Watchdogging follow up

Thanks to Fritz for the following comment on my previous post:

“I'm a generally lawful and courteous cyclist, but when was the last time motorists who are just part of traffic was labeled "arrogant"?

And just because other cyclists break the law and are hoodlums, why are you and I the ones who are somehow held accountable? We don't expect motorists to apologize for the idiots among their midst.”

I agree with all you say, but who said life was fair, and that everyone in the world plays fair. Cyclists as a group are a minority in the mindset of an automobile society, and minorities always tend to get the shitty end of the stick.

Any minority group, not just cyclists, are always labeled by the worst behavior of those within that group. In place of cyclist say “Illegal immigrant” and are they not all painted as bad? However, the truth is the majority are good, decent people. It is the way that society justifies the prejudice; this is how bigotry works.

Bigots don’t like minority groups who are different than they are, and they wish they would just go away. By labeling the whole group as bad, they gather like minded people to their cause, in the hope that this minority can somehow be stopped, driven out, or eliminated.

As cyclists we can whine and complain to each other about the unfairness of society’s attitude, but will that change anything or make anyone on the other side, listen to our point of view?

All we can do is ride our bikes, and obey the laws of the road, and try to behave in a civilized manner. We have no control over the way others act twards us, but we do have control over the way we re-act.

We can try to convince some amongst us who have a hostile and arrogant attitude, that this type of behavior may not be in their own and other cyclist’s interest.

If people like myself and other bike bloggers, keep pushing the message in a positive way, maybe in time it will find it’s way into the mainstream media.

Watchdogging Blogging

There was a link to my last Thursday’s post about the Matthew Parris apology, on a cycling blog called Turnings.

It posted my piece with the following comment:

“Here’s the problem, none of these cyclists who are forever watchdogging all the comments of others (and granted beheading is a bit strong) ever wonder or decry the fact that cyclists the world over are perceived the same way. What can we, as a community, do about the issues the press and individuals raise? No small impact the clothing, packaging, manufacturing, etc have on the environment, or the lawlessness and discourtesy that are often foisted on an unsuspecting public that has no framework to understand our point of view, and worse, we do it with a righteous attitude rife with implication that we are saving the world! How about we work on *that* some more?”

The comment by Daniel Berlinger makes an excellent point. Yes actually, I do wonder and think about the subject often. It seems at times we are our own worst enemy.

Cyclists are arrogant is always the cry, Lycra Louts in some parts of the world. In defense of the cyclist a person could say, is it any wonder they are arrogant, anyone would be after being cursed at, honked at, had stuff thrown at them on a daily basis; cut off, knocked down and even seen their fellow cyclists killed.

But, as the comment above points out, the public has no framework to understand the cyclist’s point of view, and do most care about that viewpoint anyway?

The cyclist can argue that he has the right to ride on road, and he does by law. Does he have the “perceived right” by public opinion? Definitely not, the mindset of some is that cyclists don’t belong on the road, and just by being there appears arrogant. However, is acting in an arrogant manner, and giving people the finger the best way to change public opinion?

The lycra and the helmet has nothing to do with anything, it is the cyclist’s different color skin. It is what sets us apart and causes others to judge us by our appearance. And, like any minority group, the moment we put on that skin and get on a bike we are all judged by the worst standard of behavior of those within our group.

Just because a person in a car hurls abuse at a cyclist because he impedes his way, is it any different if the cyclist then does the same to the pedestrian who steps out in front of him? Does the shouting and abuse help, or make the situation any better? We are all just people trying to get to and from somewhere or other.

Does it help the cyclists cause when a car has to wait at a stop light and a cyclist rides straight through; what gives him the divine right to do that? It is just plain rude, a person wouldn't push in front of someone in line at a movie theatre. Where is the difference?

Change in attitude on both sides is needed; however, it will have to come from the cyclist first. Why? Because the cyclist has the most to gain and at the same time the most to loose. Everybody gains something, but most road users can’t see that yet.

