Back in 1997, Bicycling published a story that linked cycling to erectile dysfunction in men. The article sparked a slew of research on the sport’s impact on male sexual health and led to the development of the first Specialized Body Geometry saddle, which featured a center cutout that relieved arterial pressure. “That story brought it out of the closet,” says Pruitt, who was also a consultant for Specialized’s Body Geometry line and lead developer of the Mimic. But for women, he says, it’s been “a silent epidemic.”
The details in the article describe saddles from Specialized that solve the problem for women. It also says that men prefer and are able to use the same saddles (Mimic and Mirror), which is why Specialized doesn’t make women’s and men’s saddles separately anymore.
The larger problem is that most bicycles still seem to be sold with sub-par and harmful saddles. There doesn’t seem to be a lot of competition and innovation here for the mass market. One could buy a bicycle costing several hundred (or even a few thousand) dollars or euros with a lighter body, fancy brakes, suspension and so on, but you’d still get sub-par saddles.
As a non-cyclist, I’m curious to know if there’s even any kind of standardization to fit saddles to any bicycle…or is it that most common bicycles cannot have these custom or other better saddles fitted at all?
> One could buy a bicycle costing several hundred (or even a few thousand) dollars or euros with a lighter body, fancy brakes, suspension and so on, but you’d still get sub-par saddles.
I think the fact that saddles are so individual means that high end buyers expect to be replacing the saddle that comes on the bike with their own personal preference. So brands are incentivized to compete on cost and equip the bike with a cheap saddle since buyers aren't comparing full bikes on the basis of saddle.
> As a non-cyclist, I’m curious to know if there’s even any kind of standardization to fit saddles to any bicycle
Yes, saddle rails are extremely standardized. For most saddles it's a pair of "7x7mm" circular rails that get clamped by the top of the seatpost. (Carbon-railed saddles use 7x9mm rails, I think, but that's a pretty niche part of the market.)
Experienced cyclists often replace all the contact points on a new bike to meet their preferences, including saddle, pedals, bar width, and stem reach. It's just like adjusting the height of the saddle to match your leg width, and replacing the stem to match your body/arm length.
You would have to know this before buying a bike, which most beginners wouldn't, and most bike shops don't want to offer this service because it costs money in parts and labor.
Standardization for saddles is very high. The overwhelming majority of saddles attach to the seatpost using two metal rods of standard distance and diameter. So there is no need to suffer if your nether parts hurt after weeks of using the bike! Go to a local bike shop and check out the options.
And the saddle type is available from many vendors, not just Specialized.
i cycled thousands of kilometers on this: https://mantasaddle.co.uk/ and i used Brooks and other good stuff before, for thousands of kilometers... the former doesn't even compare! no need for cycling shorts (tho i never used shorts with the Brooks too) and maybe isn't the most aerodynamic saddle out there but who f* cares :P
edit: and i use exclusively the MS5 version, which has less room to distribute pressure
The lack of a saddle nose would be a problem for many enthusiast cyclists. Obviously people aren't sitting on the nose, but it's used as another contact point to control the bike at high efforts, when people aren't really putting a lot of weight in the saddle at all.
it still has a nose you can use to control your bicycle... despite ~ 4/5 of my 50,000 kilometers (that i stopped counting after that) being on conventional saddles, it's just fine to control with it, be it fully loaded (2 or 4 panniers) for camping @ a mild winter or with no rack at all; & i would say my frame geometry is _twitchy_ ;)
Yeah, if your butt isn't in the saddle, you're standing to race up a hill. I've always considered aerodynamics to be a weird consideration for saddles. But that manta saddle looks wrong to me; like it's gonna end up putting a lot of pressure on the perenium and groin through the raised ridge. What am I missing?
I have an absolute treasure trove of saddles; it's hard to state just how personal they are to each person's physiology. What works for one may not work for another. It can be a long frustrating (and expensive) experience.
Isn't it also like chairs, beds, pillows, glasses' frames, bras, mice, etc. though? You can often tell when it's terrible but not when it's going to still feel good after the first 8 hours of continuous use
Edit: further down the thread someone (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40492169) mentions saddle trials as a potential option, so I guess that confirms it. A saddle library sounds like a good starting point for selecting which one to trial, though!
I think these are just different terminology for the same thing. You take the saddle from the library for a week or whatever -- it's not just sitting on it once in a shop.
