Do you 'engage' with cyclists?
Discussion
zedstar said:
No point engaging with cyclists, some (not all) seem to not understand we all have to share the road. A case in point was me waiting at a junction, pulled out slowly, spotted a cylist coming and so waited before pulling into traffic so he could get past, as he was unsure of why I had stopped (I think) halfway he slowed down and rode around me. This is exactly why i had stopped. He shouted out 'f
kING wkER' as he rode around.
So I see him, wait for him, he slows down through some confusion - totally understandable, but being considerate of him makes me a fking wker?
It reads to me like you didn't see him before you started to pull out. If that's the case, he'd seen you and thought you were going to try to kill him by not seeing him. That you saw him late and stopped probably isn't enough for him not to think you're a wkING wkER' as he rode around.So I see him, wait for him, he slows down through some confusion - totally understandable, but being considerate of him makes me a f
king wker? ker. He thinks he was a split second away from being smashed off his bike.gazza285 said:
Does it make a different sound for courtesy? Or does your horn sound the same for "Get out of my way, you lycra lout plebs."
By the way cyclists treat me, on the Internet and on the road that is exactly how I am starting to regard them.Big bad car driver always to blame, cyclists never do any wrong.
If I in my driving made it very difficult for others to overtake then gave a load of abuse when someone did a legal and safe overtake then I quite rightly would be called a muppet.
Not going to defend myself any further to people who say "if this" "if that" to excuse a bunch of louts being rude and abusive for no reason.
You are an ambassador for the group you are in, if cyclists behave like louts then they will be called louts. If Jaguar drivers drive like knobs then all Jaguar drivers will be seen as knobs, just as the millions of posts on here portray Audi drivers. Don't shoot the messenger, look at the cause.
Even MPs on cycles are rude these days.
If thats the image you want then fine!
Edited by JagXJR on Monday 2nd March 07:43
Is it worth a recap?
The premise of the OP is that cyclists cause "huge tailbacks" during rush hour.
Is this not only totally dishonest but just downright ridiculous? Is it not beyond hypocritical?
"Rush hour", that time when a gazillion of us car drivers will take to the roads at the same time twice a day and grind the roads down to a complete halt. The times when the last thing anyone gets to do is "rush"?
Yet is still seems that it is believed somebody else must be to blame. We're not going to take responsibility for the delays we create, the pollution, journey times increased by many factors, the fact that emergency service vehicles can't get about, etc etc. No, it must be somebody else's fault.
This is what I think "huge tailbacks" might look like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31GrUGNxryM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq_ce0D9eMQ
Is the OP right, or is he just thick/deluded/a liar, or am I being unfair?
The premise of the OP is that cyclists cause "huge tailbacks" during rush hour.
Is this not only totally dishonest but just downright ridiculous? Is it not beyond hypocritical?
"Rush hour", that time when a gazillion of us car drivers will take to the roads at the same time twice a day and grind the roads down to a complete halt. The times when the last thing anyone gets to do is "rush"?
Yet is still seems that it is believed somebody else must be to blame. We're not going to take responsibility for the delays we create, the pollution, journey times increased by many factors, the fact that emergency service vehicles can't get about, etc etc. No, it must be somebody else's fault.
Yazar said:
Trying to get home yesterday, a tree hugger in dark clothing and obligatory lack of lights was clogging up the single lane main road yesterday at rush hour. His selfish human rights self didn't care of the fact that there was a huge tailbacks due to his paltry maximum of 15-18 mph. Also kept going through red lights.
Sixteen pages in and this thread still has credence. So, would somebody like to post some evidence, some dashcam footage maybe, of "huge tailbacks" caused by cyclists during rush hour?This is what I think "huge tailbacks" might look like: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31GrUGNxryM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq_ce0D9eMQ
Is the OP right, or is he just thick/deluded/a liar, or am I being unfair?
hora said:
On the subject of cyclists with cams.....why do motorists need thrm too? A shared purpose-
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
There's an asymmetry to dash cams/helmet cams though.http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
You can film all the cyclists doing silly things you like but you can't identify them (this applies to whoever is doing the filming), whereas you can always get the reg of a car that has wronged you.
Johnnytheboy said:
There's an asymmetry to dash cams/helmet cams though.
You can film all the cyclists doing silly things you like but you can't identify them (this applies to whoever is doing the filming), whereas you can always get the reg of a car that has wronged you.
