By Mary Atkinson

As the Zwift CEO, the Tour de Femmes title sponsor said as the history-making 8 day women’s tour concluded at La Super Planche de Belles Filles in the Vosges mountains, the tour “exceeded everyone’s expectations”. 

24, six-a-piece teams sat on the startline on the Eiffel Tower to Champs-Élysées stage on the morning of 24th of July, as the men’s tour also drew to a close on cycling’s most iconic street later that day. The tour was the first of its kind in 33 years and spanned 640 kilometres with two mountainous stages. The women’s tour boasted €247,000 prize pot, equalling that of the Giro d’Italia Donne. 

The tour returned from its 33-year hiatus after running for five years from 1984 to 1989 and eight editions of the one day race La Course from 2016 to 2021. The 1984 - 1989 tour was cancelled due to funding issues which the revived tour and title sponsor Zwift, the cycling training online app, sought to rectify. However, this sum still only amounts to a 10th of the men’s prize. 

The tour was a massive success, France Télévisions reported peaks of around 3 million viewers per stage and cycling publications such as VeloNews also reported increased views and readership online, matching levels seen during the men’s Giro d’Italia. 

This proves that with accessible viewership formats such as the free to-air French coverage, substantial and deserved funding, and exciting racing that fans will come and they will stay engaged in the women’s side. 

The tour concluded on the 30th of July 2022, one day before the Women’s Euros final, which left the weekend feeling not only like a watershed moment for women’s cycling but women’s sport in general. The two events illustrated not only the audiences and engagement women’s sport can bring but the wider impact they can have on young women and girls who previously may not have been able to see themselves in the sports they loved. Both the Euro’s and the Tour de Femme’s have recified the wrongs of the past which left women’s sport sidelined and a lost generation inbetween. 

The two events also demonstrated the importance of funding women’s sport and, has left an optimistic outlook for the future for both professional teams and athletes but also for female participation in physical activity with only 59.8% of women currently physically active in the UK, 3.3% less than men. 

However, there are still improvements to be made. The Tour de Femmes spanned 8 days, having obtained special permission from the UCI to exceed the 6-day or 160km tour length specified for women’s tours. But, this still leaves the Tour de Femmes still 15 days shorter than the men’s race and in opposition to the original 1984 - 1989 tour in which the women rode alongside the men, with shorter distances but which still shared a number of stages and finishing locations. Although still not equal to the men’s tour, women got to tackle larger, more challenging distances with the shared media and fan attention that the men’s tour brings. 

Female athletes do have the capability to match the distances covered by the men’s peloton which leaves the debate of length open. The UCI stated that “the UCI remains open to any discussion aiming to see the format of its competitions evolve in the interests of balancing sporting interest, security of athletes and pleasure of fans, stakeholders of women’s cycling are today satisfied with the existing distances”.

There is also still the looming gender pay gap in cycling. The women's prize pot for the tour stood at €247,000 a 10th of the men's prize of €2,257,000. A difference that can be seen starkly through how three teams in the Tour de Femmes received no prize money whereas, each finisher for in the mens race received at least €1000. 

In addition, there was no minimum salary for female cyclists until 2020. This minimum salary started at €15,000 in 2020, rose to €20,000 for the 2021 season and to €27,000 for 2022. The minimum salary will also rise again to €32,100 in 2023 to match the men’s ProTeams. 

However, the pay disparity between the pelotons that will last until 2023, and only ensures an equal minimum, not an equal average, displays the stark equality gap between the men’s and women’s sport. With other measures such as health insurance and maternity leave not compulsory in the women's peloton until 2020 and the introduction of the package which included a minimum salary. 

The introduction of maternity leave in particular is highly important for supporting equality and women in the sport and was well received by female riders who previously felt fearful about how leaving the peloton temporarily to start a family could affect their career and finances . Pension contributions were also added as a requirement for women’s World Tour teams in 2022.

However, despite this minimum salary requirement a study by EY Lausanne found that on average female pros earned 44.21 per cent less than male riders in 2021. Which demonstrates how while the minimum salary may aid pay equality, it does not close the gap entirely.

But, as stated by the UCI above, ‘stakeholders’ and sponsors play highly important roles at this stage of development for women's cycling and until women's cycling can convince large investors, events and salaries will naturally and unfairly stay smaller.

In addition, it has to be acknowledged that the women’s UCI World Tour of which the Tour de Femmes is now a part of, only began in 2016 and as such, partially explains why cycling is so behind on equality compared to other sports in 2022.

The Tour de Femme’s proven results is a massive step forwards for women's cycling and more widely, women's sport. It's demonstrated audience appeal and high quality results will no doubt encourage more financial investment and as such equality for the pro peloton. 

The tour displayed the audience's willingness to support women's sport and will hopefully encourage investors to do the same. 