“after she’d progressed to regular 50- to 60-mile rides, she began to notice pain” … this is not typical. But for anyone reading, there are men and women’s bike seats, and for anyone innovating in this space women ride bicycles too.
Typically bike saddles are not gendered, to my knowledge. They come in a range of sizes and more typically the wider sizes work better for women, but it's very individual and some men need wider saddles and some women need narrower ones.
The article touches on this:
> Specialized has since advanced the Mimic technology with its Mirror saddles, which use 3D-printed polyurethane to fine-tune the densities in each area of the saddle and further reduce pressure on the sit bones. The company no longer markets its saddles according to gender, as men also love the Mimic and Mirror models.
There are _indeed_ female-specific bike saddles, which you could confirm by challenging your knowledge with a quick google. They generally have a changed cutout segment to accomodate pressure on different anatomy.
There are saddles which work better for some women, but they do not work for all women and are not exclusively for women.
> Specialized has since advanced the Mimic technology with its Mirror saddles, which use 3D-printed polyurethane to fine-tune the densities in each area of the saddle and further reduce pressure on the sit bones. The company no longer markets its saddles according to gender, as men also love the Mimic and Mirror models.
There's never going to be a universal "you are male, so you CANNOT use this saddle", or vice versa... but there _are_ saddles which are marketed and designed to _more likely_ better suit men or women.
There is no saddle that is universal for anyone...so it seems like you're arguing a case no-one actually claimed?
(In case that's the intended effect, HN's markup uses *asterisks* for emphasised words. If not, as an n=1 data point, I find the thrown-off spacing a little harder to read, or maybe that's because of my narrow phone view.)
Do you mean they’re ungendered on AliExpress “women’s men’s comfortable wide bike seat” or do you mean that they’re ungendered if you go to a bike shop and ask?
I mean Specialized and Fizik do not market them as Men's or Women's saddles. They're just another saddle offering in their lineup which may or may not work for any individual.
> Specialized has since advanced the Mimic technology with its Mirror saddles, which use 3D-printed polyurethane to fine-tune the densities in each area of the saddle and further reduce pressure on the sit bones. The company no longer markets its saddles according to gender, as men also love the Mimic and Mirror models.
I have tried an elliptigo which is neat. It’s unfortunately way harder to ride due to wind resistance and the elliptic nature. Also worth a mention.
Obviously simply not using or having a saddle will remove such class of injuries.
Too bad they’re ridiculously expensive for what they are.
As far as bike seats go, I’ve had success with the cloud 9 seat and women and men alike said it was comfortable (for short rides <30 min). Never been a fan of the stiff ones, other than the fancy leather ones.
I remember having a conversation with a woman about cutout saddles around 2006 - not sure how this is new or silent or epidemic - it's long been known.
It really surprises me that women's needs were neglected when mens' erectile dysfunction was quickly addressed back in the 90s.
But back then few women were on road bikes. Perhaps this is why it took so long for this article to appear.
Another factor is that bike shops are heavily male. It's quite understandable that women don't want to discuss their saddle anatomy with bike shop staff.
I encourage doing a bit of reading about the mistreatment of women in US medicine in the 90s and beyond, specifically with regards to how doctors disregard complaints of pain from women (and continue to do so to this day). Most women have stories of how a doctor blew them off when they sought medical help for pain and/or disfigurement concerns, especially with regards to any body parts not commonly possessed by men.
The saddle shown in the "Anatomy of a Saddle" picture doesn't seem very good to me.
One problem is that the sitting area has a convex profile.
Your sit bones should be placed on horizontal surfaces, like this - -. This thing is more like / \. What that does is drive a wedge between the bones under the weight of the rider, which is bad for the pelvis.
Keep in mind that enthusiast cyclists are not sitting upright on their bicycles, like a chair. Their torsos are rotated 45 degrees or even more horizonally for aerodynamics. Their legs are constantly pedaling and pushing against the front of the saddle, so they look like they are convex even though the rider should not be sitting on that part of the saddle. Realistically, only the rear third of the saddle should bear any weight.
I don't think it's a service around me, as cycling isn't particularly popular in Scotland given the weather...however it may be worth phoning up and checking if any of the bike shops in your area do 'saddle trials'...where you can take the saddle home for a week or so and actually try it out to see if it suits.