Big deal. It makes just about absolutely no difference, and whereas the cyclists being silly is unlikely to lead to anyone other than the cyclist being harmed, that is emphatically not the case with silly drivers of motorised vehicles.You can film all the cyclists doing silly things you like but you can't identify them (this applies to whoever is doing the filming), whereas you can always get the reg of a car that has wronged you.
heebeegeetee said:
Johnnytheboy said:
There's an asymmetry to dash cams/helmet cams though.
You can film all the cyclists doing silly things you like but you can't identify them (this applies to whoever is doing the filming), whereas you can always get the reg of a car that has wronged you.
Big deal. It makes just about absolutely no difference, and whereas the cyclists being silly is unlikely to lead to anyone other than the cyclist being harmed, that is emphatically not the case with silly drivers of motorised vehicles.You can film all the cyclists doing silly things you like but you can't identify them (this applies to whoever is doing the filming), whereas you can always get the reg of a car that has wronged you.
heebeegeetee said:
Is it worth a recap?
The premise of the OP is that cyclists cause "huge tailbacks" during rush hour.
.....................................
Yet is still seems that it is believed somebody else must be to blame. We're not going to take responsibility for the delays we create, the pollution, journey times increased by many factors, the fact that emergency service vehicles can't get about, etc etc. No, it must be somebody else's fault.
No single cyclists do not cause significant delays. This one does seem to be a bit of a knob in breaking the law, not having lights and running red lights. This aside he has as much right to be there as anyone else. Human rights and tree hugging don't really come into it.The premise of the OP is that cyclists cause "huge tailbacks" during rush hour.
.....................................
Yet is still seems that it is believed somebody else must be to blame. We're not going to take responsibility for the delays we create, the pollution, journey times increased by many factors, the fact that emergency service vehicles can't get about, etc etc. No, it must be somebody else's fault.
Yazar said:
Trying to get home yesterday, a tree hugger in dark clothing and obligatory lack of lights was clogging up the single lane main road yesterday at rush hour. His selfish human rights self didn't care of the fact that there was a huge tailbacks due to his paltry maximum of 15-18 mph. Also kept going through red lights.
Sixteen pages in and this thread still has credence. ?If anyone complains they have been delayed perhaps they didn't allow time for these delays, things happen. Vehicles break down, accidents & traffic jams occur, most people (myself included sometimes, nobody's perfect) do not allow time for this.
Perhaps this is the rub, people blame others for being delayed instead of themselves for not allowing time for delays to their journey?
As for the cycle lane, I don't believe these are compulsory, they are there for the convenience and safety of cyclists. Just like helmets. To use them or not is their choice.
JagXJR said:
If anyone complains they have been delayed perhaps they didn't allow time for these delays, things happen. Vehicles break down, accidents & traffic jams occur, most people (myself included sometimes, nobody's perfect) do not allow time for this.
Perhaps this is the rub, people blame others for being delayed instead of themselves for not allowing time for delays to their journey?
This is exactly the case.Perhaps this is the rub, people blame others for being delayed instead of themselves for not allowing time for delays to their journey?
Cylists, slower drivers, etc are all just convenient targets for people to vent their frustrations over. The fact is if you are sitting in a traffic jam then you are part of the problem. If you are late then you needed to set off sooner given that delays are no uncommon. Also getting worked up and angry solves nothing and only serves to stress you out. Having unrealistic expectations, in this case that I should be able to travel without ever being inconvenienced by anyone else, is only going to lead to stress. Perhaps we need to modify our expectations and rather than doggedly sitting in our cars and complaining that it is someone elses fault that progress at times is almost non exisitant, consider what else we could do differently to change our situation.
heebeegeetee said:
Out of curiosity, what would the outcome be if the bike got caught in a car, think handlebar or so, damaging the car and possibly hurting the cyclist when coming off the bike?Article by Ian Walker.
The underlying problem with anti-cyclist attitudes in the UK is that Britain is, at heart, a deeply hierarchical, authoritarian and status-conscious country. In such an atmosphere the attitudes of individuals who are also deeply hierarchical and Authoritarian, as originally defined by researchers such as Theodore Adorno, are validated and given free expression.
