Journalism and cycling

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 09:02PM

Tell me how wrote: »

This is a valid point. If another country has tried to implement it and stepped back then exploring just what their experience was and using that as an argument against it is valid.

The only country I can think of that had a sort of bicycle registration scheme was Switzerland. It was a small plate you paid for that went towards general insurance for cyclists. They got rid of it because it cost more than it made.

I'll try to find a link for that, as I'm not sure I've got it 100% correct. It's definitely gone now though.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 09:07PM

Something about Switzerland's bicycle vignette here:
https://www.knowitall.ch/careers/47-transport/swiss-transport/732-new-laws-for-bicycle-owners-in-switzerland-no-more-vignettes

magicbastarder · 02-01-2019 09:07PM

Tell me how wrote: »

Might the identification topic lessen some of this acrimony in time thus leading to more positive thoughts than negative coming to mind for these people when they think of cyclists.

at a rough guess, no. not in the slightest.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 09:11PM

The Swiss bicycle vignette was tiny, by the way. It was about the size of half a playing card.

EDIT:

Tell me how · 02-01-2019 09:13PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

at a rough guess, no. not in the slightest.

That's the entrenched view I'm talking about. It exists on both sides.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 09:15PM

Sometimes views are entrenched because they're correct. In this case, the view that giving into a registration scheme will not make people who are inclined to dislike cyclists suddenly like cyclists is almost certainly correct.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 09:16PM

I say "almost" in this spirit:

Lloyd: What do you think the chances are of a guy like you and a girl like me…ending up together?

Mary: Not good.

Lloyd: You mean, not good like one out of a hundred?

Mary: I’d say more like one out of a million.

Lloyd: So you’re telling me there’s a chance

magicbastarder · 02-01-2019 09:23PM

i got a feeling for the entrenchedness (to coin a word) the other day. i see my father in law about once a week, usually when i'm at the end of a cycle. despite the fact that his favourite (well, only) son in law is a keen cyclist, he was giving out about cyclists, telling me he 'regularly' sees cyclists bulling to give out to him as he's overtaking them (and made an angry shaking fist gesture to illustrate what he supposedly sees).

so either it's a complete fantasy of his, or he's a dangerous overtaker and is convinced the cyclists are at fault for his overtaking.

Tell me how · 02-01-2019 09:35PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

Sometimes views are entrenched because they're correct. In this case, the view that giving into a registration scheme will not make people who are inclined to dislike cyclists suddenly like cyclists is almost certainly correct.

Agree. But it might take one of their arguments away.

What Username Guidelines · 02-01-2019 09:45PM

I’ve made the awful mistake of reading comments on the Irish times articles posted to Facebook regarding the 1.5m law and Ross also confirming cyclists don’t have to wear high vis or helmets. Can’t help but think this is gonna make the roads a bit more dangerous for the next few days. Lots of ill-informed rubbish, anecdotal crap and basically hatred for anyone on a bike. And they’ve all just been told they *don’t* have to give 1.5m while overtaking and cyclists can wear whatever they want. Good times.

Tell me how · 02-01-2019 09:48PM

magicbastarder wrote: »

i got a feeling for the entrenchedness (to coin a word) the other day. i see my father in law about once a week, usually when i'm at the end of a cycle. despite the fact that his favourite (well, only) son in law is a keen cyclist, he was giving out about cyclists, telling me he 'regularly' sees cyclists bulling to give out to him as he's overtaking them (and made an angry shaking fist gesture to illustrate what he supposedly sees).

so either it's a complete fantasy of his, or he's a dangerous overtaker and is convinced the cyclists are at fault for his overtaking.

We can all come up with anecodtes to support the harsh reality which cycling often is. (Imagine though this thread in the motoring forum) We should also open our eyes to those that occur which weaken our position.

I quite regularly see a neighbour commuter cyclist doing about 15-18 kph on a footpath with a cycle lane on the road beside them. Every time I see them, I think that they are making it harder for people to think positively about us as a group. I'm not suggesting that lane is perfect but I can understand how the dislike builds when each side is getting more and more aggrieved because of what the other is doing.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 09:55PM

Honestly, I'd just forget about the "Let's get our house in order" mindset. It's a bunch of disparate people from all kinds of backgrounds with all kinds of attitudes who just happen to at least sometimes get about by bike. There is no house to get in order.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 09:57PM

Tell me how wrote: »

We can all come up with anecodtes to support the harsh reality which cycling often is.

That's not what I got from the anecdote.

Tell me how · 02-01-2019 10:20PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

Honestly, I'd just forget about the "Let's get our house in order" mindset. It's a bunch of disparate people from all kinds of backgrounds with all kinds of attitudes who just happen to at least sometimes get about by bike. There is no house to get in order.

