bbbean 

Yes. I am. I walk.

If you want to distinguish between types of cyclists, there are lots of descriptive terms available. We can describe a mountain biker, a competitive cyclist, a bike racer, a bike commuter, a bike hobbyist, etc. We can use more loaded terms when we want to make the connotations explicit. We can talk about Freds, Lance wannabes, lycra louts, MAMILs, etc, and it is pretty clear what we mean.

But when we say cyclist, we are simply describing someone who uses a bicycle.There's a reason the dictionary definition is:
noun. /ˈsaɪklɪst/ /ˈsaɪklɪst/ ​a person who rides a bicycle.

bbbean 

I did, and it was a collection of unfounded assumptions, bias confirmation, teleological arguments, and straw men. If he wanted to make the argument that bikes are a useful tool for transportation, he could have done so without alienating the very people he needs for his argument to succeed. Consider how his video inspires semantic debate and division on a forum of people who should be natural allies.

seypat

Well, if that does happen to you, especially if you've ever felt the sting of the police........................................you've got to rehumanize yourself.

Flip Flop Rider

cyclist rides bikes and wears the kit

bike rider rides bikes but no kit

mstateglfr 

Yes- it followed the typical Not Just Bikes format.
- opens with topic
- gives background where he craps on London ON or wherever he grew up
- over dramatizes driving in a car
- rants about how unsafe/treacherous driving in Toronto and area was.
- compares trashy overpopulated and smoggy North American city life is when compared to small city Northern Europe.

This video then spends half the time ranting about how the narrator feels that everyone who doesnt ride a bike is critical of people who ride a bike.

To reiterate- I have never felt dehumanized for owning bikes, riding bikes, or being considered a cyclist.

bbbean 

If we're just making definitions up, why not say that only left handed riders under 5'9" are cyclists? The dictionary and common usage has a perfectly acceptable definition.

genejockey 

Never been buzzed? Never had some clown shout "Get off the road!"? Never had someone learn you ride a bike and tell you about how they saw some cyclist blow through a light in front of them? If you've never experienced those, well you've lived a blessed life.

I sometimes think that "dehumanized" is not the right descriptor, and perhaps "depersonalized" is more accurate, because it's not that they're denying your humanity. It's more that they're denying your individual personhood and seeing you only as "one of THEM".

Eric F 

What about a bike rider who wears a kilt?

prj71

I've never had this issue or know anyone that has. Maybe you need to move to a place that has nicer people.

genejockey 

One thing I find interesting in all this is that usually the people crapping on cyclists, bike riders, whatever you call us - generally the person doing it feels the need to define whatever the group they're crapping on as frivolous, somehow, especially as compared to themselves. There are several examples above, defining riders who wear cycling kit as "Lance Wannabes" or such, who think every ride is the Tour de France, as opposed to themselves, who ride a bike in street clothes. And in doing so they're doing exactly what the videographer is talking about - reducing individuals to members of a group they don't like.

Here's the thing - you don't know why the other person is on the road. Generally, people in cars seem to believe that whatever reason they're on the road is more important than whatever reason the rider is on the road. But, you know, apart from actual emergency vehicles, no law prioritizes any road user's reasons over anyone else's.

jon c. 

I agree that the semantic arguments are silly. But I do think they merely underscore the divisions that already exist. As this thread demonstrates, there is a lot of antipathy toward lycra clad road riders for reasons that aren't wholly clear to me. Although as one who wears lycra I don't really care.

But I don't see that there is or necessarily should be a natural alliance among all people who ride bikes. In what way would riders be allied? There aren't really goals all riders are working towards. Cycling advocates often seek change in infrastructure but there's no common vision as to what is best so alliances would be hard to forge. Changes in statutes might also be of interest to some, but generally only a small fraction of cyclists care.

So as pointless as such arguments may be, I don't really see how they're harming cycling. They certainly don't adversely impact me or my enjoyment of cycling.

genejockey 

I cannae gie ye morrre powerrr, Captain! She'll throw the chain!

prj71

Where in the world do you people live that others in society are crapping on cyclists?

soyabean

I have no idea.

I live in a metropolis that is one of the top 10 bicycle cities in the world.

