Should hatless riders appear in H&H?

T

Teddybully

Well-Known Member
Joined
17 September 2009
Messages
170
Visit site
Just got round to reading H&H this week and see on page 22 a rider with no hat on.

I don't agree with anyone not wearing a hat whether competing or 'just' schooling so why should a rider be featured not wearing a hat? At the side it states in very small writing 'H&H recommends the wearing of a hat at all times when mounted' which I only saw because I was looking for it.

On page 10 they report how Emile Faurie is insisting on everyone at his yard wearing hats now and then a few pages on I see this. Why? Why use a photo of someone not wearing a hat? It wasn't necessary. I cannot believe how the instructors on this course get away with it insurance wise either if they don't insist on people wearing hats?

Rant over....i think!
 
I dont think their pictures should be published but you will have the crowd of
"my head, my choice"
"nanny state"
etc opposing this and there will be moans about freedom of choice etc.....which is fine, each to their own etc and I respect that, but I do NOT think it is setting a good example for the younger generation of riders, fair enough if you want to say it's not your responsability to set a good example but then refuse to have your picture published in such an aspired to magazine.



opps mini rant.......appologies :o
 
No, personally, I do NOT believe that you should publish photos without a hat on. I think its extremely irresponsible.

In my opinion, its the same as publishing photos of people taking drugs or posing with weapons.
 
I'm not necessarily against hatless riding as such but i don't think photos should be published of it, i didn't look for or see the small print. I also thought it was a bit of a contradiction to have one article about a dressage rider insisting on hats being worn and then a few pages later show a hatless rider with no real mention of safety. I know people will always do it but for the sake of a short photo shoot it wouldn't have been too much to put a hat on
 
I think that if H&H is going to bother with the small print and recomending that you should wear a hat then they should step up and have the balls to not to publish the pictures.
If they were doing away with the small print then I'm not sure, I'm old enough to know that just because I see someone with no hat does not mean I should copy.
Magazines such as Pony and OMG I forgot the name....the one Freddie used to be in!!! have a responsibility to younger readers to always show riders with hats but H&H is aimed at older readers....
 
Galisgirl10 said:
I know people will always do it but for the sake of a short photo shoot it wouldn't have been too much to put a hat on
Click to expand...

I agree it's each to their own but like you say for the sake of a photo shoot its ridiculous. There were other people on that same course so why use the photograph of someone not wearing a hat....odd really.

Why would you not wear a hat anyway? I just don't get it.
 
I have to say I am going to disagree with all of you.

H+H is not a publication aimed at young children (such as pony magazine or similar which I am 99% don't put pictures of hatless riders) and as such the people reading it are generally(!) sensible people that can make their own informed decisions.

If it ofends people by seeing a picture of a hatless rider in a magazine I think they need to get out more.
 
I think that until it becomes a legal requirement to wear a hat, then photos will be taken, and published of *professional* riders hatless.
Whether people like it or not, it IS the rider's choice, and as such I suppose if publications want to include a picture of an individual, and that individual is not wearing a hat, then they have to make that decision.
I personally don't like to see hatless riders in magazines, but also agree with hellspells that generally speaking, the readership of H&H are old and wise enough to make their own choices.
 
I agree it is irresponisble to ride without a hat but I'm also with those saying H&H isn't aimed at children, the market it's aimed at should be able to realise that this is irresponsible.
 
If the "aimed at children" posts are directed towards me then I would just like to say that while the magazine is not aimed towards children / minors it IS read by them, If a mother / older person at a yard has the magazine and leaves it on the counter (or any other surface) then most children would pick it up and read it.

I know of many younger people who read the magazine as it usually contains images and write ups of their favourite riders.


This isn't having a go at anyone I'm just saying younger people DO read the magazine although it is not aimed at their age range and I am now going to run before I get lynched again :p
 
The child comment was not aimed at anyone. And yes I agree children may well see the magazine, but as stated this is not the target audience. Equally as responsible adults it should be our issue to make sure that any children under our care are wearing hats not that of a magazine.
 
I think if a publication is going to print a hatless rider, then the 'don't try this at home kids' health warning definitely needs to be bigger, at least as big as the caption.

Just out of interest, the riders who ride hatless - why? Hats are not that uncomfortable, surely. The newer ones have vents etc to make them cooler on the head on hot days. If they were massively restrictive, I could understand people not wanting to wear them, but most of the time I hardly notice mine is on at all.

My dad's got the same attitude with seatbelts. He will fasten the seatbelt and then get into the car ON TOP of it, to stop the pinging noise. I don't get why he doesn't just put the thing on - it seems more hassle to do it the other way??
 
hellspells said:
The child comment was not aimed at anyone. And yes I agree children may well see the magazine, but as stated this is not the target audience. Equally as responsible adults it should be our issue to make sure that any children under our care are wearing hats not that of a magazine.
Click to expand...