For such individuals cyclists constitute the perfect 'out group'. They form a minority whose values are widely perceived as posing a challenge to the privileges and power of a very dominant, majority in-group. That is motorists. Cyclists, at least those who ride for utility purposes, are widely perceived as only riding a bike because they are forced to do by poverty. As such they are seem to be 'less important' than motorists, especially when the car is such a powerful expression of power and status. Also, there is no legislation outlawing prejudiced attacks on cyclists, as there are with many other minority groups in society, so cyclists have become the ideal figures of hatred for those who psychologically need to identity 'the other' in order to reinforce their sense of in-group belonging.
When one looks at the attacks that cyclists are subjected to, they almost universally display all the signs of the Authoritarian mindset. Cyclists are 'All the same'. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to reflect on the inner psychology of all cyclists. The behaviour of cyclists, as members of a minority out-group, is attributed to supposedly universal internal traits, whilst the behaviour of motorists is much more likely to be attributed to external, situational factors. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to justify harsh punishments and sanctions that affect cyclists as a whole. In comparison, the misbehaviour of a reckless minority of motorists is not held to reflect on motorists in general, and certainly is not regarded as justifying sanctions that would affect drivers in general. Cyclists are often dehumanised, even to the extent of being called 'rodents'. (This coming from Bonnie Greer when she appeared on 'Grumpy old women'). Etc. Etc.
The psychological roots of anti-cyclist prejudice mean that attempts to challenge anti-cyclist prejudice on rational grounds is bound to be largely futile. Such prejudice is not rational; it is instinctive, even if the individual is an expert at rationalising what they instinctively feel.
Attitudes towards cyclists in Britain have remained essentially unchanged for over 100 years. All that has changed is the label that is applied in order to reinforce their out-group identity. In the 1890's cyclists were ridiculed as being 'Monkey's on a wire', then they were dismissed as 'Cads on castors'. Now we have 'Two wheel terrorists' and 'Lycra louts'.
Whilst the image of the cyclist as a 'sporting hero', may have played a role in raising the status of cyclists on the Continent, 100 years of prejudice is unlikely to be overturned by the exploits of the likes of Bradley Wiggins. There are just too many vested interested determine to keep cyclists 'In their place' and, ultimately, hating cyclists, along with other low-status out groups from the poor to single mothers to 'asylum seekers' runs in the blood of a very significant proportion of the British population.
Drivers’ perceptions of cyclists. [Pub by DoT 2002.]
Awareness raising
Education of drivers should focus not on helping them to predict cyclist behaviour but on understanding that circumstances will influence that behaviour. This would require an acknowledgement on the part of the driver that the surrounding environment affects cyclist behaviour and challenge one of the central elements of cyclists’ status as an ‘out group’.
Drivers’ education, including the Highway Code, should include advice on how to respond when encountering cyclists at certain types of road feature, both those explicitly providing for cyclists and other highway features. More clearly defining the appropriate responses may assist drivers in knowing how to behave more considerately and in resisting social pressure from other drivers to force their way past cyclists.
Programmes of training to improve cyclist skills and behaviour may be helpful.
Enforcement
The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
Research
Further research into the behavioural response of drivers to frustrating conditions, including encounters with cyclists, should be conducted in order to establish whether the frustration experienced by drivers is expressed as negative behaviour.
Some regional variations in attitude to cyclists were identified in the early stages of this research. Further research to investigate in more detail the basis of this variation may be useful in identifying practices likely to promote a better relationship between cycle users and motorists.
The underlying problem with anti-cyclist attitudes in the UK is that Britain is, at heart, a deeply hierarchical, authoritarian and status-conscious country. In such an atmosphere the attitudes of individuals who are also deeply hierarchical and Authoritarian, as originally defined by researchers such as Theodore Adorno, are validated and given free expression.
For such individuals cyclists constitute the perfect 'out group'. They form a minority whose values are widely perceived as posing a challenge to the privileges and power of a very dominant, majority in-group. That is motorists. Cyclists, at least those who ride for utility purposes, are widely perceived as only riding a bike because they are forced to do by poverty. As such they are seem to be 'less important' than motorists, especially when the car is such a powerful expression of power and status. Also, there is no legislation outlawing prejudiced attacks on cyclists, as there are with many other minority groups in society, so cyclists have become the ideal figures of hatred for those who psychologically need to identity 'the other' in order to reinforce their sense of in-group belonging.
