower quality product? Harumph.

That said we noticed the self-same thing as you when shopping for joddies for the bloke, so there is definitely a gap in the market.
Click to expand...

I buy men's hiking gear. I haven't found that the quality of women's gear is worse or that there is less range I just find the manufacturers assume women are all 5ft2 with short arms a flat chest and a massive bum! The only thing I really want hiking gear wise is a sleeveless but not strappy technical base layer. Something I can wear a sports bra with that won't give me a t-shirt tan and will protect my shoulders from rucksack straps.

The husband struggles with hiking trousers nearly as much as jodhs. Very few come with an inside leg more than 32".
 
Mens riding gear is out there, it just tends to be more expensive and reduced in choice.
It must be said that the market is aimed more at female riders as there are more of them. If you are selling a lot of something it becomes cheaper than selling a small amout of something (that's just economics).
What I'm finding hard to find is a pair of long, leather riding boots in a size 10 (not an uncommon size of male feet), that don't cost the earth. There are many, many different styles in smaller sizes, up to the £80-£90 mark.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top