Towards A Slower, Simpler, More Civilized Bicycle Culture

[Eden]

Piffle - if I want to move slowly and dress stylishly, I walk....

[lph]

The point this article, and most others of its kind, completely miss, is that the type of daily cycling journey isn't usually something you can just pick and choose.

"Once you discover the simple comforts and pleasures of civil cycling you won't look back". I can wear all the jeans and skirts I want and ride an upright bike, it won't change the fact that I have almost 15 km to ride to work and I live somewhere it frequently rains and snows. To get there within a reaonable amount of time I need to ride reasonably fast, and that means an efficient bike, and ditto clothing.

And no, if I'm riding down to the local library or grocery store about a km away I do not change into bike clothes first. Does anyone?

It's sort of like sneering at people for taking a train to work, and suggesting they walk instead.

[velo]

“Cycle Chic and their content inspired me to give up aspirations to spend loads of money I didn’t have on cycling gear, and remember what I used to ride in as a child: my regular clothes.”

I think people are pretty clued in to what gear is required for different rides. I don't see anyone in "full kit" riding to the grocery. And I'm sure nobody who is out on a training ride is going to ride in jeans. The article is just another example of brewing contention among a group of people who all have the same goal. Anyone who rides a bike should respect other cyclists and this article doesn't seem very respectful. I used to live in Munich, which is just about the MOST bike-friendly city in the world and it seemed that any type of cyclist was respected. They just let everyone be. I wish we would see more of that in N. America. I mean, seriously... "more civilized"???? What makes serious road cycling uncivilized?

[lph]

[I] I don't see anyone in "full kit" riding to the grocery.

On the other hand, I very often do turn up at my local grocery store in bike gear, because a) it's on my way home, and b) I'm not self-conscious about being seen in public wearing bike gear.

I read the comments under the article, and pretty much everyone said the same thing as we're saying. Except the one who felt they were all being thin-skinned vehicular cyclists because the article wasn't attacking them. Oh yeah? Is it really that hard to promote "civilized", "graceful", "elegant" and "dignified" riding without calling everybody else "militant" "Gore-tex clad Superdads hunched (...) pedalling like maniacs with scowls on their faces" and "middle-class, middle-aged road warriors"?

By all means, I'd be thrilled if people rode bikes more for short errands. But I don't give a rat's *** what they're wearing or how fast they're moving, as long as they behave themselves in traffic.

eta: sorry about getting worked up about an old post. But the sentiment is still out there, and gets voiced every now and then.

[Trek420]

RIP Ralieghdon, for here he tells us about bike fashion as it should be:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EEkFr...ture=youtu.be:

[PamNY]

There is so much stupidity in this piece one hardly knows where to begin with the snark. The author attributes a lot of power to clothing and gear in general.

"Not only does that protective gear imply that cycling is inherently dangerous and complicated (actively discouraging the average by-stander from giving it a try), it also leads to risk compensation, causing the wearer to ride faster and more recklessly than they otherwise would.

In choosing style over speed, and elegance over exertion, you are a completely predictable vehicle on the road, travelling at a jogging pace, yielding to pedestrians and cars, and following all traffic laws."

How is riding "faster and more recklessly" risk compensation?

I usually chuckle at articles like this but this one deserves an award of some sort.

[kajero]

There is so much stupidity in this piece one hardly knows where to begin with the snark. The author attributes a lot of power to clothing and gear in general.

Exactly . . . that's why I had to post the link to this stupid piece of journalism. Uh . . . is IT journalism????

[Owlie]

There is so much stupidity in this piece one hardly knows where to begin with the snark. The author attributes a lot of power to clothing and gear in general.

"Not only does that protective gear imply that cycling is inherently dangerous and complicated (actively discouraging the average by-stander from giving it a try), it also leads to risk compensation, causing the wearer to ride faster and more recklessly than they otherwise would.

In choosing style over speed, and elegance over exertion, you are a completely predictable vehicle on the road, travelling at a jogging pace, yielding to pedestrians and cars, and following all traffic laws."

How is riding "faster and more recklessly" risk compensation?

I usually chuckle at articles like this but this one deserves an award of some sort.

Is now the time to point out that the people I see doing STUPID things in traffic are the ones wearing regular clothing? What the...?