When one looks at the attacks that cyclists are subjected to, they almost universally display all the signs of the Authoritarian mindset. Cyclists are 'All the same'. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to reflect on the inner psychology of all cyclists. The behaviour of cyclists, as members of a minority out-group, is attributed to supposedly universal internal traits, whilst the behaviour of motorists is much more likely to be attributed to external, situational factors. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to justify harsh punishments and sanctions that affect cyclists as a whole. In comparison, the misbehaviour of a reckless minority of motorists is not held to reflect on motorists in general, and certainly is not regarded as justifying sanctions that would affect drivers in general. Cyclists are often dehumanised, even to the extent of being called 'rodents'. (This coming from Bonnie Greer when she appeared on 'Grumpy old women'). Etc. Etc.
The psychological roots of anti-cyclist prejudice mean that attempts to challenge anti-cyclist prejudice on rational grounds is bound to be largely futile. Such prejudice is not rational; it is instinctive, even if the individual is an expert at rationalising what they instinctively feel.
Attitudes towards cyclists in Britain have remained essentially unchanged for over 100 years. All that has changed is the label that is applied in order to reinforce their out-group identity. In the 1890's cyclists were ridiculed as being 'Monkey's on a wire', then they were dismissed as 'Cads on castors'. Now we have 'Two wheel terrorists' and 'Lycra louts'.
Whilst the image of the cyclist as a 'sporting hero', may have played a role in raising the status of cyclists on the Continent, 100 years of prejudice is unlikely to be overturned by the exploits of the likes of Bradley Wiggins. There are just too many vested interested determine to keep cyclists 'In their place' and, ultimately, hating cyclists, along with other low-status out groups from the poor to single mothers to 'asylum seekers' runs in the blood of a very significant proportion of the British population.
Drivers’ perceptions of cyclists. [Pub by DoT 2002.]
Awareness raising
Education of drivers should focus not on helping them to predict cyclist behaviour but on understanding that circumstances will influence that behaviour. This would require an acknowledgement on the part of the driver that the surrounding environment affects cyclist behaviour and challenge one of the central elements of cyclists’ status as an ‘out group’.
Drivers’ education, including the Highway Code, should include advice on how to respond when encountering cyclists at certain types of road feature, both those explicitly providing for cyclists and other highway features. More clearly defining the appropriate responses may assist drivers in knowing how to behave more considerately and in resisting social pressure from other drivers to force their way past cyclists.
Programmes of training to improve cyclist skills and behaviour may be helpful.
Enforcement
The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
Research
Further research into the behavioural response of drivers to frustrating conditions, including encounters with cyclists, should be conducted in order to establish whether the frustration experienced by drivers is expressed as negative behaviour.
Some regional variations in attitude to cyclists were identified in the early stages of this research. Further research to investigate in more detail the basis of this variation may be useful in identifying practices likely to promote a better relationship between cycle users and motorists.
Saddle bum said:
Article by Ian Walker.
The underlying problem with anti-cyclist attitudes in the UK is that Britain is, at heart, a deeply hierarchical, authoritarian and status-conscious country. In such an atmosphere the attitudes of individuals who are also deeply hierarchical and Authoritarian, as originally defined by researchers such as Theodore Adorno, are validated and given free expression.
For such individuals cyclists constitute the perfect 'out group'. They form a minority whose values are widely perceived as posing a challenge to the privileges and power of a very dominant, majority in-group. That is motorists. Cyclists, at least those who ride for utility purposes, are widely perceived as only riding a bike because they are forced to do by poverty. As such they are seem to be 'less important' than motorists, especially when the car is such a powerful expression of power and status. Also, there is no legislation outlawing prejudiced attacks on cyclists, as there are with many other minority groups in society, so cyclists have become the ideal figures of hatred for those who psychologically need to identity 'the other' in order to reinforce their sense of in-group belonging.
When one looks at the attacks that cyclists are subjected to, they almost universally display all the signs of the Authoritarian mindset. Cyclists are 'All the same'. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to reflect on the inner psychology of all cyclists. The behaviour of cyclists, as members of a minority out-group, is attributed to supposedly universal internal traits, whilst the behaviour of motorists is much more likely to be attributed to external, situational factors. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to justify harsh punishments and sanctions that affect cyclists as a whole. In comparison, the misbehaviour of a reckless minority of motorists is not held to reflect on motorists in general, and certainly is not regarded as justifying sanctions that would affect drivers in general. Cyclists are often dehumanised, even to the extent of being called 'rodents'. (This coming from Bonnie Greer when she appeared on 'Grumpy old women'). Etc. Etc.