Anecdotally: yes. Mimic saddles are more comfortable for both men and women than identical non-mimic models. Myself (male) included - it was a significant improvement. It’s a simple change, softer padding, something that recreational riders have used for decades.
When I sold saddles at the bike shop I would say “women are more sensitive than men, surprising none of them”.
Men’s behavior is not representative of men’s physical sensitivity.
Anecdotally, as a former guy, I can absolutely report that I ignored tingling and numbness in saddles because I just assumed I was supposed to put up with it, and ended up giving up cycling as a result. As a gal, until this article came out, I’d assumed that cycling was essentially hopeless from a comfort perspective (because if they couldn’t solve it for men, they sure weren’t going to try to solve it for women).
So it’s great to see that progress is being made for all equipment, and that people are more willing to consider such issues “able to discuss” than they were when I was growing up. But I would not say that it’s due to differing sensitivity; it’s due to the cultural baggage around discussing and prioritizing groins.
Agreed. In my experience saddle discomfort was a problem for most people. The cultural expectation was to ignore it, which is silly. A known issue for far too long.
Clearly there's room for innovation here. I'm sure someone (maybe a woman inventor, since they have first-hand experience with this stuff) will come up with a radical new design for a bike seat that works for them?
This goes for men and women, but it’s irresponsible to say this can be treated. Just don’t over do it. It’s like saying you should wear diapers when playing video games for 8 days straight because that causes incontinence.
My other comment was downvoted and flagged for me being trans and not a real woman.
I swear I have a vulva and am a long-distance cyclist, this subject matters to me. I might not fit everyone's definition of a woman, I certainly wasn't implying that women's issues shouldn't be addressed.
I still want to share my advice: invest in a good quality pair of women's padded cycling underwear. It made the difference for me, and also why it's golden rule #1 from the article.
I was genuinely just sharing my experience and wasn't attacking women or anything like that. I understand I might get downvoted or flagged again, and I apologize in advance.
Disclaimer: I'm a guy.
This is why I switched to riding recumbent bikes.
Towards the 'end' of my previous riding lifestyle, I could only be in the saddle for 10 minutes before excruciating pain and numbness (I don't know how pain & numbness can happen together; but they did.) would force me to walk. And this was during a stage of my life where I was riding 50km daily, and 100+kms every weekend.
Now, I can ride for 12hrs and the only thing sore are my muscles from the workout.
I cannot comment on women issues, but for men, unless you are a pro racer, buy a brooks saddle. After break-in I never had issues and it was like riding on a cloud. I expect the same would be true for women too.
Also for break-in, follow brooks recommendations closely, not all the crazy suggestions on the WEB. After a season of riding almost every day, you will be sitting on a cloud. You do not want a soft saddle, but one that forms to your butt. I have been using the same saddle for well over 20 years, no issues plus it has lasted longer than any other saddle I have ever owned.
I never liked the saddles with the hole in them and I cannot help but wonder if the article is really an advertisement.
To me, if you are having this issue, see a qualified sports doctor first.
I have ridden centuries on a few different Brooks saddles, and I personally had a lot more numbness problems with them (male genital version), but I have had better luck with Terry saddles (with a central cutout). They were developed for women riders, but also include a few men's models. I would say people will have to experiment, not just with the type of saddle but also positioning on the bike, getting a taller stem could help shift your weight back on the saddle, onto your ischials, for example; or raising or lowering your saddle (knees permitting).
My mom and I swear by our Brooks saddles, and we both ride thousands (not tens of thousands) of miles a year. Brooks does offer some saddles with cutouts, but I'm unsure that it's necessary (according to the article, those cutouts may in fact increase pressure on labia). Once the saddle is broken in, it fits like a glove.
Another point raised in the article is getting a proper fit. Whenever I shop for bikes, I add about $800 to the price tag: for a new saddle, and a professional fitting. I am too old to fuck about with a bike that's gonna hurt me.
The first 2 comments on HN on this article about women in cycling are talking about men in cycling instead.
It’s fascinating. I can’t tell if it’s a sign of HN commenters never talking about the topic itself, about HN being predominantly male, or the fact that women issues are constantly ignored in society and men tend to make things about themselves instead.
... as a point of contrast between how men's and women's health are discussed. Here, HN illustrates the issue raised in the article. We could hope to do better, primed with such information, to have a curious conversation about how to prevent labial swelling before it requires labiaplasty.
