Anti-bicycle rant by Dowd Muska. Is Big-Bicycle a growing threat to America?
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 403
Bikes: Rivendell Atlantis, Kogswell P58, 1988 Pinarello, Rivendell Wilbury (my wife's bike)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Anti-bicycle rant by Dowd Muska. Is Big-Bicycle a growing threat to America?
Read his June 3 rant against bicycles. Quite the charming guy. One of my friends posted this on facebook.
https://dowdmuska.com/
All the usual stuff is there: Bicycles are for children, bicyclists obstruct traffic and disobey traffic laws, bicyclists endanger pedestrians, car drivers are forced to subsidize bike paths, etc. The creative part is how he attempts to paint "Big Bicycle" as a threat to America. Hilarious stuff, but kind of sad too.
I live in a very bike-friendly city (Bellingham, WA), but even here I know some people who have a very bad opinion of bicyclists. The negativity comes mostly from people I know who have been buzzed by fast moving bicycles on one of our city's many multi-use paths without any warning. I try to explain to them that many of these people are not what I could call "cyclists" but just jerks on bicycles. And of course some avid cyclists are jerks too. So are some drivers. That's just human nature for you. People will be inconsiderate and even break the law putting you at risk if you are in their way. Still, I know plenty of people who have had bad interactions with inconsiderate bicyclists, and so I'm sure this Muska idiot has his fans and that many of them agree. His essay reads like a rallying cry that will only encourage hostility towards cyclists.
https://dowdmuska.com/
All the usual stuff is there: Bicycles are for children, bicyclists obstruct traffic and disobey traffic laws, bicyclists endanger pedestrians, car drivers are forced to subsidize bike paths, etc. The creative part is how he attempts to paint "Big Bicycle" as a threat to America. Hilarious stuff, but kind of sad too.
I live in a very bike-friendly city (Bellingham, WA), but even here I know some people who have a very bad opinion of bicyclists. The negativity comes mostly from people I know who have been buzzed by fast moving bicycles on one of our city's many multi-use paths without any warning. I try to explain to them that many of these people are not what I could call "cyclists" but just jerks on bicycles. And of course some avid cyclists are jerks too. So are some drivers. That's just human nature for you. People will be inconsiderate and even break the law putting you at risk if you are in their way. Still, I know plenty of people who have had bad interactions with inconsiderate bicyclists, and so I'm sure this Muska idiot has his fans and that many of them agree. His essay reads like a rallying cry that will only encourage hostility towards cyclists.
#2
Some guy with a bike
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: California
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
"Obnoxious crusade"? Hm, I see far more motorists breaking the law than cyclists, and as far as I know, no one has been hit and killed by a bike. What was his goal in writing this? Seems a bit "childish" for him to attack cyclists without a purpose.
#4
Some guy with a bike
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: California
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I admit that some people on bikes (should they really be called cyclists?) act like morons, but they seem to be minorities. Most of us are sane law abiding citizens. I rather liked some of the comments on the blog, especially those pointing out that motorists do the same things bad cyclists do, but with much more deadly consequences. I think from now on if I see a cyclist doing something dangerous or unruly, I will attempt to point it out to them, and explain how it affects other cyclists.
#5
Randomhead
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Happy Valley, Pennsylvania
Posts: 24,895
Liked 4,055 Times
in
2,760 Posts
I'm afraid pointing out bad behavior to other people doesn't tend to affect their behavior much, and this is true of motorists and cyclists. But the idea that motorists treat us badly because of bad cyclists is laughable. The worst of motorist behavior hasn't changed in the 30-odd years I've been riding, and when I started there were not nearly as many people out on bikes as there are now.
#6
www.theheadbadge.com
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Southern Florida
Posts: 28,602
Bikes: https://www.theheadbadge.com
Liked 4,538 Times
in
2,143 Posts
#8
山馬鹿
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 1,407
Bikes: Nakagawa
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Geez, this guy really is an idiot.
I like how it says on his CV he works for the "pro-liberty movement" yet he writes trash like this.
I like how it says on his CV he works for the "pro-liberty movement" yet he writes trash like this.
__________________
Become King of the Square! https://kingofthesquares.com
Plan or Find your next ride on Sporra!
Become King of the Square! https://kingofthesquares.com
Plan or Find your next ride on Sporra!
