Batman and Robin never had this problem
Fri, July 6, 2007 
Road cyclists as a group are under attack again. Recently there was the New Jersey Quick Release Ban, now there is a movement afoot to ban cycling shorts in Salt Lake City, Utah. A group calling themselves Citizens for Decent Public Attire, finds the skin tight cycling shorts worn by local cyclists, offensive.
The fears of this group are unfounded and the women of Utah are safe; I can assure them that there is nothing quick release about a pair of bib shorts.
After giving this issue much thought, it occurred to me that Batman and Robin, Superman and all the other super heroes of yesteryear wore tights and never had this problem. And they were on television in an era when censorship was far more strict than today.
For example, at that time, married couples could not be shown in the same bed together. Also remember, this was children's television and had the brim of the hat been even slightly visible, there would have been hell to pay.
So how did the Dynamic Duo get away with it? It was not that these actors were not well endowed; they didn't call Robin "The Boy Wonder" for nothing.
The answer was in discrete padding in their tights that made them appear Genitalia-less. Only the slightest hint of a bulge in the pubic area, just enough to distinguish Batman from Batwoman. The result, no one was offended.
The manufactures of cycling shorts should take note; the technology to make the penis as invisible as a stealth bomber on the radar screen was there in the 1950s, and can be used again today.
It appears that Performance Bicycle may already be using this concept. (See picture, right.)
I can imagine the potential for some catchy advertising like: "The Anti-bacterial padding in these shorts is cleverly placed for a low profile, less pretentious package."
Or: "Extreme comfort level for both the wearer and the casual observer."
It also occurred to me, and again, the idea sprang from television censorship. Today anything offensive we might see on TV is Pixilated; blurred out so we can't see the details.
Here is an idea; why not print the pixilation right on the shorts in the crotch area.
Any innocent bystander who might accidentally gaze in that direction, would see the pixilation, and being accustomed to seeing this on TV would be satisfied that the matter had been taken care of.
The pixilation should be extended from the crotch to the rear of the shorts, because when those white shorts get wet, we can see your butt crack.
I should start charging money for ideas like this, but I do it for the good of the sport of cycling.
Reader Comments (16)
The cop had just arrived when the door to the house flew open and a woman emerged demanding the cops arrest the lot. "You can see EVERYTHING!" she said.
The cop just laughed a little and sent them on their way, but recommended they choose a different tree next time.
Oh that "phallic symbol" thing in Oregon is a hoot!
On my first day in Italy, I rode with a local racer that wore (gasp) white shorts! Like you said Dave, on a clear day you can see forever (although on wet days you may see farther). And on another ride we walked into (gasp again) a church while services were ongoing, cleats clicking and shorts girding our loins. Nobody gave us any dirty looks, much less stared.
Hey, the Greeks used to wrestle nude during the original Olympics.
I find it indecent of people to impose their judgments on others. Is this hypocrisy?
Great idea with the pixellated shorts but I think someone's already beat you to it.
www.fatcyclist.com/blogphotosYourJerseyisSOOOOUgly_14887/dugshorts2.jpg
(or www.fatcyclist.com and scroll down a bit)
Fat Cyclist DOES live in Utah... coincidence? Hmm...
Nope.
Daggum.
J
I try to keep this blog a balance of information and entertainment. Regular readers get to know me and can tell which is which.
Sigh.
http://dir.salon.com/story/ent/tv/feature/2003/02/26/trek/
Why should they mind the cyclist's attire when almost all the TV dancers and the MTV videos these days are nearly naked?