Girls don't cycle! Guess whos fault it is?

AndrewJRenko

bladespin wrote: »

Marhay70 wrote: »

I find it difficult to care about cyclists' well being when so many of them seem to care little about their own well being.

Lol, very cold blooded statement but accurate these days worth bearing in mind it's the motorist who's most likely to do the damage, not the cyclist, whether they're in the right or wrong makes little difference afterwards.

It's also worth remembering that where formal research has been done into cyclist/motorist collisions, it generally confirms that, more often than not, the motorist is at fault.

AndrewJRenko

magicbastarder wrote: »

whisky_galore wrote: »

Don't waste your time, the cycling fashion victims wouldn't be seen dead in hi vis.

ACKSHERLY, i think many cyclists have been seen dead, even when wearing hi-vis.

They certainly have.

http://www.stickybottle.com/latest-news/cyclist-killed-dublin-mary-white/

bladespin

magicbastarder wrote: »

ACKSHERLY, i think many cyclists have been seen dead, even when wearing hi-vis.

Yeah, to be seen the other party has to look, as a motorcyclist I see it all the time.

A few years back I lost a good friend to a driver who didn't see him and turner right, across his path. Thing is he was an escort outrider at the time, low speed, full hi-viz, flashing lights (red and amber) the full monte, somehow she still didn't 'see' him.

AndrewJRenko

bladespin wrote: »

magicbastarder wrote: »

ACKSHERLY, i think many cyclists have been seen dead, even when wearing hi-vis.

Yeah, to be seen the other party has to look, as a motorcyclist I see it all the time.

A few years back I lost a good friend to a driver who didn't see him and turner right, across his path. Thing is he was an escort outrider at the time, low speed, full hi-viz, flashing lights (red and amber) the full monte, somehow she still didn't 'see' him.

"He musta came out a nowhere Garda"

Marhay70

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's also worth remembering that where formal research has been done into cyclist/motorist collisions, it generally confirms that, more often than not, the motorist is at fault.

To my mind statistics like this only confirm how hard motorists strive to miss them.

AndrewJRenko

Marhay70 wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's also worth remembering that where formal research has been done into cyclist/motorist collisions, it generally confirms that, more often than not, the motorist is at fault.

To my mind statistics like this only confirm how hard motorists strive to miss them.

Like the bus driver in Mary White's case above?

Or like the driver who drove blindly at Edward Duggan and killed him?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/man-found-not-guilty-of-dangerous-driving-causing-death-of-cyclist-in-kerry-908096.html

Or the truck driver who crushed Donna Fox while she was stopped at traffic lights?

https://www.thejournal.ie/donna-fox-cycling-laws-4447232-Jan2019/

You should really try reading some of that research.

Marhay70

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Like the bus driver in Mary White's case above?

Or like the driver who drove blindly at Edward Duggan and killed him?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/man-found-not-guilty-of-dangerous-driving-causing-death-of-cyclist-in-kerry-908096.html

Or the truck driver who crushed Donna Fox while she was stopped at traffic lights?

https://www.thejournal.ie/donna-fox-cycling-laws-4447232-Jan2019/

You should really try reading some of that research.

Nobody doubts that cars/trucks/ buses kill people, you can pull statistics like that out of your a*se all day, no one will doubt you. What I'm saying is, the way a lot of cyclists behave in the midst of these vehicles, begs the question why a lot more of them aren't statistics. The very fact that they aren't statistics lends a lot more weight to your statistics.

m5ex9oqjawdg2i

Marhay70 wrote: »

I find it difficult to care about cyclists' well being when so many of them seem to care little about their own well being.

Can you not see the stupidity of this statement?

AndrewJRenko

Marhay70 wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Like the bus driver in Mary White's case above?

Or like the driver who drove blindly at Edward Duggan and killed him?

https://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/man-found-not-guilty-of-dangerous-driving-causing-death-of-cyclist-in-kerry-908096.html

Or the truck driver who crushed Donna Fox while she was stopped at traffic lights?

https://www.thejournal.ie/donna-fox-cycling-laws-4447232-Jan2019/

You should really try reading some of that research.