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 68
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
#10
Domestic Domestique
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 1,742
Bikes: Brand New Old Catamount! Schwinn Homegrown, Specialized FSR, Salsa Vaya, Salsa Chile Con Crosso
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times
in
6 Posts
I don't understand this anti-cycling mentality. It's become an us-vs-them scenario and I'm not sure why. I just like to ride my bike. I like to get from point a to point b without the use of a motor vehicle. I like to blast down a road at 45 kph. Why shouldn't I be able to do those things efficiently and safely?
#11
genec
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: West Coast
Posts: 27,079
Bikes: custom built, sannino, beachbike, giant trance x2
Liked 4,532 Times
in
3,158 Posts
I don't understand this anti-cycling mentality. It's become an us-vs-them scenario and I'm not sure why. I just like to ride my bike. I like to get from point a to point b without the use of a motor vehicle. I like to blast down a road at 45 kph. Why shouldn't I be able to do those things efficiently and safely?
But then we have to contend with jerks in cars that think they own the road, and that we don't belong... kinda crushes that soaring spirit.
#12
Senior Member
Most of his argument is based on the reader feeling that bikes are toys and riding them is silly. If you don't believe that you'll think his essay is weird at best. I loathe this kind of argument.
#13
Senior Member
I don't think I know anybody that rides for the environment. If they mention it it comes after "stay in shape," "save money," and "I like it."
He was pretty impossible to deal with. He asserted, roughly, that riding was moralistic, and therefore evil. I tried to explain to him that he was moralizing while accusing people of moralizing, but that was lost on him.
#14
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: in bed with your mom
Posts: 13,696
Bikes: who cares?
Likes: 0
Liked 1 Time
in
1 Post
Huh, I was talking to a guy on NPR comments who had that attitude (bikes are a religion). I was pretty lost about where he was coming from. He was quite certain that people ride bikes to save the environment. I tried to assure him that people who do that quit and buy a Prius more often than not.
I don't think I know anybody that rides for the environment. If they mention it it comes after "stay in shape," "save money," and "I like it."
He was pretty impossible to deal with. He asserted, roughly, that riding was moralistic, and therefore evil. I tried to explain to him that he was moralizing while accusing people of moralizing, but that was lost on him.
I don't think I know anybody that rides for the environment. If they mention it it comes after "stay in shape," "save money," and "I like it."
He was pretty impossible to deal with. He asserted, roughly, that riding was moralistic, and therefore evil. I tried to explain to him that he was moralizing while accusing people of moralizing, but that was lost on him.
#15
Senior Member
A 2008 rant:
https://www.dowdmuska.com/2008columns/col040308.htm
https://www.dowdmuska.com/2008columns/col040308.htm
#16
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Bellingham, WA
Posts: 403
Bikes: Rivendell Atlantis, Kogswell P58, 1988 Pinarello, Rivendell Wilbury (my wife's bike)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I'm afraid pointing out bad behavior to other people doesn't tend to affect their behavior much, and this is true of motorists and cyclists. But the idea that motorists treat us badly because of bad cyclists is laughable. The worst of motorist behavior hasn't changed in the 30-odd years I've been riding, and when I started there were not nearly as many people out on bikes as there are now.
My town of Bellingham, Washington is quite bike friendly. I previously lived in the District of Columbia, Missouri, Colorado and Arkansas (where I grew up). So I'm used to cars passing too close or even swerving to make me veer off the road. I'm used to people honking and yelling stuff like "Get off the road!" Such things rarely happen here and now. People were pretty nice in Colorado too. I chuckle whenever I hear young cyclists in Bellingham complaining about motorists. I tell them they have no idea how good they have it. Pedaling the redneck back roads of Arkansas in the 80s while wearing spandex was much more of an adventure
#17
Then you are not paying attention. Fairly rare but far from unheard of.
#18
Arizona Dessert
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AZ
Posts: 15,029
Bikes: Cannondale SuperSix, Lemond Poprad. Retired: Jamis Sputnik, Centurion LeMans Fixed, Diamond Back ascent ex
Liked 2,169 Times
in
1,288 Posts
#19
Some guy with a bike
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: California
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
I think I'll stand by the point I was trying to make. Cars are thousands of times more dangerous than bicycles when they break the law. Two incidents of cyclists killing people is less than the number of people killed in half an hour by cars.
Last edited by serra; 06-10-10 at 10:47 AM. Reason: I actually did manage to find an instance from 2008
#20
Senior Member
I don't take this guy seriously. Whom is he going to influence?