It is this view which in some ways influences many to be bad tempered towards cyclists. "There needs to be change but not on our side."

It could equally be argued that motorists do not exist as a group but are all separate individuals who happen to be driving cars and yet, we refer to them as a collective as they do us.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 10:29PM

Tell me how wrote: »

It is this view which in some ways influences many to be bad tempered towards cyclists. "There needs to be change but not on our side."

It could equally be argued that motorists do not exist as a group but are all separate individuals who happen to be driving cars and yet, we refer to them as a collective as they do us.

No, we don't. Nobody ever says things like "you drivers think you own the road!" People only ever do this for minorities.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 10:32PM

And nobody sees reports of horrific driving and says "Oh no! That's why we motorists have such a bad name! We're our own worst enemy!"

Duckjob · 02-01-2019 10:54PM

Tell me how wrote: »

It is this view which in some ways influences many" to be bad tempered towards cyclists. "There needs to be change but not on our side."

It could equally be argued that motorists do not exist as a group but are all separate individuals who happen to be driving cars and yet, we refer to them as a collective as they do us.

- We never have discussions about whether to provide to more car infrastructure which end in shouting about whether motorists behave well enough to deserve it (In fact we never have that discussion about whether to build new roads in the first place, its taken as a given and just happens)

- We never have discussions about what can be done to make the roads safer for drivers that get shouted down by people saying that they (all) don't deserve the increased safety because of how some motorists misbehave.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 11:02PM

You never mention at a social or work occasion that you had trouble finding parking and then someone says "Well, I hope you didn't park on the footpath!", while they're perfectly happy to start talking about cyclists breaking red lights if they figure that you got there on a bike.

There are so many ways in which cyclists are treated as a homogeneous group with exactly the same behaviours and attitudes and drivers are treated as just "people".

Tell me how · 02-01-2019 11:08PM

Duckjob wrote: »

- We never have discussions about whether to provide to more car infrastructure which end in shouting about whether motorists behave well enough to deserve it (In fact we never have that discussion about whether to build new roads in the first place, its taken as a given and just happens)

I suspect many in the motoring forum would disagree strongly with this point.

I'm not trying to fight motorists corner here. I'm suggesting that we look at what we can do to promote improvement, not just lament that we are the ones who suffer and are entirely blameless for the perception others may have of us.

I've made my point on this in relation to the topic of identification, I'm going to leave it at that.

tomasrojo · 02-01-2019 11:09PM

Ian Walker talks about the in-group/out-group psychology here:

A report from the Transport Research Laboratory and University of Strathclyde a few years ago led by Lynn Basford (PDF via tinyurl.com/7qk877b) suggested that there’s some classic social psychology at work here – cyclists represent an outgroup such that the usual outgroup effects are seen, particularly overgeneralisation of negative behaviour and attributes – ‘They all ride through red lights all the time’. It’s hard to escape the conclusion that something of this sort is going on.

However, there has to be more to it than just this. For a long time I wondered if the outgroup status of cyclists was compounded by two other known social psychological factors: norms and majority vs. minority groups. Not only are cyclists an outgroup, they’re also a minority outgroup. Moreover, they are engaging in an activity that is deemed slightly inappropriate in a culture that views driving as normative and desirable and, arguably, views cycling as anti-conventional and possibly even infantile.

https://thepsychologist.bps.org.uk/volume-25/edition-9/interview-vulnerable-road-users

rubadub · 02-01-2019 11:40PM

Tell me how wrote: »

I quite regularly see a neighbour commuter cyclist doing about 15-18 kph on a footpath with a cycle lane on the road beside them. Every time I see them, I think that they are making it harder for people to think positively about us as a group.

I see similar in my road, but US strong black sisters need to stick together, one bad one should not give us all a bad name. Fcuk those prejudiced assholes grouping us all together, but sure you can understand why they do it, hard to think of us positively as a group.

:rolleyes:

Poor pricks have only so many groups they can lash out against, in another era they would be screaming on lashings.

Grassey · 03-01-2019 07:59AM

tomasrojo wrote:

You never mention at a social or work occasion that you had trouble finding parking and then someone says "Well, I hope you didn't park on the footpath!",

Actually had similar last week, met friends at masseys, who commented how busy/dangerous the road between hellfire & masseys was that day. I asked was that not their car parked opposite a continuous white line by masseys entrance, and why didn't they go into the practically empty car park in hellfire and walk the 100m back. 'yeah, but there was a space there behind the other car...'