Nobody doubts that cars/trucks/ buses kill people, you can pull statistics like that out of your a*se all day, no one will doubt you. What I'm saying is, the way a lot of cyclists behave in the midst of these vehicles, begs the question why a lot more of them aren't statistics. The very fact that they aren't statistics lends a lot more weight to your statistics.

The fact that cyclists are about 5% of road deaths suggests that cyclists are not the root cause or common denominator in road deaths. Most road deaths are motorists killing themselves, other motorists or passengers. Pedestrians are the next largest bunch.
If you're not noticing the dangerous behaviour of motorists in the midst of motorists every day, you're not a very observant driver.

Here's an interesting perspective from the enlightened WMP in the UK

https://twitter.com/NoonanJoe/status/1176104566460489728?s=19

magicbastarder

Marhay70 wrote: »

To my mind statistics like this only confirm how hard motorists strive to miss them.

so the fact that most KSIs involving cyclists are the fault of the motorists involved, proves that motorists are the safer party in general?
...sure.

inforfun

What was the topic again?

magicbastarder

i don't think it really matters what the topic was. any thread which in any way mentions cycling attracts hordes of non-cyclists telling cyclists what they're doing wrong.

Marhay70

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The fact that cyclists are about 5% of road deaths suggests that cyclists are not the root cause or common denominator in road deaths. Most road deaths are motorists killing themselves, other motorists or passengers. Pedestrians are the next largest bunch.
If you're not noticing the dangerous behaviour of motorists in the midst of motorists every day, you're not a very observant driver.

Don't be trying to turn this on me, you don't know how observant a driver I am or if I'm a driver at all. My point is that there are more statistics which could be reported every day than those that are, and if they were, then your blameless cyclists would turn out not to be so blameless. For instance, the young lady on Capel Street two weeks ago, suitably helmeted and hi vis jacketed, who calculated she could ignore a red light and beat a Luas tram to the other side of Abbey Street, turned out she was right but only after a heart stopping moment when her foot slipped off the pedal. that was a split second from being a statistic but by some quirk of fate it wasn't. Whose fault would that have been?
When cyclists compete with heavy traffic on the streets there is absolutely no doubt that it's an unequal contest, no doubt of who is going to come off worst in a collision. There is no doubt either that there are careless drivers and bad drivers but why stack the odds against yourself by behaving like an idiot.

Salary Negotiator

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's also worth remembering that where formal research has been done into cyclist/motorist collisions, it generally confirms that, more often than not, the motorist is at fault.

Marhay70 wrote: »

To my mind statistics like this only confirm how hard motorists strive to miss them.

Marhay70 wrote: »

Don't be trying to turn this on me, you don't know how observant a driver I am or if I'm a driver at all. My point is that there are more statistics which could be reported every day than those that are, and if they were, then your blameless cyclists would turn out not to be so blameless. For instance, the young lady on Capel Street two weeks ago, suitably helmeted and hi vis jacketed, who calculated she could ignore a red light and beat a Luas tram to the other side of Abbey Street, turned out she was right but only after a heart stopping moment when her foot slipped off the pedal. that was a split second from being a statistic but by some quirk of fate it wasn't. Whose fault would that have been?
When cyclists compete with heavy traffic on the streets there is absolutely no doubt that it's an unequal contest, no doubt of who is going to come off worst in a collision. There is no doubt either that there are careless drivers and bad drivers but why stack the odds against yourself by behaving like an idiot.

AndrewJRenko

Marhay70 wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

The fact that cyclists are about 5% of road deaths suggests that cyclists are not the root cause or common denominator in road deaths. Most road deaths are motorists killing themselves, other motorists or passengers. Pedestrians are the next largest bunch.
If you're not noticing the dangerous behaviour of motorists in the midst of motorists every day, you're not a very observant driver.

. There is no doubt either that there are careless drivers and bad drivers but why stack the odds against yourself by behaving like an idiot.

