A few weeks ago, I skimmed a thread on a cycling email list about a women's bike skills class hosted by a local bike coalition. Then I watched it slip benignly and steadily into doom.

It began with a few guys asking if their non-member spouses could attend. Then it moved on to a few other men begging to be included (the course is only offered every few months to begin with). Things took an interesting turn, though, when somebody commented that they'd taken this course in a mixed group before, and "never noticed any teasing".

In fact, my environment is pretty lacking in teasing or overt sexism in general, and I have a generally great experience riding with men. I work in a group that's split 84/16. I ride frequently with men. Last year when I was training day and night, and floating on the sheer bliss of my shiny, new, perfectly-fitted road bike, I could even give the fastest of the crew a serious run for their money in short sprints and climbs. They're friendly, they heckle better than women (also true in ultimate frisbee), and there are simply more of them cycling so it's easier to find friends.

it's almost a soft environment because they're so welcoming. I never truly knew where l I stood. The barrier to entry for women seems to be low and incredibly welcoming, while novice males tend to drop off. Groups often then wind up with novice women cyclists and advanced male cyclists, which makes for great challenges and inspiration but crummy peer-finding. It wasn't until about 14 months ago, when I attended an all-women's cycling workshop, that I had could accurately assess myself.

Gender "optimization" happens in many forms, though, and most are much less blatant than teasing. Whether or not the coed class is actually a different experience for different genders, the perception of such was causing fewer women to sign up. The signups for the last few classes have had a gender ratio of 80-20; compare this to the gender split of the environment at large which is reputed to be close to 50-50.

But I really wanted to make clear the points that (1) gender bias comes in many forms, many insidious ones of which are not explicit teasing (2) a women's-only environment, like many other specialized environments, provides better instruction for the targeted group. Luckily rahrahfeminista thought so, too, and both of our comments sparked good responses by other people on the list.

Related: life is pretty good for women around here, so why should we care instead of focusing fistula surgeries or women's disenfranchisement that's happening elsewhere?