Go Back  Bike Forums > Bike Forums > Living Car Free
Reload this Page >

Do you want to be labeled a "Cyclist" by others?

Notices
Living Car Free Do you live car free or car light? Do you prefer to use alternative transportation (bicycles, walking, other human-powered or public transportation) for everyday activities whenever possible? Discuss your lifestyle here.

Do you want to be labeled a "Cyclist" by others?

Old 11-19-13, 03:07 PM
  #76  
plustax
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 222

Bikes: 90's Campione,90's trek multitrack,2005 trek 3700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
to be a proper car free/car lite cyclist or even a proper "Cyclist" requires being a member of the hug the whales/motorist bashing club.

What do you have against whales?
plustax is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 04:04 PM
  #77  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by I-Like-To-Bike
Perhaps because some posters and cyclists do not wish to be associated with a construct that assumes that to be a proper car free/car lite cyclist or even a proper "Cyclist" requires being a member of the hug the whales/motorist bashing club.

Posters are not defending cars so much as fending off some of the arrogance of posters who seem to want to apply a car free=car hate loyalty oath to other posters or people identified as "Cyclists". Witness the recent exchange on this thread.

Perhaps you should consider why Machka (or any other poster) has to provide her bona fides as a car hater to keep from being badgered.
I do agree with you, in essence. Maybe my point was a little more subtle than what was conveyed by my clumsy words. I simply don't think cars are in need of defense. I don't think it should be shocking to you that most people who bother with a carfree forum are "anti-car" to a greater or lesser degree. I don't think that holding "anti-car" sentiments is more arrogant than holding "pro-car" sentiments.

That said, I also don't think that Machka's sincerity should be questioned. Or yours. I don't think people should have to be carfree or even carlight in order to post here. (I do think that posters should have a genuine interest in the topic of the forum--just like I would expect only people who are interested in mountain biking to post on the MTB subforum, whether or not they have ever actually ridden a bike off pavement.)

Personally, I was bothered by Ekdog's comment to Machka. I wish he hadn't said it, and I wish he would apologize to her. But that's between them. I probably shouldn't say anything, but I do want to support Machka.

Although I disagree with her much of the time, I truly value Machka's contributions to this forum. I also recognize that she has done much more for cycling in her career than I will ever do. And we do need dissent and diversity, or all we have is an echo chamber.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 04:24 PM
  #78  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Rowan
I thought it would have been self-explanatory -- of course there is an interest, otherwise, Machka and I wouldn't be here discussing these issues. What she and I are bringing to the conversations is a degree of balance and reality and a somewhat broader view of the world than some who post here.

Just to be quite clear, there is no special membership requirement to participate in this forum. There is no membership fee, no vows against the motor car, and no initiation rites. Not even a special little avatar to go against the posters' names. We are free to post our (reasonable) comments and observations, many of which have been based on many years of not owning a motor vehicle.
Ok, I assume we are back on topic, and you won't take my response personally!

Why do you think that a pro-car stance is balanced and broader? Is that not an arrogant attitude? IMO, recognizing the limitations and destructive nature of cars is at least "deep" if not broad.

My stance is future oriented--based on an understanding that private cars are unsustainable in a world that is hotter and more crowded (apologies to Mr. Friedman), with dwindling supplies of cheap energy. Your stance is based on keeping things (i.e., car dominant structure) the same, even as conditions change. Believing that cars will survive much longer is like telling the dinosaurs to hold their breath, because everything will be fine in a little while. You can't provide any reasonable backup for your claim that cars are just fine, in light of the changing circumstances that our species is confronting in the 21st century.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 04:40 PM
  #79  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex
Posts: 5,058

Bikes: 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1470 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 45 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by Alekhine
I've heard the same complaint from vegetarians I know who absolutely mind their own business about it and act in the same way I'm talking about, but get all sorts of arguments, assumptions, and baloney thrown at them the moment it's discovered that they are vegetarian. C'est la vie!
And yet you knew they were vegetarians and have called them such? They may not advocate for the Animal free diet but they can be put in that box and accept being called vegetarian. Just as a cyclists should be able to live with being a cyclists. Somehow the difference is always noticed. If it is not noticed then the person isn't "living" it or as they say walking the walk.