It was almost like they couldn't connect their illegal parking choice to the narrowing of the road width contributing to a long gauntlet that cars hurtle down to beat oncoming traffic in and around numerous walkers.

Tell me how · 03-01-2019 12:17PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

No, we don't. Nobody ever says things like "you drivers think you own the road!" People only ever do this for minorities.

Come on now. We're on the same side but lets not be all holier than thou.

Many arguments against motorists start with "You think you're the only one who uses the road".

Lumen · 03-01-2019 12:21PM

Tell me how wrote: »

Come on now. We're on the same side but lets not be all holier than thou.

Many arguments against motorists start with "You think you're the only one who uses the road".

This is a cycling forum. Lots of us have had clubmates run over. I don't think expecting people to be entirely detached and neutral is a reasonable expectation.

Tell me how · 03-01-2019 12:34PM

Lumen wrote: »

This is a cycling forum. Lots of us have had clubmates run over. I don't think expecting people to be entirely detached and neutral is a reasonable expectation.

As I pointed out previously, I got knocked off my bike in November and fractured my pelvis. I'm still using crutches after it.

I'm just trying to advocate for considering how can we improve things without simply suggesting all improvement or attitude changes needs to be elsewhere.

I think reactions like "No point, it won't make a difference" are frustrating no matter which side makes them. I want to see more and more miles completed by bike, and less injuries when doing so and I think listening to some concerns might lead to a more positive perception of cyclists as a group.

tomasrojo · 03-01-2019 01:03PM

Tell me how wrote: »

Come on now. We're on the same side but lets not be all holier than thou.

Many arguments against motorists start with "You think you're the only one who uses the road".

Nothing I've said has anything to do with morality. It's to do with how people in general perceive groups. Cyclists are generalised: "*They* break red lights all the time". Motorists are just people, and sometimes (now I think of it, maybe even most of the time) even the person itself is abstracted away: "I saw *a car* break a red light".

So my point isn't that people on bikes never do any wrong, or what about the other people travelling by other means who do wrong. It's that the wrongdoing of people I don't know is nothing to do with me, and I'm not assenting to a completely counterproductive and pointless registration scheme so that people will say "Well, at least there are some good ones", because that itself is a result of overgeneralising about the faults of an out-group. (And they won't say that anyway.)

And I don't really appreciate accusations of moralising from someone whose input so far has been Bimodal Saint Francis of Assissi: "I both drive and cycle; where there is discord let me bring harmony".

Tell me how · 03-01-2019 01:09PM

tomasrojo wrote: »

Nothing I've said has anything to do with morality. It's to do with how people in general perceive groups. Cyclists are generalised: "*They* break red lights all the time". Motorists are just people, and sometimes (now I think of it, maybe even most of the time) even the person itself is abstracted away: "I saw *a car* break a red light".

So my point isn't that people on bikes never do any wrong, or what about the other people travelling by other means who do wrong. It's that the wrongdoing of people I don't know is nothing to do with me, and I'm not assenting to a completely counterproductive and pointless registration scheme so that people will say "Well, at least there are some good ones", because that itself is a result of overgeneralising about the faults of an out-group. (And they won't say that anyway.)

And I don't really appreciate accusations of moralising from someone whose input so far has been Bimodal Saint Francis of Assissi: "I both drive and cycle; where there is discord let me bring harmony".

And we're done.
So often the case, everyone things there should be agreement and the sooner everyone agrees that what I want is right the better.

So much for discussion. I'm out.

tomasrojo · 03-01-2019 01:11PM

Tell me how wrote: »

And we're done.
So often the case, everyone things there should be agreement and the sooner everyone agrees that what I want is right the better.

It's entirely possible for this to include your posts here too.

Chips Lovell · 03-01-2019 01:12PM

Tell me how wrote: »

I'm not trying to fight motorists corner here. I'm suggesting that we look at what we can do to promote improvement, not just lament that we are the ones who suffer and are entirely blameless for the perception others may have of us.

I've made my point on this in relation to the topic of identification, I'm going to leave it at that.

I'm not sure what you trying to argue here. Are you saying that cyclists should back an initiative they know to be unnecessary or counterproductive in order to avoid the appearance of inflexibility?

Tell me how · 03-01-2019 01:22PM

Baron de Charlus wrote: »

I'm not sure what you trying to argue here. Are you saying that cyclists should back an initiative they know to be unnecessary or counterproductive in order to avoid the appearance of inflexibility?

Not sure there's any point explaining it again if you have read my posts and still don't get my point. Send me a PM if you genuinely are curious. Or anyone else can for that matter.

I've no wish to derail a thread once we are in to going in circles territory.

Journalism and cycling

Comments