View Single Post
Old 07-08-20, 02:35 PM
  #90  
Gresp15C
Senior Member
 
Gresp15C's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 3,893
Mentioned: 20 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1062 Post(s)
Liked 665 Times in 421 Posts
Textbook definitions are for textbooks... and web forum debates.

My impression is that the debate is a proxy for a debate over a hierarchy -- real or imagined -- of people who ride bikes. This isn't limited to cycling. Musician forums have similar debates.

But the very act of cycling already creates natural hierarchies that make any artificial one seem silly. For instance, within my small circle of friends, while out on my bike, and even among some BF members, I know exactly who's faster than me -- often much faster. I don't need a special title to know who they are. The very act of riding a bike settles the matter. Similarly, I know who's more dedicated to utilitarian cycling than I am, e.g., who's out in worse weather, or makes a better effort to avoid driving a car. I know who's a more dedicate advocate of cycling, e.g., engaging in community activities, volunteering at the bike co-op, and so forth.

I also know who's slower than I am, few as they are, or less dedicated.

Creating a precise distinction of "cyclist" only runs the risk of exposing obvious exceptions, and is thus self defeating. This is true for a lot of terms that are better off left as understood but undefined.
Gresp15C is offline