The psychological roots of anti-cyclist prejudice mean that attempts to challenge anti-cyclist prejudice on rational grounds is bound to be largely futile. Such prejudice is not rational; it is instinctive, even if the individual is an expert at rationalising what they instinctively feel.
Attitudes towards cyclists in Britain have remained essentially unchanged for over 100 years. All that has changed is the label that is applied in order to reinforce their out-group identity. In the 1890's cyclists were ridiculed as being 'Monkey's on a wire', then they were dismissed as 'Cads on castors'. Now we have 'Two wheel terrorists' and 'Lycra louts'.
Whilst the image of the cyclist as a 'sporting hero', may have played a role in raising the status of cyclists on the Continent, 100 years of prejudice is unlikely to be overturned by the exploits of the likes of Bradley Wiggins. There are just too many vested interested determine to keep cyclists 'In their place' and, ultimately, hating cyclists, along with other low-status out groups from the poor to single mothers to 'asylum seekers' runs in the blood of a very significant proportion of the British population.
Drivers’ perceptions of cyclists. [Pub by DoT 2002.]
Awareness raising
Education of drivers should focus not on helping them to predict cyclist behaviour but on understanding that circumstances will influence that behaviour. This would require an acknowledgement on the part of the driver that the surrounding environment affects cyclist behaviour and challenge one of the central elements of cyclists’ status as an ‘out group’.
Drivers’ education, including the Highway Code, should include advice on how to respond when encountering cyclists at certain types of road feature, both those explicitly providing for cyclists and other highway features. More clearly defining the appropriate responses may assist drivers in knowing how to behave more considerately and in resisting social pressure from other drivers to force their way past cyclists.
Programmes of training to improve cyclist skills and behaviour may be helpful.
Enforcement
The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
Research
Further research into the behavioural response of drivers to frustrating conditions, including encounters with cyclists, should be conducted in order to establish whether the frustration experienced by drivers is expressed as negative behaviour.
Some regional variations in attitude to cyclists were identified in the early stages of this research. Further research to investigate in more detail the basis of this variation may be useful in identifying practices likely to promote a better relationship between cycle users and motorists.
Thanks Ian.The underlying problem with anti-cyclist attitudes in the UK is that Britain is, at heart, a deeply hierarchical, authoritarian and status-conscious country. In such an atmosphere the attitudes of individuals who are also deeply hierarchical and Authoritarian, as originally defined by researchers such as Theodore Adorno, are validated and given free expression.
For such individuals cyclists constitute the perfect 'out group'. They form a minority whose values are widely perceived as posing a challenge to the privileges and power of a very dominant, majority in-group. That is motorists. Cyclists, at least those who ride for utility purposes, are widely perceived as only riding a bike because they are forced to do by poverty. As such they are seem to be 'less important' than motorists, especially when the car is such a powerful expression of power and status. Also, there is no legislation outlawing prejudiced attacks on cyclists, as there are with many other minority groups in society, so cyclists have become the ideal figures of hatred for those who psychologically need to identity 'the other' in order to reinforce their sense of in-group belonging.
When one looks at the attacks that cyclists are subjected to, they almost universally display all the signs of the Authoritarian mindset. Cyclists are 'All the same'. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to reflect on the inner psychology of all cyclists. The behaviour of cyclists, as members of a minority out-group, is attributed to supposedly universal internal traits, whilst the behaviour of motorists is much more likely to be attributed to external, situational factors. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to justify harsh punishments and sanctions that affect cyclists as a whole. In comparison, the misbehaviour of a reckless minority of motorists is not held to reflect on motorists in general, and certainly is not regarded as justifying sanctions that would affect drivers in general. Cyclists are often dehumanised, even to the extent of being called 'rodents'. (This coming from Bonnie Greer when she appeared on 'Grumpy old women'). Etc. Etc.
The psychological roots of anti-cyclist prejudice mean that attempts to challenge anti-cyclist prejudice on rational grounds is bound to be largely futile. Such prejudice is not rational; it is instinctive, even if the individual is an expert at rationalising what they instinctively feel.