But if I did, the best way to deal with conservative/libertarian critics of cycling is with conservative/libertarian arguments in favor of cycling. In case you hadn't noticed, there are plenty of conservatives and libertarians who love cycling. Why is that? Simply, cycling has broad appeal. Consequently, it's easy to find conservative and/or libertarian arguments to support it.
Some examples:
Protecting the travel rights of bicyclists protects civil liberties.
Preserving the right to travel by bicycle protects freedom of movement for a wider population than who motor.
Preserving the right to travel by bicycle increases the supply of labor who can reach their jobs, which is good for business.
Preserving the right to travel by bicycle increases the population of people who can reach commercial goods and services, which is good for the economy.
Protecting practical bicycle transportation improves the ability of low-income people to become employed and leave government assistance.
Protecting safe bicycle transportation can be done by enforcing the laws we already have.
Enforcing existing traffic laws well enough to reasonably protect bicyclists has the additional effect of improving safety for all road users.
And so forth.
The line of argument focuses on the cyclist exerting their own personal effort to travel (the pick-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps idea), be it to improve their standard of living, participate in the economy, improve their health, or protect the environment. The public costs of supporting this are less than the public costs of supporting other travel modes. It just makes good conservative sense to protect it.
But if I did, the best way to deal with conservative/libertarian critics of cycling is with conservative/libertarian arguments in favor of cycling. In case you hadn't noticed, there are plenty of conservatives and libertarians who love cycling. Why is that? Simply, cycling has broad appeal. Consequently, it's easy to find conservative and/or libertarian arguments to support it.
Some examples:
Protecting the travel rights of bicyclists protects civil liberties.
Preserving the right to travel by bicycle protects freedom of movement for a wider population than who motor.
Preserving the right to travel by bicycle increases the supply of labor who can reach their jobs, which is good for business.
Preserving the right to travel by bicycle increases the population of people who can reach commercial goods and services, which is good for the economy.
Protecting practical bicycle transportation improves the ability of low-income people to become employed and leave government assistance.
Protecting safe bicycle transportation can be done by enforcing the laws we already have.
Enforcing existing traffic laws well enough to reasonably protect bicyclists has the additional effect of improving safety for all road users.
And so forth.
The line of argument focuses on the cyclist exerting their own personal effort to travel (the pick-yourself-up-by-the-bootstraps idea), be it to improve their standard of living, participate in the economy, improve their health, or protect the environment. The public costs of supporting this are less than the public costs of supporting other travel modes. It just makes good conservative sense to protect it.
Last edited by sggoodri; 06-10-10 at 11:10 AM.
#21
Senior Member
Now you know otherwise: https://www.pnwlocalnews.com/south_ki.../91473374.html
An 83-year-old Renton woman out for a walk on the Cedar River Trail late Sunday afternoon died Monday morning of head injuries she suffered when hit by a bike rider, according to the Renton Police Department.
#22
Senior Member
I don't think I haven't heard of it from a lack of paying attention, but possibly from a lack of googling "killed by cyclist". The worst I have heard was a hip fracture when some moron was on the sidewalk and plowed into an elderly woman.
I think I'll stand by the point I was trying to make. Cars are thousands of times more dangerous than bicycles when they break the law. Two incidents of cyclists killing people is less than the number of people killed in half an hour by cars.
I think I'll stand by the point I was trying to make. Cars are thousands of times more dangerous than bicycles when they break the law. Two incidents of cyclists killing people is less than the number of people killed in half an hour by cars.
Incidentally, this provides excellent reason to avoid a fist fight. You could be the unlucky one that kills the other guy or the unlucky one killed. Even if both of you have no idea how to fight.
#23
Pedaled too far.
I don't understand this anti-cycling mentality. It's become an us-vs-them scenario and I'm not sure why. I just like to ride my bike. I like to get from point a to point b without the use of a motor vehicle. I like to blast down a road at 45 kph. Why shouldn't I be able to do those things efficiently and safely?
Since Ray La Hood proposed that bicycling should be considered transportation on an equal basis with automobiles we've become a "them" of the month.
Bicyclists, who don't have to pay all those terrible gas prices are now part of a big government plot to further intrude into their lives, and maybe (horrors!) get the motorist to stop driving. And any soldier in Iraq will tell you that if you stop you're dead. It makes no sense, I noted that the only cyclist he actually talked with worked at the CATO Institute.
I'd follow the money on this one.
__________________
"He who serves all, best serves himself" Jack London