Agreed - but how can we add weight to this argument and try to convince children that wearing hats is the right thing to do, when they see professional riders and role models doing the opposite?
 
I ......... jesus!!!!!!!! you will die if you dont wear a hat... just think how many people have been killed or maimed just looking at hatless riders .. sorry... yes its good idea to don a hard hat for riding on a hard surface or on a young horse, riding is dangerous simple.. if you dont want any risk dont ride or go out stay at home and pray the roof dosent fall on you ... kids should be required to wear them but adults should be able to judge the situation and act accordingly.. if you want to ride with or without a hard hat your choice..
 
perfect11s said:
I ......... jesus!!!!!!!! you will die if you dont wear a hat... just think how many people have been killed or maimed just looking at hatless riders .. sorry... riding is dangerous simple.. if you dont want any risk dont ride or go out stay at home and pray the roof dosent fall on you ... ..
Click to expand...

Maybe a little extreme. Yes, riding is dangerous, so doesn't it make sense to try to make it as safe as possible?

I had a fall off a middle-aged horse in a school on an all-weather surface in a totally freak occurrence. If I hadn't had a hat on, I would either be dead or taking my lunch through a straw now - my hat was a write off. I walked (hobbled) away. And that's the difference.

I don't think the post is about having a pop at riders who don't wear hats, but rather whether it is responsible of HH Magazine to be seen to be condoning unneccessary risk taking. Or what some people see as unneccessary risk taking maybe.
 
Think about motorcycles. Wearing hats was advised, still many riders didn't until it became compulsory. Now they all wear them. Maybe it needs to be made compulsory for everyone to take their own safety seriously. Well done Emile, what made you take this decision?
 
Wearing a hat is a choice you make. End of.

If a photo of someone not wearing a hat is going to influence a child, then maybe we should also ban people smoking on TV, drinking alcohol in pictures and magazines. Clearly we are going to turn them all into smoking, drinking monsters for looking at a picture.

Also, what do you propose to do for the dressage/showing/sidesaddle reports - not show pictures of people wearing beaglers/toppers?
 
Teddybully said:
Just got round to reading H&H this week and see on page 22 a rider with no hat on.

I don't agree with anyone not wearing a hat whether competing or 'just' schooling so why should a rider be featured not wearing a hat? At the side it states in very small writing 'H&H recommends the wearing of a hat at all times when mounted' which I only saw because I was looking for it.

On page 10 they report how Emile Faurie is insisting on everyone at his yard wearing hats now and then a few pages on I see this. Why? Why use a photo of someone not wearing a hat? It wasn't necessary. I cannot believe how the instructors on this course get away with it insurance wise either if they don't insist on people wearing hats?

Rant over....i think!
Click to expand...

Agree with you entirely
 
CrazyMare said:
Wearing a hat is a choice you make. End of.

If a photo of someone not wearing a hat is going to influence a child, then maybe we should also ban people smoking on TV, drinking alcohol in pictures and magazines. Clearly we are going to turn them all into smoking, drinking monsters for looking at a picture.

Also, what do you propose to do for the dressage/showing/sidesaddle reports - not show pictures of people wearing beaglers/toppers?
Click to expand...

Fabulous post!
 
CrazyMare said:
Wearing a hat is a choice you make. End of.

If a photo of someone not wearing a hat is going to influence a child, then maybe we should also ban people smoking on TV, drinking alcohol in pictures and magazines. Clearly we are going to turn them all into smoking, drinking monsters for looking at a picture.

Also, what do you propose to do for the dressage/showing/sidesaddle reports - not show pictures of people wearing beaglers/toppers?
Click to expand...
Sadly the world is becoming full of
semi educated people who know whats best for the rest of us, but left to survive on there own they woudn't last 5 mins..
 
In responce to the "A child might see ti an copy" comments-if a child has a parent who is happy to let them ride without a hat because XX did,that child has much bigger problems then the content of H&H!

Mine would never be allowed on without one,simples.
 
CrazyMare said:
If a photo of someone not wearing a hat is going to influence a child, then maybe we should also ban people smoking on TV, drinking alcohol in pictures and magazines. Clearly we are going to turn them all into smoking, drinking monsters for looking at a picture.
Click to expand...

I think you are missing the point. Of course the rider in the photo is entitled to do what she likes and I am not disputing that. My question is - why show that particular rider? She is not a 'famous face' she was one of a few riders on a course - so why choose that picture?
 
perfect11s said:
Sadly the world is becoming full of
semi educated people who know whats best for the rest of us, but left to survive on there own they woudn't last 5 mins..
Click to expand...

Who is telling you what to do or telling you what is best for you?

You see to be turning this into saying everyone who differs in opinion from you needs to get a life.

Everyone has a choice of whether to wear a hat or not. If you don't where one I couldn't care less. My point is about why that particular photo was chosen.

And who the heck is 'semi-educated' aimed at?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top