Attitudes towards cyclists in Britain have remained essentially unchanged for over 100 years. All that has changed is the label that is applied in order to reinforce their out-group identity. In the 1890's cyclists were ridiculed as being 'Monkey's on a wire', then they were dismissed as 'Cads on castors'. Now we have 'Two wheel terrorists' and 'Lycra louts'.
Whilst the image of the cyclist as a 'sporting hero', may have played a role in raising the status of cyclists on the Continent, 100 years of prejudice is unlikely to be overturned by the exploits of the likes of Bradley Wiggins. There are just too many vested interested determine to keep cyclists 'In their place' and, ultimately, hating cyclists, along with other low-status out groups from the poor to single mothers to 'asylum seekers' runs in the blood of a very significant proportion of the British population.
Drivers’ perceptions of cyclists. [Pub by DoT 2002.]
Awareness raising
Education of drivers should focus not on helping them to predict cyclist behaviour but on understanding that circumstances will influence that behaviour. This would require an acknowledgement on the part of the driver that the surrounding environment affects cyclist behaviour and challenge one of the central elements of cyclists’ status as an ‘out group’.
Drivers’ education, including the Highway Code, should include advice on how to respond when encountering cyclists at certain types of road feature, both those explicitly providing for cyclists and other highway features. More clearly defining the appropriate responses may assist drivers in knowing how to behave more considerately and in resisting social pressure from other drivers to force their way past cyclists.
Programmes of training to improve cyclist skills and behaviour may be helpful.
Enforcement
The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
Research
Further research into the behavioural response of drivers to frustrating conditions, including encounters with cyclists, should be conducted in order to establish whether the frustration experienced by drivers is expressed as negative behaviour.
Some regional variations in attitude to cyclists were identified in the early stages of this research. Further research to investigate in more detail the basis of this variation may be useful in identifying practices likely to promote a better relationship between cycle users and motorists.
Saddle bum said:
Article by Ian Walker....
The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
I'm sure everyone who has posted from a cycling POV in this thread will agree.The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
This is absolute claptrap!
All the cyclists I know drive cars too. So not done out of poverty.
I have never heard of cyclist been called "rodents" and the only negative terms I have heard them being called stem only from their attitude, not social and economic background.
This article if at all true is seriously out of date.
All it needs is for a bit of respect being shown towards motorists to improve opinions of them.
No doubt the same can be said about some motorists too, I have seen some motorist drive so close to cyclists that the displaced air made them wobble. That is also unacceptable!
All the cyclists I know drive cars too. So not done out of poverty.
I have never heard of cyclist been called "rodents" and the only negative terms I have heard them being called stem only from their attitude, not social and economic background.
This article if at all true is seriously out of date.
All it needs is for a bit of respect being shown towards motorists to improve opinions of them.
No doubt the same can be said about some motorists too, I have seen some motorist drive so close to cyclists that the displaced air made them wobble. That is also unacceptable!
Johnnytheboy said:
Saddle bum said:
Article by Ian Walker....
The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
I'm sure everyone who has posted from a cycling POV in this thread will agree.The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
As a keen cyclist, petrolhead and someone who actually writes for the cycling press, my take:
The rate of car ownership among cyclists is higher than non-cyclists; ergo, it should not a them and us situation because more often than not, the person you see on a bike will be a motorist. As a rider and motorist myself, I think most drivers (on rural roads) are respectful and considerate of cyclists. When I'm out riding, I always try and wave a car past if at all possible, and give a wave to say thanks when someone has waited behind me for more than a few seconds. I never ride 2 abreast unless the road is completely empty - I consider this selfish. And I am sometimes amazed by the arrogance and ignorance of some of my fellow cyclists who don't seem to understand the concept of sharing the road.
In a car, I always pass cyclists with extra space, aware that gusty winds and unexpected potholes can cause a cyclist to swerve out. I also accept that I occasionally may have to wait for 15 seconds or so before attempting an overtake - just as I would if passing a horse, tractor or other slow moving vehicle. This is part and parcel of driving on public roads. Most of all, I am aware that I am surrounded by a ton and a half of metal and that someone on a bike is extremely vulnerable.
The rate of car ownership among cyclists is higher than non-cyclists; ergo, it should not a them and us situation because more often than not, the person you see on a bike will be a motorist. As a rider and motorist myself, I think most drivers (on rural roads) are respectful and considerate of cyclists. When I'm out riding, I always try and wave a car past if at all possible, and give a wave to say thanks when someone has waited behind me for more than a few seconds. I never ride 2 abreast unless the road is completely empty - I consider this selfish. And I am sometimes amazed by the arrogance and ignorance of some of my fellow cyclists who don't seem to understand the concept of sharing the road.
