What Does This Mean for Cycling?

http://www.suntimes.com/news/marin/27635186-452/could-rahm-lose-rac...

The thing is that Bike Lane's aren't the problem, but they are an obvious change upon which the drivers can blame their problems.   But if someone beats Rahm, they will, no doubt, give a great deal of credence to the Anti-Bike forces.   I am afraid that the mis-advocating of the ATA is coming back to roost.  We need that political capital that they threw away on that horrible Ashland Abomination, the Berteau "No Way", and a number of other badly thought out projects at the expense of real and useful projects.   Oh, and Critical Mass, I am looking at you too.   Once a month you deliver the message that Bicyclists think that they are better than the rest and don't have to follow any of the social conventions.    And that enters into the mix on these comments as well.  

Here's what we all need to do.   Dress and act respectfully (i.e. no naked bike ride, no bright flowery helmets with shirts that say "can you see me now asshole"), follow the primary traffic rules (right way on streets, stop at lights) and try to make people realize that we are part of the solution.  For if we don't, we are an election away from getting swatted hard.

Views: 2608

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Barry Niel Stuart on May 30, 2014 at 9:10am

From what I've seen, Rahm Emanuel has only built on what Richard M. Daley started.  There are firebrands on both the Cyclist and motorist sides.  Idaho stops and blowing red lights ruin our case for having a place on the road.  And yes, bicyclists are still a minority.  Wisconsin's legislature passed a Vulnerable User Law this past session.  Unfortunately, they had to gut it of penalties to get it passed.  Both motorists and bicyclists need to follow the same rules of the road and respect each other's right to choose as long as they're not out to do the other person harm.  The most important doctrine of human relations is to treat others the way you want them to treat you.

Permalink Reply by Alex Z on May 30, 2014 at 9:32am

Really? Doesn't a true "Idaho stop" require yielding if there is a car approaching the intersection?

Barry Niel Stuart said:

Idaho stops ... ruin our case for having a place on the road. 

Permalink Reply by J.P. on May 30, 2014 at 4:11pm

Good discussion.

I think the infrastructure was built without broad based support.

We need more children, moms, old people riding bikes... they need to feel comfortable riding bikes. Currently it's pretty much only young to middle-aged men with large chips on the shoulder that ride bikes. We need to work on the image. In my view, that means: Obey (at least the spirit) of the rules of the road. If you ride on public streets, understand that cycling is not a sport (drop the lycra), drop the sense of entitlement. Don't be a jerk. The best program to get us towards those goals is probably Divvy. 

Permalink Reply by Simon Phearson on May 30, 2014 at 10:38pm

Since I'm a middle-aged man who wears lycra in order to commute, I guess this means I'm actively working against the movement, huh?

I don't get all of this stupid lycra-hate. I wear it because my commute is nine miles minimum, so a change of clothes one way or another is necessary, and wearing lycra and other special bike-clothing is far more comfortable in the kinds of all-weather conditions in which I ride than the athletic shorts and cotton t-shirts I typically wore before adopting lycra. I don't understand why others feel entitled to police or chastise that choice.

I wear lycra, but that doesn't mean I'm disobeying traffic rules or treating every commute like a race. I'm the one, in fact, who's watching people in more casual clothing shoal me, coast through stop lights, make unsafe passes on the LFP, and weave dangerously through traffic. And then Divviers do all of that while also salmoning and riding on sidewalks. Yeah, great diplomacy there.

I'm already a year-round bike-commuter who's not afraid of riding on the street, so I agree that I'm not the key demographic we need to get out there in order to make cycling a more mainstream activity. At the same time, I don't see why it should be so easily taken for granted that my mere presence on the street conveys a hostile signal to literally everyone who sees me - drivers, pedestrians, would-be cyclists, other actual cyclists - just because the decisions I've made about what bike best gets me there and what outfit is most comfortable for the route fit into some stereotype. Especially when the sort of bad-diplomat behavior that drivers love to complain about and that many agree is counterproductive is far more commonly performed by casual-looking riders.

J.P. said:

Good discussion.

I think the infrastructure was built without broad based support.

We need more children, moms, old people riding bikes... they need to feel comfortable riding bikes. Currently it's pretty much only young to middle-aged men with large chips on the shoulder that ride bikes. We need to work on the image. In my view, that means: Obey (at least the spirit) of the rules of the road. If you ride on public streets, understand that cycling is not a sport (drop the lycra), drop the sense of entitlement. Don't be a jerk. The best program to get us towards those goals is probably Divvy. 

Permalink Reply by Reboot Oxnard on May 31, 2014 at 2:49am

The long and the short of it? Clothing *is* communication. People have learned that the Lycra-clad as a group tend to ride too fast for conditions on the shared paths and are a danger. Other individuals may also be a threat but they're wearing the equivalent of camouflage and hiding in a group that experience has shown is not so much of a hazard. Wearing lycra on the shared paths is like showing up at a Chicago sports saloon wearing a Kings jersey - you've self-identified with a disfavored group. You shouldn't get a beer thrown at you but you shouldn't expect to get laid, either. People might not be hearing the message that you want them to when you don your Lycra but that's because what they hear is a cumulative message that says, Lycra = trouble.

Simon Phearson said:

I don't get all of this stupid lycra-hate.

Permalink Reply by Simon Phearson on May 31, 2014 at 3:13am

The thing is that I just don't agree that the Lycra-clad group do ride so dangerously. I think that's a perception fed by availability bias. The message people "hear" is one that people perpetuate without actual evidence.