Balls and shafts stick out more than labia, so in this situation, it's entirely fair to suspect that the remedies for male cycling problems are of (even more) benefit to women. You know, like split saddles that don't poke at the crotch region, but support the "sit bones". Which are unlike the garbage saddles that come most cheap, bicycle-shaped objects.
Do you suppose that this first-order reasoning was not available to the riders, their doctors, and saddle designers? Would you be willing to consider that balls and shafts may stick out differently than labia; and how addressing those differences may be more fruitful than reducing a 3-dimensional problem to a one-dimensional consideration of "more vs less"?
The cutout saddles actually cause similar injury in women. That's a big point in the article. Women need specialized support in that region, not a complete cutout.
There's famously more men in tech and people like to talk about themselves or apply a situation to themselves. I fully expected comments to talk about how this affects men.
I believe you'll find the reverse happens too; talk about an issue affecting men to a prominently female audience and the topic will be changed to how it affects women.
That's not an excuse. Men can and should be capable of "oh shit, we should fix this bad experience women have!" Without needing to center men's experiences.
> That's not an excuse. Men can and should be capable of "oh shit, we should fix this bad experience women have!"
Why?
I never see any of the womens books, magazines and websites my wife visit ever go "Oh shit, we should fix this bad experience for men first" before discussing anything.
Demographics discuss what they find relevant, usually. Why is this a problem for you?
You aren't paying attention to women's media if you think that's the case. Plenty of women's media discusses the difficulties in men's lives. And when they do, for instance talking about testicular cancer, they tend to stay away from, "ok but breast cancer is worse actually. "
We should all be comfortable lifting each other up, rather than focusing only on our own demographics. Otherwise those without power will suffer needlessly.
Spend ten minutes googling, it's really not hard to find articles that talk about men and unique needs of men in traditionally women's spaces, and they stayed focused on men.
It's trivial to demonstrate that these exist. Maybe your wife just doesn't read Vogue, glamour, Elle, etc. but for those of us who do, this sort of thing is a mainstay.
For what it's worth, I didn't downvote you for being trans; that wasn't obvious at all until you edited your comment (yet my question specifically allowed for that possibility). I downvoted you for being reductive and dismissive of the problem; and for suggesting a "solution" that the article clearly describes as a common and inadequate approach to the problem whose application results in injury requiring surgery.
>I downvoted you for being reductive and dismissive of the problem; and for suggesting a "solution" that the article clearly describes as a common and inadequate approach to the problem whose application results in injury requiring surgery.
You should re-read the article. Your interpretation doesn't align with my takeaway from it, and I'm curious why that is.
The article mirrored my advice. Their number one golden rule was padded shorts: "Endura’s Pro SL bib shorts, which use silicone in the pad to prevent "bottoming out," unlike foam."
I suggested investing in a good pair of women's padded cycling underwear without specifying a brand. I've never even heard of the Endura brand.
>For what it's worth, I didn't downvote you for being trans;
What an absurd statement. It's a) not a fucking competition and b) nearly impossible for you to know that and c) not going to be universal for all balls-havers and all labia-havers.
Also, like, what is your comment even aiming to achieve?
Are you hoping people will be like, "oh yes, I'm interested in learning how we could improve the lives of women but this insightful comment about balls made me really think about how I shouldn't"?
>What an absurd statement. It's a) not a fucking competition and b) nearly impossible for you to know that and c) not going to be universal for all balls-havers and all labia-havers.
As a trans person, having both equipment, and being a long distance cyclist. I was just sharing my experience.
But as usual the anti-trans people on HN have censored my comment.
>Also, like, what is your comment even aiming to achieve?
Sharing my opinion in a way that people hate I guess?
How dare I share the recommendation for women's padded underwear.
Then I retract b) in this case. You are in the nearly impossible case - a woman who does know that, for them, the situation was worse as a balls-haver.
But it's hard to generalize, and the original comment did an extremely typical thing in men's spaces -- taking a woman's experience and immediately responding with "but men also!" Could be your comment simply coincidentally fit the pattern.
Also, extremely fuck that transphobe poster. They can eat shit.
A lot of people including me have great experience with gel-padded saddles (Sportourer FLX in my case). No chafing or any other issue even after >100km rides. On the other hand, I can't ride unpadded saddles even with well-padded shorts; it's just too painful. I've tried several.