In a car, I always pass cyclists with extra space, aware that gusty winds and unexpected potholes can cause a cyclist to swerve out. I also accept that I occasionally may have to wait for 15 seconds or so before attempting an overtake - just as I would if passing a horse, tractor or other slow moving vehicle. This is part and parcel of driving on public roads. Most of all, I am aware that I am surrounded by a ton and a half of metal and that someone on a bike is extremely vulnerable.
Saddle bum said:
Article by Ian Walker.
The underlying problem with anti-cyclist attitudes in the UK is that Britain is, at heart, a deeply hierarchical, authoritarian and status-conscious country. In such an atmosphere the attitudes of individuals who are also deeply hierarchical and Authoritarian, as originally defined by researchers such as Theodore Adorno, are validated and given free expression.
For such individuals cyclists constitute the perfect 'out group'. They form a minority whose values are widely perceived as posing a challenge to the privileges and power of a very dominant, majority in-group. That is motorists. Cyclists, at least those who ride for utility purposes, are widely perceived as only riding a bike because they are forced to do by poverty. As such they are seem to be 'less important' than motorists, especially when the car is such a powerful expression of power and status. Also, there is no legislation outlawing prejudiced attacks on cyclists, as there are with many other minority groups in society, so cyclists have become the ideal figures of hatred for those who psychologically need to identity 'the other' in order to reinforce their sense of in-group belonging.
When one looks at the attacks that cyclists are subjected to, they almost universally display all the signs of the Authoritarian mindset. Cyclists are 'All the same'. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to reflect on the inner psychology of all cyclists. The behaviour of cyclists, as members of a minority out-group, is attributed to supposedly universal internal traits, whilst the behaviour of motorists is much more likely to be attributed to external, situational factors. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to justify harsh punishments and sanctions that affect cyclists as a whole. In comparison, the misbehaviour of a reckless minority of motorists is not held to reflect on motorists in general, and certainly is not regarded as justifying sanctions that would affect drivers in general. Cyclists are often dehumanised, even to the extent of being called 'rodents'. (This coming from Bonnie Greer when she appeared on 'Grumpy old women'). Etc. Etc.
The psychological roots of anti-cyclist prejudice mean that attempts to challenge anti-cyclist prejudice on rational grounds is bound to be largely futile. Such prejudice is not rational; it is instinctive, even if the individual is an expert at rationalising what they instinctively feel.
Attitudes towards cyclists in Britain have remained essentially unchanged for over 100 years. All that has changed is the label that is applied in order to reinforce their out-group identity. In the 1890's cyclists were ridiculed as being 'Monkey's on a wire', then they were dismissed as 'Cads on castors'. Now we have 'Two wheel terrorists' and 'Lycra louts'.
Whilst the image of the cyclist as a 'sporting hero', may have played a role in raising the status of cyclists on the Continent, 100 years of prejudice is unlikely to be overturned by the exploits of the likes of Bradley Wiggins. There are just too many vested interested determine to keep cyclists 'In their place' and, ultimately, hating cyclists, along with other low-status out groups from the poor to single mothers to 'asylum seekers' runs in the blood of a very significant proportion of the British population.
Drivers’ perceptions of cyclists. [Pub by DoT 2002.]
Awareness raising
Education of drivers should focus not on helping them to predict cyclist behaviour but on understanding that circumstances will influence that behaviour. This would require an acknowledgement on the part of the driver that the surrounding environment affects cyclist behaviour and challenge one of the central elements of cyclists’ status as an ‘out group’.
Drivers’ education, including the Highway Code, should include advice on how to respond when encountering cyclists at certain types of road feature, both those explicitly providing for cyclists and other highway features. More clearly defining the appropriate responses may assist drivers in knowing how to behave more considerately and in resisting social pressure from other drivers to force their way past cyclists.
Programmes of training to improve cyclist skills and behaviour may be helpful.
Enforcement
The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
Research
Further research into the behavioural response of drivers to frustrating conditions, including encounters with cyclists, should be conducted in order to establish whether the frustration experienced by drivers is expressed as negative behaviour.