What's your definition of 'behaving like an idiot'? Does it include cycling in ordinary clothes in daylight?

storker

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's your definition of 'behaving like an idiot'? Does it include cycling in ordinary clothes in daylight?

He gave you an example but you snipped it.

magicbastarder

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't think it really matters what the topic was. any thread which in any way mentions cycling attracts hordes of non-cyclists telling cyclists what they're doing wrong.

"any chance that cyclists get to lecture everyone about why they shouldnt have to do one iota more than whats legal in order to protect themselves on the road" would be a fairer description, and its miles off topic now.

shootermacg

Deleted User wrote: »

"any chance that cyclists get to lecture everyone about why they shouldnt have to do one iota more than whats legal in order to protect themselves on the road" would be a fairer description, and its miles off topic now.

I think the reason for a lot of the complaints from cyclists has something to do with the fact that their lives have regularly been put at risk, through no fault of their own, by careless driving.

inforfun

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't think it really matters what the topic was. any thread which in any way mentions cycling attracts hordes of non-cyclists telling cyclists what they're doing wrong.

Goes both ways.
The old excuse of "i also drive a car" many cyclists use as kind of reason why their opinion means more i dont buy either.
If you ride your bicycle like an idiot, i fully expect the same from you in a car.

Bicycles and cars shouldnt share the same road. Unfortunately the infrastructure here in Ireland is in a state they are.

The Netherlands have cycle lanes wherever possible but as soon as there is none available, the same trouble as here starts.

https://www.dumpert.nl/item/7760695_da1714df

Salary Negotiator

shootermacg wrote: »

I think the reason for a lot of the complaints from cyclists has something to do with the fact that their lives have regularly been put at risk, through no fault of their own, by careless driving.

and if challenged on this the motorists response is often "why aren't you wearing a helmet" or similar.

As if the motorists actions are influenced by the cyclists choice of head-wear.

AndrewJRenko

storker wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

What's your definition of 'behaving like an idiot'? Does it include cycling in ordinary clothes in daylight?

He gave you an example but you snipped it.

Yes, I saw the example, and I considered asking if he often notices similar near miss incidents with motorists, but I thought it might help to move the discussion forward if I clarified his overall definition instead.

AndrewJRenko

inforfun wrote: »

magicbastarder wrote: »

i don't think it really matters what the topic was. any thread which in any way mentions cycling attracts hordes of non-cyclists telling cyclists what they're doing wrong.

Goes both ways.
The old excuse of "i also drive a car" many cyclists use as kind of reason why their opinion means more i dont buy either.
If you ride your bicycle like an idiot, i fully expect the same from you in a car.

Just to put the 'goes both ways' in context, it's not cyclists that kill 2 or 3 people each week on the roads.

And in general, research suggests that cyclists make better drivers than non cyclists.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/10/09/cyclists-are-better-drivers-than-motorists-finds-study/

AndrewJRenko

Salary Negotiator wrote: »

shootermacg wrote: »

I think the reason for a lot of the complaints from cyclists has something to do with the fact that their lives have regularly been put at risk, through no fault of their own, by careless driving.

and if challenged on this the motorists response is often "why aren't you wearing a helmet" or similar.

As if the motorists actions are influenced by the cyclists choice of head-wear.

While I agree with your general thinking, helmet use has been linked to closer overtaking by motorists

https://researchportal.bath.ac.uk/en/publications/bicycle-helmet-wearing-is-associated-with-closer-overtaking-by-dr

Marhay70

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yes, I saw the example, and I considered asking if he often notices similar near miss incidents with motorists, but I thought it might help to move the discussion forward if I clarified his overall definition instead.

No doubt you would have found some reason to dispute it. You just carry on in your fantasy world were all cyclists are blameless and I won't bother pointing out that actually yes, it is easier to see you if you use lights and no, I don't expect you to shoot out from between two buses and no, I don't really think that the green man means that I can cross the road without you mowing me down.

