Cycle chic according to the NY Times

[PamNY]

In that regard, I think articles telling us what is 'fashionable' or not are lame.

But if the Times stops covering such things, a whole chunk of humor will be gone from my life

[buffybike]

I'm all for commuting by bike, however the pomposity of those interviewed in the article is just beyond me. Bunch of sheep-le.

[lph]

I just read the article, just skimmed it first time round. And I was thinking that - sure, I'd prefer if these people wore a helmet, or at least demonstrated a minimum of traffic sense (which they could have I guess, but it certainly drowned in the "looky-me I can cycle too and look chic"-message) But at the speed and distances they're probably logging it's doubtful that they're going to be a big part of the accident statistics. Toodling around for short distances in the inner city where traffic is slow isn't really that dangerous compared to long-distance commuting on heavily trafficked roads.

And we can't expect people to just "become cyclists" and adopt cyclist culture as we see it overnight. If cycling is to become more popular, well then, the popular crowd is going to cycle their way. That includes chic clothing, viewing hip bikes as accessories, and baskets, dogs and whatnot as fashion statements. And maybe not helmets. The best we can do as a cycling community is send the message that yes, cycling for transport is for everybody, and no, you don't have to look like a spandex-wearing superhero, BUT you have to remember that you are in traffic and behave responsibly. It's not cool to behave like a super-fast and unpredictable pedestrian, urban cycling chic is about being civilized, predictable and on top of things.

[PamNY]

I stopped by one of the chic stores today (Adeline Adeline in Tribeca). Really, they were very nice and I'm not knocking the place at all. I wouldn't be surprised if they make some customers more comfortable than the traditional bike stores featuring monosyllabic male employees. I hoped to come away with an amusing anecdote, but was disappointed.

The whole neighborhood is Extremely Chic, with $800 handbags and such, so they fit in.

They were babysitting a customer's dog while she took a test-ride, which speaks well of them IMO (beautiful greyhound who sniffed me all over because I smell like bulldog).

The bikes I saw were Linus and Pashley. Most were on the heavy side -- no way I'd get one up the subway stairs.

The place was really, really, really chic, though. I need chain lube but didn't even ask. Theirs is probably organic and imported from the Andes.

I will be curious to see if they survive.

[jessmarimba]

I need chain lube but didn't even ask. Theirs is probably organic and imported from the Andes.

Aaaahahahahaha that's hilarious!!! And probably true

[featuretile]

When I first started cycling, I could never picture myself in all that spandex and wondered if it was necessary. Then after trying a pair of bike shorts, the answer was 'yes, this is more comfortable than rolled up jeans'. Then I tried a jersey, and 'yes - it wicks moisture and has pockets in the back'. Then other cyclists started telling me that it was much easier to cycle with a hard sole on your shoe instead of tennis shoes, and 'yes, even with toe clips, bike shoes are an improvement'. The other comment when I showed up in a black windbreaker was 'do you want to die? - so my colors got bright'. The helmet I got at the time I bought the bike because I do value my head. So, now I look like a proper cyclist.

The whole fashion thing is really just as nuts as riding on the sidewalk in the wrong direction. I would stay far away from those folks.

[Owlie]

Featuretile, my bike clothing experience was a bit like yours. DBF said "Yeah, you need shorts" and dragged my butt to Performance for a cheap pair (all I was willing to buy at the time.) The helmet was not an issue--I'm not dumb enough to ride without one, and even if I was, my BF would never let me near a bike without one.

A couple miles, I could do without all the spandex and a jersey. Never dressed up like that, though. I can't walk around and look like that. I like the idea of a "casual bike wardrobe" for jaunts to the coffee shop or to class and the like. I need the wicking fabric-- I could sweat for England.

[JennK13]

And we can't expect people to just "become cyclists" and adopt cyclist culture as we see it overnight......The best we can do as a cycling community is send the message that yes, cycling for transport is for everybody, and no, you don't have to look like a spandex-wearing superhero, BUT you have to remember that you are in traffic and behave responsibly.

Just because someone doesn't wear "cycling" attire (as most here are considering cycling attire - jerseys, close fitting shorts with chamois in them, shoes with cleats in them....) doesn't mean they aren't cyclists and aren't part of the cycling culture. There is a whole "hipster" group of people who ride, and even cycling specific clothing that doesn't look "racey" or tight. I find it narrow minded to think that people have to adopt cycling culture as many here see it - not just overnight, but ever.

I totally agree with the second part that cycling IS for everyone and you DONT have to wear spandex but everyone should behave responsibly.
(side note, totally not picking on you IPH, your post was perfect for both sides of the arguement! )

I ride a lot for many different purposes - I ride for health and exercise, I race, I ride FOR work (group ride leader), I ride for pleasure with friends, I ride TO work and run errands. I dress differently based on what I'm doing. Just like I wouldn't jog or do aerobics in jeans, or snowboard in sweat pants, if I'm working out or racing, I'm wearing cycling specific attire appropriate for what I'm doing (bike shorts and jerseys, and proper foot wear with cleats). I'd certainly look funny wearing a sundress in a cyclocross race - that's for the men to do!

If I'm using my bike for transportation, to the movies, to run errands, go to coffee with friends, to go to work, I'm not dressed that way - I have a serious fashion obsession (addiction if you ask DH), and as I sit here in my Banana Republic slacks and Anthropologie sweater, I see absolutely nothing wrong with looking totally cute and fabulous while riding my super cute bike with it's wicker panniers. I have ridden in a skirt (and I think those skirt garters someone posted a while ago are a MUST!), though I'm a clutz, so I don't ride in heels, but I do bring them with me to change into once I'm at my destination. There are "hipster" websites where you can get cycling specific pants/knickers that are cute and work appropriate, yet are seamed appropriately so as not to cause problems while riding, and are made of wool and wrinkle resistant material so they don't stink and look nice once you're off your bike.

When it comes to helmets, to each their own. If people dont want to wear them, that's their perogative - just like with motorcycles. The sidewalk riding is a huge pet peeve of mine, and while the article makes those that are riding the bikes sound like a bunch of jerks who give ALL cyclists bad names with their horrible traffic habits, what they wear has absolutely nothing to do with that. My helmet may protect my head if I hit it in a fall, but a short sleeved jersey and shorts don't offer me any more protection in a fall than anything else I might wear while riding. In fact, I wear the least amount clothes when I'm most likely to get injured - coming out of or going into transition in a triathlon.

Just be responsible when you ride, no matter what you're riding or wearing. And if you look good doing it, all the better.