Some regional variations in attitude to cyclists were identified in the early stages of this research. Further research to investigate in more detail the basis of this variation may be useful in identifying practices likely to promote a better relationship between cycle users and motorists.
An interesting post that raises some good points.The underlying problem with anti-cyclist attitudes in the UK is that Britain is, at heart, a deeply hierarchical, authoritarian and status-conscious country. In such an atmosphere the attitudes of individuals who are also deeply hierarchical and Authoritarian, as originally defined by researchers such as Theodore Adorno, are validated and given free expression.
For such individuals cyclists constitute the perfect 'out group'. They form a minority whose values are widely perceived as posing a challenge to the privileges and power of a very dominant, majority in-group. That is motorists. Cyclists, at least those who ride for utility purposes, are widely perceived as only riding a bike because they are forced to do by poverty. As such they are seem to be 'less important' than motorists, especially when the car is such a powerful expression of power and status. Also, there is no legislation outlawing prejudiced attacks on cyclists, as there are with many other minority groups in society, so cyclists have become the ideal figures of hatred for those who psychologically need to identity 'the other' in order to reinforce their sense of in-group belonging.
When one looks at the attacks that cyclists are subjected to, they almost universally display all the signs of the Authoritarian mindset. Cyclists are 'All the same'. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to reflect on the inner psychology of all cyclists. The behaviour of cyclists, as members of a minority out-group, is attributed to supposedly universal internal traits, whilst the behaviour of motorists is much more likely to be attributed to external, situational factors. The misbehaviour of a minority is held to justify harsh punishments and sanctions that affect cyclists as a whole. In comparison, the misbehaviour of a reckless minority of motorists is not held to reflect on motorists in general, and certainly is not regarded as justifying sanctions that would affect drivers in general. Cyclists are often dehumanised, even to the extent of being called 'rodents'. (This coming from Bonnie Greer when she appeared on 'Grumpy old women'). Etc. Etc.
The psychological roots of anti-cyclist prejudice mean that attempts to challenge anti-cyclist prejudice on rational grounds is bound to be largely futile. Such prejudice is not rational; it is instinctive, even if the individual is an expert at rationalising what they instinctively feel.
Attitudes towards cyclists in Britain have remained essentially unchanged for over 100 years. All that has changed is the label that is applied in order to reinforce their out-group identity. In the 1890's cyclists were ridiculed as being 'Monkey's on a wire', then they were dismissed as 'Cads on castors'. Now we have 'Two wheel terrorists' and 'Lycra louts'.
Whilst the image of the cyclist as a 'sporting hero', may have played a role in raising the status of cyclists on the Continent, 100 years of prejudice is unlikely to be overturned by the exploits of the likes of Bradley Wiggins. There are just too many vested interested determine to keep cyclists 'In their place' and, ultimately, hating cyclists, along with other low-status out groups from the poor to single mothers to 'asylum seekers' runs in the blood of a very significant proportion of the British population.
Drivers’ perceptions of cyclists. [Pub by DoT 2002.]
Awareness raising
Education of drivers should focus not on helping them to predict cyclist behaviour but on understanding that circumstances will influence that behaviour. This would require an acknowledgement on the part of the driver that the surrounding environment affects cyclist behaviour and challenge one of the central elements of cyclists’ status as an ‘out group’.
Drivers’ education, including the Highway Code, should include advice on how to respond when encountering cyclists at certain types of road feature, both those explicitly providing for cyclists and other highway features. More clearly defining the appropriate responses may assist drivers in knowing how to behave more considerately and in resisting social pressure from other drivers to force their way past cyclists.
Programmes of training to improve cyclist skills and behaviour may be helpful.
Enforcement
The current low level of enforcement of traffic law with regard to both drivers and cyclists should be increased.
Research
Further research into the behavioural response of drivers to frustrating conditions, including encounters with cyclists, should be conducted in order to establish whether the frustration experienced by drivers is expressed as negative behaviour.
Some regional variations in attitude to cyclists were identified in the early stages of this research. Further research to investigate in more detail the basis of this variation may be useful in identifying practices likely to promote a better relationship between cycle users and motorists.
JagXJR said:
Fully agree! About time cyclists were made to realise they are not above the law.
Of course. I mean, there's no chance of us purchasers of Jag XJRs or Boxsters ever breaking the law, is there. Drive at twice the speed limit? Me? Never! 
The article is spot on and you are very much part of the mindset of the masses described therein imo.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff