Cycling chic & meeting local enthusiast

[lph]

I have to admit that I thought you were being facetious when you first wrote about not being "able" to be cycle chic. Sure, it looks civilized and elegant to ride in snazzy clothes, but I'd never heard of anyone feeling inappropriately dressed when wearing specific cycling gear, just the other way round.

But reading your post it sounds like you do feel judged for not wearing chic clothing when cycling. Is that really the case where you live?

I guess I can see someone being judged for wearing hotshot gear like full matching team kit all the time, grocery shopping and running errands, but not just everyday commuter wear like a yellow jacket and standard black shorts. I dunno, I just never viewed the cycling chic movement as judgmental, just a celebration of it being possible to look elegant while riding a bike. I feel I can co-exist with that ideal quite comfortably, grubby commuter clothing and all.

[shootingstar]

We'll see. No, actually in my area (Calgary) people tend to be more helmet oriented and wear some cycling garment at times. We have lousier cycling infrastructure, compared to Vancouver.

I agree, I've always believed there was peaceful co-existence between cycling gear and cycling chic and everything else in between. But there are some vocal cycling chic folks in some other areas of the world, who keep saying or think that wearing cycling clothing is a bit elitist because it costs money.

That's why I wrote the blog post...to say that how cycling clothing actually saves me money for my whole overall streetwear and business wear wardrobe.

[lph]

But there are some vocal cycling chic folks in some other areas of the world, who keep saying or think that wearing cycling clothing is a bit elitist because it costs money.

I see, I just never heard that take on it. I have heard at times that cycling can be elitist, but it usually revolves around the price of the bike itself. I'm happy to join you in debunking the idea that cycling for transport is in any way elitist, I just didn't know the cycle chic movement had anything to do with being thrifty.

[Susan]

Isn't "cycle chic" as you describe it in your blog post supposed to be the opposite, I mean don't they just say that you can basically bike in ANY clothes you want to? Just to encourage people to not think about clothing when they want to ride a bike?

I think sport equipment in general can be very expensive, so in a way elitist, but there are always ways to work around this problem. I think a lot of people hestitate to start with exercise in general because they think they need all this expensive gear, but clothes shouldn't stop you from doing anything you want to do. If you do what you love you won't think about how you look anyway

[PamNY]

Interesting blog post, but the whole clothing issue seems strange to me. I also thought the "elitist" thing had to do with the cost of the bike, not clothing.

[shootingstar]

I think a lot of people hestitate to start with exercise in general because they think they need all this expensive gear, but clothes shouldn't stop you from doing anything you want to do. If you do what you love you won't think about how you look anyway

I used to wear T-shirts during first 6 years or so of returning to cycling...and I was cycling triple the annual mileage compared to what I've been doing for past 18 months.

Then I got into a jersey and did feel more comfortable. I resisted the longest, because I was afraid of looking like an athlete or similar.

For awhile I only had 2 jerseys, 2 chamois-less cycling shorts and 2 tights. Plus 2 cycling jackets. All purchased over 2-3 years. (I say chamois-less because that's what I wear. It works for me but not for everyone. But they are cheaper.)

No need to break the bank on this. Yup, I hardly buy a new fashion, off-bike item. For some people that would be disasterous. It's ok..if I can buy 1 new off-bike top annually or similar because I've made my bottoms last several years longer, it works for me.

Saves my dress/biz wardrobe. I don't buy the argument fully on "cost", when lots of low-income people own and drive cars daily. THAT is alot more expensive..sometimes well justified, sometimes not.

[BodhiTree]

I don't buy the argument fully on "cost", when lots of low-income people own and drive cars daily. THAT is alot more expensive..sometimes well justified, sometimes not.

I don't think I fully understand what you are saying here. Can you explain a bit more?