Sucks to be those that get crapped on

Eric F 

The greater Los Angeles metropolitan area.

mstateglfr 

Your second paragraph covers it.
Those things you ask about in the first are not determiners of if I am humanized or dehumanized.
There are dicks in this world, but them being dicks doesnt mean I must feel dehumanized. The issue us them, not me.
We all play a role in how we perceive ourselves and our situation. If I dont view their actions as dehumanizing, then I am not dehumanized. Pretty basic comment, but its true.

I have been buzzed, but nothing actually dangerous, just frustrating. Its rare.
I may have been told to get off the road, but I wear buds when riding and so maybe I didnt hear and ignorance is bliss? For the records, in case any crazies show up and read this, I am joking and I can actually hear ambient noise even with music playing. Simma down, fundies.
I have had people complain to me about other cyclists. I dont know why that would ever dehumanize me. I get it, if 'we' are grouped, then there are no more individuals. Ok sure, but reality is that I am standing and talking to someone and they are just generalizing while complaining. Show me someone who doesnt ever generalize. I dont think generalizing necessarily results in dehumanizing.

Dehumanizing, to me, is a very strong accusation. It is something that should be reserved for genuine instances where the rights or suffering of someone is washed over and ignored. Unsafe working conditions and the employer refuses to acknowledge, much less fix the dangers?- yeah thats dehumanizing. Tuskeegee experiment?- yeah, thats dehumanizing.
Someone talking to me and saying 'cyclists ignore stop signs!'?- nope, that isnt dehumanizing.

genejockey 

That's nice, but dehumanizing isn't about how you feel about it. It's about the attitudes and actions of others.

mstateglfr 

But it is about how I feel about it because its a matter of perception.

Same for bullying, abuse, etc etc.
One person can see or experience an incident and say its dehumanizing. Another can see it and say its just a dick being a dick.
One person can see or experience an incident and say its bullying. Another can see it and say its passion.

The actions of others stay the same, but how each of us processes and perceives those actions is different.

veganbikes

No I understand that but you put "cyclists" in quotes (not the cool part) meaning not really cyclists. Yes text is very frustrating in that you cannot get emotion and intonation and all of that but there are certain visual clues that can sometimes key you in and in this case you used one. Granted yes it is possible to change an opinion rather quickly I didn't think that had maybe fully happened here.

Being cool doesn't always mean positive or good as well not that you were using it in a negative way, I don't think you were, but it is important to point out. Though yes cool is generally more positive and if we go by the person who birthed the Cool, Miles Davis, he was certainly cool but I don't think he ever rode a bicycle or at least nothing of note.

At least in my area mostly just normal cyclists with no need to qualify them. Occasional a-holes but they don't really stand out that disproportionately. I do see a few here and there but more often than not I just see normal cyclists just riding their bicycles. Sucks you see more of the bad ones or the ones you see clouds your vision.

Eric F 

I think it's pretty typical for people to notice the a-holes, rather than the ones who are behaving properly. This is how negative stereotypes develop.

zandoval 

Ridding for no reason at all!

Cleaned and tuned my bike.
Got those wheels trued and balanced
Chain and derailleurs tracking just perfect
Bars relaxed with new tape

Going on a long down and spinning
Teeth trying to collect stray bugs
Pulling on my cages

Yep... I must be a Cyclist...

livedarklions

Probably because they aren't "a long, narrow rug or strip of carpet, especially for a hall or stairway"..

Sorry, this conversation always breaks don the same way, with people insisting their use of the word is the "common" understanding, when it's anything but. "Part of their identity" is too vague to mean anything. If say "I nearly hit a runner in the park", I am saying absolutely nothing about their level of commitment to running, and that's not exactly an uncommon usage.

seypat

People see what they want to see. Take those Pearl Izumi pop up ads that are on the screen. What do you see? Cyclists, people riding their bikes or both? Are all of the ads positve, or do some irritate you? Some of them are irritating to me. I don't exactly know why. I think it's because some of them are crossing into Rapha advertising territory. Is that even a bad thing?

livedarklions

New Hampshire. I've literally had drivers deliberately go out of their way to attack me with their vehicles. Also, you name it, I've had it yelled at me. I found that a bit crappy.

seypat

Most anywhere in the south you will encounter agressive behaviour. Bubba's gonna bubba if he has the chance. Roll coal, close passes, etc. Whatever it takes to get those pesky cyclists off the road