As it returns in 2023 and beyond, the tour will hopefully embed itself in the consciousness of cycling and the struggles for equality in women's side will begin to ease, with the UCI also committed to bridging the gap with measures such as the 2023 minimum salary match. 

The tour has not only begun to change the landscape of women’s cycling at a pro level but has given every little girl who loves riding her bike a more accessible race and figures to look up to. It has helped to show that women can and women will perform in sport just as well as men. 

If you can see it, you can be it.

 By Mary Atkinson

(Image: Mary Atkinson, 7th arr. Paris, Île de France, France, 28th May 2019)

If you’re anything like me, you probably found yourself guiltily watching the second season of Netflix and Sex and the City writer Darren Star’s series Emily in Paris this festive season, released December 22nd to arguably better press than when the series premiered in 2020. Although perhaps a feat that was not hard to do considering the large-scale backlash the series received upon release for outdated French stereotypes and an unrealistic portrayal of Paris. However, did we ever expect realism from the creator of Sex and the City? A show which hardly portrayed New York accurately, even in the mid-'90s in SATC, with Carrie’s expensive designer clothing, nightlife and apartment while only writing one weekly column for income – unrealistic as any journalist could tell you first-hand.
 
However, as viewers received with SATC in the '90s and early 2000s, Emily in Paris presents an idealised lifestyle in a big city. Reviving the perhaps tired trope of the American abroad but with the key element that helped to make SATC a cult show – a loud, impressive wardrobe for each character in the show, putting fashion at the forefront. For once maybe fitting for the two fashion capitals that are used as the backdrop and playground for both shows. 
 
This wardrobe was brought to viewers in Emily in Paris by another familiar SATC name, costume designer Patricia Field, working alongside French costume designer Marylin Fitoussi. Leaving the wardrobe in the show to become one of season two’s biggest discussion points. Viewers of the show tweeting and discussing their dismay towards titular character Emily Cooper’s wardrobe and its loudness. Which vastly contrasts the minimalist, muted, Parisian aesthetic adored in the fashion world and seen in some of the show’s Parisian characters such as Emily’s boss Sylvie, played by Philippine Leroy-Beaulieu and her friend and Champagne heiress Camille, played by Camille Razat. Although Sylvie and Camille's fashion is also far elevated from the typical French aesthetic. But, as neither character is an average Parisian with high-status jobs or family wealth, why would we expect an average wardrobe choice? 
 
Emily’s meticulously styled ‘natural’ wavy hair is another point of contention, contrasting the effortless air of Parisian style further, showing Emily 'trying too hard'. 
 
However, Emily's undoubtedly loud, non-Parisian wardrobe was perhaps intended that way all along, a deliberate choice. Fashion can be used to make a statement, seen frequently in the modern era, utilised both successfully and not… Think Lewis Hamilton’s BLM shirts on Grand Prix weekends and then Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's 'eat the rich' Met Gala Dress… Emily's loud wardrobe at its bare bones is based upon Parisian fashion and silhouettes. Well, American conceptions and stereotypes of them. Featuring items such as beret's, straight leg jeans, designer handbags, blazers, and trench coats - items either worn in the Parisian aesthetic or associated with the aesthetic by outsiders. 
 
Emily's loudness in her clothing can be said to show her loud personality and general presence and its contrast to Parisian culture. While her hair and its maliciously styled nature can be said to reflect her desire to fit in in Paris, which misses the mark entirely. A representation of an outsider figuring out a new world and more precisely Emily’s life in Paris. Emily's wardrobe deliberately leaves her sticking out and sometimes looking a bit of a mess, showing how she is perceived by her Parisian co-workers and friends in the show and reflective of how she navigates her Parisian life, not particularly well. Whether it is chic or not is something else, style will never be something everyone agrees on, but we can say Emily Cooper’s wardrobe is well thought out and perhaps to be expected with the series’ costume designers. 
 
"I know how to design the perfect Frenchwoman," French costume designer Fitoussi said to Elle Magazine and The New York Times “I didn’t want in season 2 for Emily to become too chic. Emily being too chic or too French would have meant that her personality was no longer as strong”, almost confirming the deliberate nature of Emily’s wardrobe. 
 
Emily in Paris is so bad it's enjoyable, a guilty watch for us all and most importantly, deliberately, definitely, not realistic. Just as Carrie Bradshaw would never have afforded her NYC lifestyle on a weekly column wage, Emily in Paris paints a fantasy image of Paris, from the lens of American stereotypes, all the way down to the clothes. 
 
However, if Emily in Paris were real, I'd give her this advice – a better way to assimilate than through clothes and appearances is through learning the language (I mean, even my French is better than hers…). But I'll enjoy critiquing or adoring the loud outfits anyways.