I am on the LFP on a near-daily basis, and these days I ride much of its length, north to south, so I ride through a lot of different conditions, different crowds, etc. And it's just not been my experience that the people in Lycra are riding "too fast for conditions." Every once in a while, I'll encounter a racer who's too far over in the wrong lane while trying to pass or riding alongside someone else. But as a general rule, the fast riding is happening in places where there's maybe one user every 30 yards or so, if that, and they don't put me or anyone else (that I see) in any real danger.

Where I do encounter the unsafe riding along the LFP? It's at the choke points: mainly North Ave. Beach and Navy Pier to Grant Park. And almost uniformly, the unsafe riding I encounter there is not racers plowing through crowds but casual riders weaving into and out of pedestrian traffic because they can't handle biking at the rate of traffic flow. I find myself - lycra-clad, half-clipped in - moseying behind a group of tourists because there's no safe opportunity to pass, when some ass on a bike he's too big for plays chicken with the oncoming traffic, veering around and passing me unannounced.

If you're paying attention, and if you're actually familiar with what to watch out for on the LFP, the problem riding on the LFP is not the racers, who as a rule will act predictably and only occasionally err on the side of aggressiveness. It's the casual riders who have no clue about trail etiquette and no patience for dialing it down when things move as slow as they do at peak periods. Those are the riders I've learned I need to watch out for.

"Experience has shown is not so much of a hazard" - really? Take a look at who you see salmoning downtown or running red lights sometime.


Reboot Oxnard said:

The long and the short of it? Clothing *is* communication. People have learned that the Lycra-clad as a group tend to ride too fast for conditions on the shared paths and are a danger. Other individuals may also be a threat but they're wearing the equivalent of camouflage and hiding in a group that experience has shown is not so much of a hazard. Wearing lycra on the shared paths is like showing up at a Chicago sports saloon wearing a Kings jersey - you've self-identified with a disfavored group. You shouldn't get a beer thrown at you but you shouldn't expect to get laid, either. People might not be hearing the message that you want them to when you don your Lycra but that's because what they hear is a cumulative message that says, Lycra = trouble.

Simon Phearson said:

I don't get all of this stupid lycra-hate.

Permalink Reply by Andy J on May 31, 2014 at 5:29am
Lycra riders = Harley riders.

Both wrongly maligned because of the assholes among them.
Permalink Reply by PK RPR on May 31, 2014 at 6:34am

....So we have decided we like (or don't like) racers on the LFP and like (or don't like) CM

but I think both of these issues miss the point.  Depending on age/demographic both make biking 'sexy'

City biking infrastructure is a public safety issue.

The CPD understands this, City Hall has traditionally understood this.

Bike advocacy does more with ROS and ghost bikes to put the city on notice that they need to continue to make the streets safer.  That and insisting on full legal and public response every time there is a bad biking injury or death.

Permalink Reply by Craig S. on May 31, 2014 at 3:26pm

This has to be one of the most ignorant posts on this blasted forum that I've ever read. 

Perhaps I should go on about the skinny jeaned, bearded hipsters, or the shirtless casual riders riding no hands whilst texting, or the scared tourists on their rental bikes, or what ever it is YOU choose to wear whilst riding, Oxnard, because I'm sure I can make a grand case about how you're probably the worst rider on the streets, just based upon what you wear.

I realize everyone's entitled to state their opinion, so feel free to hold forth on your opinions about uniforms and fashion statements, just don't be surprised when you're blasted on how ignorant those opinions are.

Signed, Your Lakefront Lance.



Reboot Oxnard said:

The long and the short of it? Clothing *is* communication. People have learned that the Lycra-clad as a group tend to ride too fast for conditions on the shared paths and are a danger. Other individuals may also be a threat but they're wearing the equivalent of camouflage and hiding in a group that experience has shown is not so much of a hazard. Wearing lycra on the shared paths is like showing up at a Chicago sports saloon wearing a Kings jersey - you've self-identified with a disfavored group. You shouldn't get a beer thrown at you but you shouldn't expect to get laid, either. People might not be hearing the message that you want them to when you don your Lycra but that's because what they hear is a cumulative message that says, Lycra = trouble.

Simon Phearson said:

I don't get all of this stupid lycra-hate.

Permalink Reply by Reboot Oxnard on May 31, 2014 at 6:29pm

Hit you where it stings, eh, Lance?

Craig S. said:

This has to be one of the most ignorant posts on this blasted forum that I've ever read.

Permalink Reply by Simon Phearson on June 1, 2014 at 5:13am

Is that all you were trying to accomplish?

Reboot Oxnard said:

Hit you where it stings, eh, Lance?

Craig S. said:

This has to be one of the most ignorant posts on this blasted forum that I've ever read.

Permalink Reply by J.P. on June 1, 2014 at 4:16pm

I think we started out, wondering how to counter negative public opinion. Some folks on here stated that behavior and maybe even appearance may play a factor. Especially in regards of appearance some here (including me) speculated that there may be a general bias by the general population. For example when I stated above that lycra wearing sports-cyclists may belong to a group of cyclists that the average Joe may have a hard time identifying with, I certainly didn't mean to imply that I hate everybody who wears lycra (Simon). The question is, what makes a non-cyclist see a cyclist and say, 'Hey, you know instead of driving to the store/work/whatever next time, I should try *this*

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service