If someone has the desire to post on Bicycling forum, and then move into an even smaller circle and join a car free/car light thread, it seems counter productive to complain that someone just might consider them a Cyclists. To a degree I have to think someone that has maneuvered themselves into such a company of cyclists and then complains that they are identified as a cyclist by people than know them need to read the words of the "Bard" more closely, "The Lady doth protest too much."
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 05:04 PM
  #80  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155
And yet you knew they were vegetarians and have called them such? They may not advocate for the Animal free diet but they can be put in that box and accept being called vegetarian. Just as a cyclists should be able to live with being a cyclists. Somehow the difference is always noticed. If it is not noticed then the person isn't "living" it or as they say walking the walk.

If someone has the desire to post on Bicycling forum, and then move into an even smaller circle and join a car free/car light thread, it seems counter productive to complain that someone just might consider them a Cyclists. To a degree I have to think someone that has maneuvered themselves into such a company of cyclists and then complains that they are identified as a cyclist by people than know them need to read the words of the "Bard" more closely, "The Lady doth protest too much."
It surprises me too that people would take exception to being called cyclists or even see it as a value judgment. But I guess it doth happen.

Now, it would be different if we were talking about "carfree" as a label. My experience is that if you are carfree and a middle class person living outside New York, you have some explaining to do. I have been asked many times why I don't own a car, but never asked why I ride a bike. Hell, even on this carfree forum my motives are questioned, and people who have never met me assume that I am arrogant, hypocritical, and smug.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 05:35 PM
  #81  
Alekhine
1. e4 Nf6
 
Alekhine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 78º44`W, 42º46`N
Posts: 872

Bikes: Mercian KoM with Rohloff, Bike Friday NWT, Pogliaghi Italcorse (1979)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155
And yet you knew they were vegetarians and have called them such?
Of course. Why wouldn't I? They are friends. You learn all sorts of things about friends, and not always from their own mouths.

I think you're confusing the nature of the OP's question with what I wrote above in the vegetarian bit though, which had nothing to do with "labels." As far as I know, none of them object to being called vegetarian, and being called that is not the issue in the bit you quoted from me. It's more related to my discussion with Roody about voicing advocacy, telling other people how to live vs. answering them about it dispassionately, etc.

Anyway, it's not some secret that they keep; they merely don't go around blasting the meat-eating world with their opinions about eating meat or telling people what to do, etc. Very chill and under the radar about it. If anything they are objecting to that sort of thing being done to them: The blistering arguments and taunts that come their way as soon as some opinionated and presumptuous stranger learns they don't eat meat, and feels that an argument about it is suddenly warranted or even desired ipso facto.

As for your second para, I'm not sure what it has to do with anything I wrote in this thread since I never once complained about being called a cyclist, so I'm going to ignore it entirely and assume you're directing it at someone else. :shrug:

Last edited by Alekhine; 11-19-13 at 05:47 PM. Reason: clarification
Alekhine is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 06:04 PM
  #82  
Alekhine
1. e4 Nf6
 
Alekhine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 78º44`W, 42º46`N
Posts: 872

Bikes: Mercian KoM with Rohloff, Bike Friday NWT, Pogliaghi Italcorse (1979)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Roody
It surprises me too that people would take exception to being called cyclists or even see it as a value judgment. But I guess it doth happen.
I think there are degrees to this. In my case "taking exception" is an okay way to put it, I suppose. It's more a preference. I don't really think of myself as a "cyclist," so - while it doesn't bother me at all - I would prefer not to be introduced as one or defined that way entirely by someone else. There are things that are much more germane to my lot in life, and better descriptors of my primary interests. If it happens, I'm not going to fuss over it, but I find it a little silly, as aside from some touring it's merely a mode of transportation and an interest.
Alekhine is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 06:36 PM
  #83  
Mobile 155
Senior Member
 
Mobile 155's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Dallas Fort Worth Metroplex
Posts: 5,058

Bikes: 2013 Haro FL Comp 29er MTB.

Mentioned: 9 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1470 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 45 Times in 35 Posts
Originally Posted by Alekhine
Of course. Why wouldn't I? They are friends. You learn all sorts of things about friends, and not always from their own mouths.

I think you're confusing the nature of the OP's question with what I wrote above in the vegetarian bit though, which had nothing to do with "labels." As far as I know, none of them object to being called vegetarian, and being called that is not the issue in the bit you quoted from me. It's more related to my discussion with Roody about voicing advocacy, telling other people how to live vs. answering them about it dispassionately, etc.

Anyway, it's not some secret that they keep; they merely don't go around blasting the meat-eating world with their opinions about eating meat or telling people what to do, etc. Very chill and under the radar about it. If anything they are objecting to that sort of thing being done to them: The blistering arguments and taunts that come their way as soon as some opinionated and presumptuous stranger learns they don't eat meat, and feels that an argument about it is suddenly warranted or even desired ipso facto.

As for your second para, I'm not sure what it has to do with anything I wrote in this thread since I never once complained about being called a cyclist, so I'm going to ignore it entirely and assume you're directing it at someone else. :shrug:
The second part was addressed to the main post by the OP. Keeping track of many conversations can be daunting but that is what started the whole point. Just showing up in a Bicycle forum and then moving to a Car free/Car light thread should give a clue to anyone that knows a person what they do. If I see you with a tennis racquet every day or every other day and you are going to play tennis at the college or local court it is fair to assume you are a tennis player. It is also easy to bundle you with others that play tennis. It would be even easier to put you in that box if you also spent time posting in a tennis forum. All those things show what a person values. But the post in the forums it is a form of advocating for the sport of Tennis even if it is simply to give encouragement to others that do more face to face advocating for the sport. You can advocate for something even if you aren't trying to convince someone to play tennis. It is the same with cycling. If you cycle, and your friends know you cycle and then you post in a cycling forum, even a special interest sub forum you are indeed advocating for the health of that activity. Unless you can honestly say that activity means nothing at all to you coming to such places identifies someone because of who they associate with.

We can and do presume a lot by what people do and say. Pretending it shouldn't happen doesn't change a thing because people are people. we see patterns in everything and we label everything. We don't even have to work hard at placing these labels because most often the people being labeled do most of the work.

I don't mind being called a cyclists because it rates rather high on my list of things I love to do. We can say all we want that people shouldn't be put in a box or that we don't do that ourselves and yet I am not sure anyone can make that claim 100 percent of the time.

I am just saying that if you are posting in a bicycle forum and you love to cycle you have more or less advocated an activity a goodly portion of our society doesn't do. Active or passive you are still on the other side of the line from non cyclists. And as we have learned over the years putting Press on your car windshield no longer keeps people from shooting at you in a modern war. Same thing happens with someone who hangs out in a small corner of a cycling forum. Non cyclist might not know but the people in the forum will more than likely receive encouragement from the participation. That is a form of advocacy.
Mobile 155 is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 07:29 PM
  #84  
Alekhine
1. e4 Nf6
 
Alekhine's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: 78º44`W, 42º46`N
Posts: 872

Bikes: Mercian KoM with Rohloff, Bike Friday NWT, Pogliaghi Italcorse (1979)

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Mobile 155
The second part was addressed to the main post by the OP. Keeping track of many conversations can be daunting but that is what started the whole point. Just showing up in a Bicycle forum and then moving to a Car free/Car light thread should give a clue to anyone that knows a person what they do. If I see you with a tennis racquet every day or every other day and you are going to play tennis at the college or local court it is fair to assume you are a tennis player. It is also easy to bundle you with others that play tennis. It would be even easier to put you in that box if you also spent time posting in a tennis forum. All those things show what a person values. But the post in the forums it is a form of advocating for the sport of Tennis even if it is simply to give encouragement to others that do more face to face advocating for the sport. You can advocate for something even if you aren't trying to convince someone to play tennis. It is the same with cycling. If you cycle, and your friends know you cycle and then you post in a cycling forum, even a special interest sub forum you are indeed advocating for the health of that activity. Unless you can honestly say that activity means nothing at all to you coming to such places identifies someone because of who they associate with.

We can and do presume a lot by what people do and say. Pretending it shouldn't happen doesn't change a thing because people are people. we see patterns in everything and we label everything. We don't even have to work hard at placing these labels because most often the people being labeled do most of the work.

I don't mind being called a cyclists because it rates rather high on my list of things I love to do. We can say all we want that people shouldn't be put in a box or that we don't do that ourselves and yet I am not sure anyone can make that claim 100 percent of the time.

I am just saying that if you are posting in a bicycle forum and you love to cycle you have more or less advocated an activity a goodly portion of our society doesn't do. Active or passive you are still on the other side of the line from non cyclists. And as we have learned over the years putting Press on your car windshield no longer keeps people from shooting at you in a modern war. Same thing happens with someone who hangs out in a small corner of a cycling forum. Non cyclist might not know but the people in the forum will more than likely receive encouragement from the participation. That is a form of advocacy.
A worthy post, and no worries about keeping the conversational topics in order. Roody and I were on a tangent there and it's easy to mistake one topic for another when that happens.

You did, though, touch upon what I feel about advocacy when I said to Roody earlier "I suppose advocacy is something we might see differently." I'm the ne plus ultra example of the passive advocate. I ride, and I tour/bike camp in summers, and I shop by bike. If it sets an example for others or creates an interest in their minds that they can do it too, fine, but again - I claim no responsibility for what others deduce from seeing me do it or knowing that it's my primary mode of transport, or even after having a long discussion with me about it. This includes creation of interest as much as total opposition. It's up to others to decide for themselves what it all means or if it's interesting or feasible or if I'm a total nutball. This would make me perhaps the most passive kind of advocate there is. I absolutely refuse to pitch my tastes to others these days, though I don't feel any reason to shy from letting them be known, and that's a definitive mode of my personality. Mind you, I used to sometimes when I was younger.

Posting here in this forum I don't very much consider advocacy at all as much as communing with fellows over a common interest. "Preaching to the choir," I suppose is the best way to put it, but even then I try not to preach in particular.

Cycling is very much a tertiary concern for me, however, even if I do post here sometimes. I really do consider it a mode of transport, and I have some interest in cycling history and especially classic bicycles, but I don't very much talk to others about it except here. It would be a boring conversation anyway, since the people I associate with in the real world neither care nor know much about the subject. The title/label "cyclist" is a really really minor concern for me though, almost not very much worthy of saying anything more than I already have about it. Again, as a descriptor of what I am, it would be one of the lesser ones, and thankfully, none of my friends has ever introduced me specifically as a cyclist that I can remember, so it's a hypothetical issue, really.
Alekhine is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 07:43 PM
  #85  
Rowan
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 16,771
Mentioned: 125 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1454 Post(s)
Liked 85 Times in 40 Posts
Originally Posted by Roody
Ok, I assume we are back on topic, and you won't take my response personally!

Why do you think that a pro-car stance is balanced and broader? Is that not an arrogant attitude? IMO, recognizing the limitations and destructive nature of cars is at least "deep" if not broad.

My stance is future oriented--based on an understanding that private cars are unsustainable in a world that is hotter and more crowded (apologies to Mr. Friedman), with dwindling supplies of cheap energy. Your stance is based on keeping things (i.e., car dominant structure) the same, even as conditions change. Believing that cars will survive much longer is like telling the dinosaurs to hold their breath, because everything will be fine in a little while. You can't provide any reasonable backup for your claim that cars are just fine, in light of the changing circumstances that our species is confronting in the 21st century.
Actually I don't think you have a single clue what my stance is, because you and Ekdog wash over much of what I and Machka have said in the past. To the point where Machka and I were both hounded off this forum several years ago by the very attitude that continues to bubble to the surface here in this thread, even with the use of words such as "arrogant" in your post here.

I take a different view to you about personal transport into the future. The car will not disappear despite how much you, Ekdog and others wish it would. It will morph into a means of transport that is not reliant on carbon-based energy. Nuclear power is already being promulgated by some in the environmental movement as a necessary evil, others look to solar energy. My feeling is that hydrogen-based power is what will happen into the future, but I could be wrong on that score.

How transportational and utility cycling integrates into that is another matter. And that's where liveability comes into it. And being somewhat more responsible in going about our daily lives. Some of that was discussed in the recent Sustainability Expo thread, and in the How Simply Do You Live thread until we were run off the forums by people who couldn't get that we were doing what they preached.

I also cannot help it if you and others want to apply your lowly view of the place where you live to everywhere else in the world. It simply isn't like that where I live and have lived, and in many cases visited. That is why I say there are very narrow views expressed in this forum because the people expressing them don't have a clue how others in the world live.

We've also been over this in other threads, but my motivation for being a cyclist or a bicycle rider had almost nothing to do with environmental factors, but a lot to do with fitness, both physical and financial, and to satisfy my curiosity through exploring. You and Ekdog conveniently forget I was free of car ownership for over a decade and that currently we are running car-lighter.

I have as much to contribute to any discussion here as anyone else. And to suggest otherwise is insulting.
Rowan is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 11:30 PM
  #86  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,870

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3939 Post(s)
Liked 112 Times in 87 Posts
Originally Posted by Rowan
Actually I don't think you have a single clue what my stance is, because you and Ekdog wash over much of what I and Machka have said in the past. To the point where Machka and I were both hounded off this forum several years ago by the very attitude that continues to bubble to the surface here in this thread, even with the use of words such as "arrogant" in your post here.

I take a different view to you about personal transport into the future. The car will not disappear despite how much you, Ekdog and others wish it would. It will morph into a means of transport that is not reliant on carbon-based energy. Nuclear power is already being promulgated by some in the environmental movement as a necessary evil, others look to solar energy. My feeling is that hydrogen-based power is what will happen into the future, but I could be wrong on that score.

How transportational and utility cycling integrates into that is another matter. And that's where liveability comes into it. And being somewhat more responsible in going about our daily lives. Some of that was discussed in the recent Sustainability Expo thread, and in the How Simply Do You Live thread until we were run off the forums by people who couldn't get that we were doing what they preached.

I also cannot help it if you and others want to apply your lowly view of the place where you live to everywhere else in the world. It simply isn't like that where I live and have lived, and in many cases visited. That is why I say there are very narrow views expressed in this forum because the people expressing them don't have a clue how others in the world live.

We've also been over this in other threads, but my motivation for being a cyclist or a bicycle rider had almost nothing to do with environmental factors, but a lot to do with fitness, both physical and financial, and to satisfy my curiosity through exploring. You and Ekdog conveniently forget I was free of car ownership for over a decade and that currently we are running car-lighter.

I have as much to contribute to any discussion here as anyone else. And to suggest otherwise is insulting.
To me you come across as very dismissive of any concerns people express about the destructive nature of the automobile culture. Hydrogen power (or rather, whatever energy source is used to to provide the hydrogen, as hydrogen is not a primary source of power) is not going to solve automobile-generated problems like land wastage for freeways and sprawl, MVA deaths, tire disposal, road congestion, population health challenges related to driving or sitting in gridlock and so on. Your personal sustainable lifestyle, admirable though it is and probably better than mine, is not going to be enough, because it is going to take global shifts in policies and population attitudes to turn the world's economies and cultures into sustainable ones. Yet people who are advocating for that kind of shift seem to attract your scorn.

I'm not trying to "run you off the forum". I just disagree with you on some key issues.

Last edited by cooker; 11-19-13 at 11:34 PM.
cooker is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 11:39 PM
  #87  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Rowan
[one paragraph of personal comments deleted]

I take a different view to you about personal transport into the future. The car will not disappear despite how much you, Ekdog and others wish it would. It will morph into a means of transport that is not reliant on carbon-based energy. Nuclear power is already being promulgated by some in the environmental movement as a necessary evil, others look to solar energy. My feeling is that hydrogen-based power is what will happen into the future, but I could be wrong on that score.

How transportational and utility cycling integrates into that is another matter. And that's where liveability comes into it. And being somewhat more responsible in going about our daily lives. Some of that was discussed in the recent Sustainability Expo thread, and in the How Simply Do You Live thread until we were run off the forums by people who couldn't get that we were doing what they preached.

[three paragraphs of personal insults deleted]
I don't wish the car would disappear--they're pretty cool in a lot of ways. I just believe they must disappear and will disappear. It's good to be prepared for this, both as individuals and communities.

There's no good reason to think that a cleaner energy source will arise to replace internal combustion in the near term. Hydrogen is not that far along in the development process, and faces some big infrastructure issues. Plug-in electrics are most likely, but as long as the world's two largest economies are sitting on mountains of cheap coal, electric cars won't help much. Nuclear isn't looking very good after Fukushima. Overall, as world population urbanizes, personal motor transport of any sort is becoming less and less popular. Cars and big cities have never been a good mix.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 11-19-13, 11:41 PM
  #88  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by cooker
To me you come across as very dismissive of any concerns people express about the destructive nature of the automobile culture. Hydrogen power (or rather, whatever energy source is used to to provide the hydrogen, as hydrogen is not a primary source of power) is not going to solve automobile-generated problems like land wastage for freeways and sprawl, MVA deaths, tire disposal, road congestion, population health challenges related to driving or sitting in gridlock and so on. Your personal sustainable lifestyle, admirable though it is and probably better than mine, is not going to be enough, because it is going to take global shifts in policies and population attitudes to turn the world's economies and cultures into sustainable ones. Yet people who are advocating for that kind of shift seem to attract your scorn.

I'm not trying to "run you off the forum". I just disagree with you on some key issues.
Ditto.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 12:59 AM
  #89  
Siu Blue Wind
Homey
 
Siu Blue Wind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 13,519
Mentioned: 56 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2424 Post(s)
Liked 1,392 Times in 891 Posts
Okay I did a little bit of clean up here. I don't appreciate the badgering and accusations of other members here. If one member has a personal beef with someone, instead of calling them out in a public forum so that it could look like there is an attempt to make a fool out of them, talk to them in an adult manner via pm.

And if someone answers a question, do not keep on them, hoping that the answer in your head will come out of their posts.

Just a reminder here of the forum guidelines that EVERYONE here agreed to when signing up.


Diversity
We’re a community of cyclists, from different backgrounds and with different perspectives on sports and life. At all times, we expect our members to respect that.
Intelligence
We’re a community with quality standards and expect our members will make a sincere effort to contribute their thoughts on interesting subjects in a meaningful and respectful manner. Posting messages and otherwise interacting on BikeForums is completely optional; many members often prefer to just read what others have to say. But if you do post, we expect that you’ll be respectful of the time of others by posting meaningfully.
Respectfulness
We expect our member to show respect for others. Respecting their person, their views, their time and their opinions, and their belief systems ... even if you disagree with them.
__________________
Originally Posted by making
Please dont outsmart the censor. That is a very expensive censor and every time one of you guys outsmart it it makes someone at the home office feel bad. We dont wanna do that. So dont cleverly disguise bad words.

Last edited by Siu Blue Wind; 11-20-13 at 01:03 AM.
Siu Blue Wind is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 01:29 AM
  #90  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 52,152

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3203 Post(s)
Liked 595 Times in 329 Posts
Originally Posted by Roody
Ok, I assume we are back on topic ...

Why do you think that a pro-car stance is balanced and broader? ...
The topic of this thread is "Do you want to be labeled a "Cyclist" by others?"

The answer is Yes.

And being labelled a "Cyclist" by others has nothing to do with owning a car, not owning a car, being pro-car, being anti-car, or anything whatsoever to do with cars. It has nothing to do with my choice in clothing, where I live, where I work, how long I wear my hair, how many lights I turn on during the evening, or the fact that I hate mushroom and love chocolate.

Being a "Cyclist" has everything to do with riding bicycles.

Last edited by Machka; 11-20-13 at 01:34 AM.
Machka is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 02:12 AM
  #91  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by Machka
The topic of this thread is "Do you want to be labeled a "Cyclist" by others?"

The answer is Yes.

And being labelled a "Cyclist" by others has nothing to do with owning a car, not owning a car, being pro-car, beings wasn't anti-car, or anything whatsoever to do with cars. It has nothing to do with my choice in clothing, where I live, where I work, how long I wear my hair, how many lights I turn on during the evening, or the fact that I hate mushroom and love chocolate.

Being a "Cyclist" has everything to do with riding bicycles.
I'm sorry I was off topic, as were many others. In fact, IIRC I was responding to remarks made by you and Rowan, so, like any Internet forum, we were all pretty much off topic by post # 50 or 60.

I never much got the topic of this thread in the first place. I never thought of "cyclist" being a stigmatizing label. I always thought of it as something to aspire to. Now I know that to some people it's an insult to be called a cyclist.
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 03:45 AM
  #92  
Ekdog
Senior Member
 
Ekdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seville, Spain
Posts: 4,403

Bikes: Brompton M6R, mountain bikes, Circe Omnis+ tandem

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
'Cyclist' is too broad a term. If you google it, most of the images that come up will be of lycra-clad yuppies on expensive road bikes, like the cyclist in the photo at the bottom of this post. I often encounter those haughty folk when I'm out riding at the weekend. I used to wave to them or say hello, and they'd almost never respond, so I stopped. They tend to look down their noses at the likes of me. During the week they drive everywhere. They don't give a sh*t about the environment, they support a different political party and as a group they've opposed every improvement to the cycling infrastructure in my area.

If I'm going to be called a cyclist, I'd rather that noun were modified with 'car-free' or 'transport'. I'm also proud to be called a cycling advocate, an ecologist or an environmentalist. As it is the wont of certain visitors to this subforum to enclose these terms in scare quotes, I like the words still more!

I won't inject politics into this discussion, but I was brought up by my grandparents, who lived through the Great Depression, and I know that in this day and age we're supposed to mince words, to be conciliatory, to avoid terms that our adversaries might not cotton to and to allow them to decide on the 'correct' terminology. Sorry, but I'm not going to do that. I know the fossil fuel advocates and the climate deniers hate me. In the words of a great man:

​I WELCOME THEIR HATRED!
Attached Images
File Type: jpeg
CyclistMale300wide.jpeg (31.4 KB, 17 views)

Last edited by Ekdog; 11-20-13 at 06:46 AM.
Ekdog is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 06:25 AM
  #93  
Machka 
In Real Life
 
Machka's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Down under down under
Posts: 52,152

Bikes: Lots

Mentioned: 141 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3203 Post(s)
Liked 595 Times in 329 Posts
Originally Posted by Roody
That said, I also don't think that Machka's sincerity should be questioned. Or yours. I don't think people should have to be carfree or even carlight in order to post here. (I do think that posters should have a genuine interest in the topic of the forum--just like I would expect only people who are interested in mountain biking to post on the MTB subforum, whether or not they have ever actually ridden a bike off pavement.)

Personally, I was bothered by Ekdog's comment to Machka. I wish he hadn't said it, and I wish he would apologize to her. But that's between them. I probably shouldn't say anything, but I do want to support Machka.

Although I disagree with her much of the time, I truly value Machka's contributions to this forum. I also recognize that she has done much more for cycling in her career than I will ever do. And we do need dissent and diversity, or all we have is an echo chamber.
Thanks Roody.
Machka is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 07:16 AM
  #94  
FenderTL5
Senior Member
 
FenderTL5's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Nashville TN
Posts: 794

Bikes: Trek 7.3FX, Diamondback Edgewood hybrid, KHS Montana

Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
I came across this article/blog yesterday on this subject: ..instead of cyclist?
It seems some bicycle oriented publications are beginning to reduce the usage because it carries a negative connotation.
FenderTL5 is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 07:49 AM
  #95  
plustax
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 222

Bikes: 90's Campione,90's trek multitrack,2005 trek 3700

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Can drivers not looking at their smartphones make bicycling safe?

It's absurd. It's not the N word or C word. It's cyclist. There are real issues in common language to get worked up about (the masculinization e.g. talking about a female pet and saying he). Do you people who dislike being called cyclists really not have bigger problems?

