This gracious and little chivalrous fabrication which concerns the fair sex is the classic example of how you can completely misjudge the assessments if you do not perform an in-depth and multidirectional examination.
In fact, not considering pelvis an essential part of the body of a person is an error which arises from the anatomical observation of the male and female pelvis.
To clarify this concept once and for all, it is necessary to divide the explanation into two parts.
The structures of the female and the male pelvis are undoubtedly different from each other, for reasons that everyone knows: the conformation and position of the external genitals, which allow women’s childbearing.
Regarding the cycling area, we can observe that the contact zone, in particular the pubic zone and the two large ischial tuberosities, has some differences.
The male ischial arch has a narrower base and its vault’s height is really pronounced. In women, however, the ischial arch is lower and has a more open base.
This different morphological aspect has led many famous people of the cycling world to claim that women’s distance of the ischial bones is greater than men’s. However, this is all true only if the male and the female pelvis would be the same size .
More than 70% of women (especially among those who do cycling) have an average body size and, consequently, their pelvis size is significantly lower than the male’s average. It follows that the average distance between the two women’s ischial tuberosities are not wider as men’s.
A study carried out on a multiethnic cycling population’s sample of 49,785 people (males and females) showed that 24% of males reported the value of 121 mm for the ischial bones’ distance, while 24% of women reported a value of 111 mm .
If you slightly widen the scissors, you can notice that 61% of men have a value between 116 mm and 126 mm while 60% of women have a value between 106 mm and 116 mm.
It is up to you to find out how things really are …