More bikes, less congestion, for one. Safety, and less people killed on the roads will be another. It will cause everyone to slow the fuck down, and realize they will still get where they are going on time, without the carnage we have today.

I think the best way to bring change about, is not by any cyclists’ rights movement, but by individual riders, clubs and small groups of friends who ride together setting their own rules and codes of behavior.

When I’m out riding, I expect sloppy and poor driving from some people. I see it all the time when I drive my car, so it is not going to change just because I am on a bike. I stay alert; I ride defensively, and try not to let it spoil my ride.

When someone is waiting to turn or pull out from a side road, and they see me and are obviously waiting for me to pass, I give a thank you wave. Even though they are doing what they are supposed to be doing.

I do this because it is no effort, it costs me nothing, but does a lot for the cycling cause. It lets them know that not everyone in lycra and a helmet is a jerk. A thank you wave will do more for the next cyclist they see on road. Giving someone the finger if they cut you off, will most likely make them deliberately cut off the next cyclist they see.

But this is just me; when some bike riders can’t acknowledge and return my wave as a fellow cyclist, I wonder if I am expecting too much of this same person to give a thank you wave to a motorist. However, think on this, if you can give the finger if someone wrongs you, it takes no more effort to recognize someone doing the right thing.

As for the save the world issue, that is a band wagon that many of us have jumped on. Let’s be honest with ourselves; if cars ran on pixie dust and had zero carbon emissions, we would still ride because it is what we do, we are cyclists. And the fact that millions of little polyesters died to make my jersey, is neither here nor there.

Any other watchdog bloggers out there care to expand on the subject and add their viewpoint.

The New Jersey quick release ban: My two cents

The recent New Jersey Legislation, which has led to a ban on the sale of bikes with quick release wheels in that state, is a perfect example of politicians trying to protect us and our children from ourselves, and in doing so cause more problems than they solve.

It seems the legislation calls for bicycles with quick release hubs to be fitted with some fail-safe mechanism. Whereby, when the bicycle wheels are inserted in the frame they lock in place on their own and will not fall out even if not fastened properly. No such mechanism exists and if it did it would be extremely costly to produce.

We have other safety devices in our lives that are not fail-safe. Car seat belts do not work unless you put them on. Child-proof caps on medication containers do not work unless an adult replaces the cap correctly.

Why does this piece of legislation call for a bicycle wheel, which somehow magically fastens itself? All that is needed is a solid axel with a pair of hex nuts on any bike that should never have been fitted with a quick release hub in the first place.

When Tullio Campagnolo took out the first patent and later produced the first quick release hub in the 1930s, it was born out of a need for the racing cyclist to remove their wheels quickly and easily. A simple device that has remained the same and works well for the purpose it was intended.

Why it ever made its way onto almost every other bicycle produced, including children’s bikes, is beyond me. There are two reasons why a quick release is not a good idea on all bikes. Kids of all ages think it is a huge joke to flip the quick release open on someone’s bike.

How many times have I watched “America’s Funniest Home Videos” and seen someone on a bike pop a wheelie only to have the front wheel drop out. Like your momma always said, “It’s only funny ’til someone gets seriously hurt.”

The other reason QR’s are not a good idea on all bikes. People, especially children, cannot grasp the concept of a cam mechanism tightening something. They take the nut in one hand and the lever in the other and screw it tight like a wing nut, instead of using the nut to adjust and the lever to tighten, which is how they are designed to work.

The bicycle industry needs to take care of this problem itself before we see legislation like this in other states or even nationally. Only racing bicycles and other high-end bikes need quick release hubs.

All other bikes and especially children’s models should have solid axels and hex nuts. If you can carry a repair outfit to fix flats, you can carry a wrench to remove the wheels. If you have no repair outfit, you are screwed anyway, and being able to remove your wheels quickly is of little use.

Having a quick release wheel that won’t come out when it is not fastened, kinda defeats the purpose of a quick release. A little like having a “fire proof” match that won’t burst into flame when you strike it.

Two cents worth from someone no longer connected to the bike industry, and with no personal agenda to push.