Sunny Dayz

I don't see it mentioned either on thread nor in the article either - the weight of schoolbags.
I was a girl cyclist - I lived in the country and cycled a mile to the national primary road to get the school bus into town. Traffic wasn't much of an issue, road was wide enough for a car which you heard coming. Neither were comments from others as the only one's who saw me cycling were my neighbours. I had to wear a knee length skirt for school and there were times when you had to cycle with one hand holding your skirt down. Some days it was really tough cycling with a heavy schoolbag on my back, then throw in a p.e. bag, home ec ingredients and windy rainy weather.


My son likes cycling but he doesn't cycle to school, the weight of his bag, I couldn't put it on my back I can barely lift it and his locker is full in the school. I haven't noticed many kids male or female cycling to his school.

shootermacg

shootermacg wrote: »

I think the reason for a lot of the complaints from cyclists has something to do with the fact that their lives have regularly been put at risk, through no fault of their own, by careless driving.

im not disputing it!

theres a world of a gap between "motorists are more often at fault" and "will i f*ck wear a helmet/hi-viz" and its not motorists dying in that gap.

would that it were different, alas its not.

inforfun

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just to put the 'goes both ways' in context, it's not cyclists that kill 2 or 3 people each week on the roads.

And in general, research suggests that cyclists make better drivers than non cyclists.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/10/09/cyclists-are-better-drivers-than-motorists-finds-study/

You dont have to put anything i type into context. And certainly not like that.
I was replying to the "the motorist telling the cyclist what they do wrong" part with the "goes both ways"

AndrewJRenko

Marhay70 wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Yes, I saw the example, and I considered asking if he often notices similar near miss incidents with motorists, but I thought it might help to move the discussion forward if I clarified his overall definition instead.

No doubt you would have found some reason to dispute it. You just carry on in your fantasy world were all cyclists are blameless and I won't bother pointing out that actually yes, it is easier to see you if you use lights and no, I don't expect you to shoot out from between two buses and no, I don't really think that the green man means that I can cross the road without you mowing me down.

Where exactly did I say that "all cyclists are blameless"?

AndrewJRenko

inforfun wrote: »

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Just to put the 'goes both ways' in context, it's not cyclists that kill 2 or 3 people each week on the roads.

And in general, research suggests that cyclists make better drivers than non cyclists.



https://www.forbes.com/sites/carltonreid/2018/10/09/cyclists-are-better-drivers-than-motorists-finds-study/

You dont have to put anything i type into context. And certainly not like that.
I was replying to the "the motorist telling the cyclist what they do wrong" part with the "goes both ways"

Apologies, my misunderstanding

AndrewJRenko

Deleted User wrote: »

shootermacg wrote: »

I think the reason for a lot of the complaints from cyclists has something to do with the fact that their lives have regularly been put at risk, through no fault of their own, by careless driving.

im not disputing it!

theres a world of a gap between "motorists are more often at fault" and "will i f*ck wear a helmet/hi-viz" and its not motorists dying in that gap.

would that it were different, alas its not.

It's very different. The suggestion that cyclists would not be killed if they were wearing helmets and hi-vis has no evidence to support it.

And actually, a lot more motorists are being killed in those gaps than cyclists.

AndrewJRenko

Sunny Dayz wrote: »

I don't see it mentioned either on thread nor in the article either - the weight of schoolbags.
I was a girl cyclist - I lived in the country and cycled a mile to the national primary road to get the school bus into town. Traffic wasn't much of an issue, road was wide enough for a car which you heard coming. Neither were comments from others as the only one's who saw me cycling were my neighbours. I had to wear a knee length skirt for school and there were times when you had to cycle with one hand holding your skirt down. Some days it was really tough cycling with a heavy schoolbag on my back, then throw in a p.e. bag, home ec ingredients and windy rainy weather.


My son likes cycling but he doesn't cycle to school, the weight of his bag, I couldn't put it on my back I can barely lift it and his locker is full in the school. I haven't noticed many kids male or female cycling to his school.

Did you try using a bike carrier or racks with bungee cords to hold his bag? It would be very exceptional that a school bag couldn't be supported by a carrier.

Marhay70

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

Where exactly did I say that "all cyclists are blameless"?

So you do think some cyclists are to blame.

AndrewJRenko

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's very different. The suggestion that cyclists would not be killed if they were wearing helmets and hi-vis has no evidence to support it.

And actually, a lot more motorists are being killed in those gaps than cyclists.

renko a mhic, you so deliberately mangle what's said that it's an exercise in frustration to try to even correct you.

motorists are not dying in collisions with cyclists.

now i saw you earlier claiming that the number of cyclists killed vs motorists is a tiny proportion in support of some facetious point about motorists being more in danger than cyclists. completely decontextualised and random of course.

would you accept that this statistic was justification to not pay any attention to cyclist deaths? i daresay not. but you will consistently try to have your cake and eat it and tbh its very hard to make sense of where youll jump next.

to argue with you is to be beaten more by your tolerance for this type of hopping around long after the original topic is being addressed than it is any merit in yr case, if anything so coherent could be classed as a single case

and yet another thread turns into "why andrew doesnt wear a helmet and you cant make him"

monument

Moderator warning:

The topic is "Girls don't cycle! Guess who's fault it is?"

This thread is now in Commuting and Transport and thus the C&T charter applies.

Posts off topic will from now on get deleted. Distasteful and other nonsensical posts have already been deleted.

Continued discussion about high-vis is not allowed unless it relates directly to the topic at hand. We already have some people think works and others don't -- please don't go around in circles.

-- moderator

Eric Cartman

Sure there was that report about the amount of women who don't wear seatbelts trying not to ruin their tan. Now this about the look of safety gear.

We have a massive issue in our society with women putting their personal safety second to their appearance. You'd close a hell of a lot of gaps if you had programs targeting this toxic feminity

shootermacg

Marhay70 wrote: »

So you do think some cyclists are to blame.

Are to blame for what exactly? Killing motorists? It's amazing to me that some muppets think that threatening someone's life through careless driving is exactly the same as a cyclist jumping a light or wearing the wrong clothes.

If someone wants to put their own life at risk, off with them. But don't for a second think that means that ALL cyclists are reckless and deserve punishment passes etc.

magicbastarder

i found the irish study i assume you're referring to. specifically, the one i found is about wearing seatbelts under your arm.
if it's the same study, to suggest it's about protecting their tan is wilfully misreading the stats.
72% of women never do it, 13% rarely, and the rest between sometimes and always.
however, in the reasons stated for wearing it under your arm, 6% stated protecting a tan was the reason; so that's 6% of a max of 28% (and that's *not* 28% who habitually do it)
https://www.rsa.ie/Documents/Road%20Safety/Seatbelts/Misuse%20of%20Seatbelts%20Among%20Females%20Aged%2017-34%20Years%20.pdf

however, what's far more interesting is that more than ten times as many women who admit to wearing it under arm, state it's due to comfort or irritation issues. and seatbelt design is known to be lacking when it comes to designing them for women:
https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2019/feb/23/truth-world-built-for-men-car-crashes

Marhay70

shootermacg wrote: »

Are to blame for what exactly? Killing motorists? It's amazing to me that some muppets think that threatening someone's life through careless driving is exactly the same as a cyclist jumping a light or wearing the wrong clothes.

If someone wants to put their own life at risk, off with them. But don't for a second think that means that ALL cyclists are reckless and deserve punishment passes etc.

Maybe if you followed the discussion rather than jumping in bald headed you would see the significance of that comment. I'm not going to explain it to you.

shootermacg

Marhay70 wrote: »

Maybe if you followed the discussion rather than jumping in bald headed you would see the significance of that comment. I'm not going to explain it to you.

I can feel the road rage rising.

shootermacg

Marhay70 wrote: »

I find it difficult to care about cyclists' well being when so many of them seem to care little about their own well being.

I'd rather be bald than share opinions like these.

monument

Eric Cartman wrote: »

Sure there was that report about the amount of women who don't wear seatbelts trying not to ruin their tan. Now this about the look of safety gear.

We have a massive issue in our society with women putting their personal safety second to their appearance. You'd close a hell of a lot of gaps if you had programs targeting this toxic feminity

Irish man tells women it's all "toxic feminity"... meanwhile in the safest EU country for cycling...

magicbastarder

yeah, women love hearing men explaining to them that the reason for their lack of safety on the roads is due to the women themselves.

and the irony is that it's basically a bunch of blokes left here now (well, it seems to be mainly blokes) arguing the point because all the women have collapsed from all the eye rolling they've been doing at this debate.

Eric Cartman

magicbastarder wrote: »

yeah, women love hearing men explaining to them that the reason for their lack of safety on the roads is due to the women themselves.

and the irony is that it's basically a bunch of blokes left here now (well, it seems to be mainly blokes) arguing the point because all the women have collapsed from all the eye rolling they've been doing at this debate.

female journalists are constantly telling men what to do, write about what men should do etc...

heaven forbid a man has an opinion on a topic when even the female author of the piece we're discussing agrees with me that its an issue.

but boo urns men or whatever makes people feel better.

AndrewJRenko

Eric Cartman wrote: »

female journalists are constantly telling men what to do, write about what men should do etc...

heaven forbid a man has an opinion on a topic when even the female author of the piece we're discussing agrees with me that its an issue.

but boo urns men or whatever makes people feel better.

I don't think there's anything controversial or extreme feminist about having an option that teenage girls should be able to cycle to school without getting harassed.



Everyone's welcome to have their own opinion, but it's generally a good idea to listen to the people directly involved in issues like this.

AndrewJRenko

Marhay70 wrote: »

So you do think some cyclists are to blame.

Marhay70 wrote: »

Maybe if you followed the discussion rather than jumping in bald headed you would see the significance of that comment. I'm not going to explain it to you.

I'm following the discussion, but honestly, I'm a bit lost as to what you're asking.

Marhay70

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

I'm following the discussion, but honestly, I'm a bit lost as to what you're asking.

Do you see any question marks? I am making statements.

SeanW

namloc1980 wrote: »

Hi Vis vests are the bane of cyclists. They're cycling, not going to a building site. If hi vis is so key to road safety why aren't cars painted with hi viz paint?

Have you ever seen a car? Cars have a full suite of lights, including brake lights and indicators for use at all times, and additional lights for use at night. Very few people claim they can't see a car coming for those reasons.

magicbastarder

SeanW wrote: »

indicators for use at all times

someone get me my smelling salts. i feel faint.

kirving

AndrewJRenko wrote: »

It's very different. The suggestion that cyclists would not be killed if they were wearing helmets and hi-vis has no evidence to support it.

I've come off my bike twice, albeit not commuting, and I'm absolutely convinced I would have got a serious brain injury or worse each time, had I not been wearing a helmet *properly*. But that's only my personal experience. You can say doctors aren't experts in cycling safety, but they were very glad I was wearing a helmet.

Many of the anti-helmet post here use carefully selected language such as "associated with" and "linked to" closer passing. There is no 1:1 correlation.

Equally, most evidence against the wearing of safety gear is tenuous at best, and often reliant on applying Scandinavin studies to Ireland's wholly different infrastructure.

For what it's worth, I cycle in the city with no helmet or hi-vis (reflective is best) and there's absolutely no way should it be made mandatory in my view. I'm in agreement with safety in numbers.

At the same time, it should be encouraged where practical. DublinBikes, no. Commuters, yes.

As it stands though, not wanting helmet hair or thinking they look stupid stops many girls I know from cycling.

If we can agree (we probably won't) for a second that helmets and reflective clothing are for the most part helpful in individual cases (without being mandatory), should we encourage girls to wear them?

The biggest thing I see lacking is basic training. Too many cyclists put their lives in the hands of inattentive drivers because they flat out don't know any better where to position themselves on the road.

Men are more aggressive on the road, both driving and cycling, and I think tend to let themselves be put in dangerous positions or be cut off less often than women. Cycling in the city then becomes a more scary prospect for women, again in general.