I envy you if so.

Last edited by plustax; 11-20-13 at 07:49 AM. Reason: poop on a fork.
plustax is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 08:04 AM
  #96  
surreal
Senior Member
 
surreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by Roody

I never much got the topic of this thread in the first place. I never thought of "cyclist" being a stigmatizing label. I always thought of it as something to aspire to. Now I know that to some people it's an insult to be called a cyclist.
I think that alot of a term's impact as an insult is tied up in the intentions of the person applying the term. If I introduce you as a cyclist to a group of other cyclist, or to a group of eco-minded ppl, or even to just a bunch of nice ppl, and I'm doing so to inform them about you, and maybe spark a conversation, then there's no insult-- or, at least, none intended. One would need to be pretty thin-skinned to see it as one.

OTOH, if we're at a party where there's a bunch of folks who tend to make jokes about tree-huggers, and who think that ppl on bikes are "losers" who need to stay off the street and go buy a truck and whatnot, and I introduce you as a cyclist, with something akin to sarcasm dripping off my voice, in hopes of sparking an argument about how annoying ppl on bikes are, well--- yeah, that's insulting. The term "cyclist" doesn't become an insult, but the intention behind using it certainly is.

Personally, I'll gladly go to the mat with these unevolved hominids b/c I've learned a few tricks that help me "win" the argument against them. (I put "win" in quotes b/c I fully realize that, even if I successfully shut them up and make them concede a bit, they'll never give up their Ram Hemi and they'll never stop harassing cyclists when they're feeling anxious on the road.) Typically, if you paint a picture of the cyclist-- especially the transportation cyclist-- as a portrait of a rugged individual celebrating his/her freedom by riding (ie, doing what s/he loves to do), they cave. 9 out of 10 of them do. And, if you get that rare atavistic auto-nazi who tries to roar down the ppl's right to bike freely, you can generally count on the other folks to get on his case for it.

So, yeah, that's how I handle the full-size pickup guys. And the Harley guys. I haven't found anything that works on the European Sports Sedan crowd, though. Does anyone have any pointers?
surreal is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 08:21 AM
  #97  
surreal
Senior Member
 
surreal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,084
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 5 Times in 4 Posts
Originally Posted by FenderTL5
I came across this article/blog yesterday on this subject: ..instead of cyclist?
It seems some bicycle oriented publications are beginning to reduce the usage because it carries a negative connotation.
Thanks for posting this. While I despised the article, I sincerely wanna thank you for posting it, as it is entirely relevant to this convo. I read the article, and I found the concept behind it interesting. The article itself is lamentably bad, and I think this whole "mission" to the kinds of ppl who get nervous when they hear the term "cyclist" seems misguided, but the trend is taking off a lot on the internet and in print publications. So, maybe they're on to something?

But, to this day, my gag reflex kicks in every time I see a picture of ppl trying to look cute on bikes. If some folks are buying into cycling (oops, i mean "bike-riding") b/c of it, then I can swallow my vomit and live with it. If it's all in vain, however, I surely wish they would stop... ASAP
surreal is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 08:23 AM
  #98  
Ekdog
Senior Member
 
Ekdog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Seville, Spain
Posts: 4,403

Bikes: Brompton M6R, mountain bikes, Circe Omnis+ tandem

Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 146 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 6 Times in 5 Posts
Originally Posted by FenderTL5
I came across this article/blog yesterday on this subject: ..instead of cyclist?
It seems some bicycle oriented publications are beginning to reduce the usage because it carries a negative connotation.
I like 'people on bikes' because it reminds drivers that we're human. Cyclist = lycra lout in the minds of many.
Ekdog is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 08:29 AM
  #99  
cooker
Prefers Cicero
 
cooker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 12,870

Bikes: 1984 Trek 520; 2007 Bike Friday NWT; misc others

Mentioned: 86 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3939 Post(s)
Liked 112 Times in 87 Posts
Originally Posted by Machka
And being labelled a "Cyclist" by others has nothing to do with owning a car, not owning a car, being pro-car, being anti-car, or anything whatsoever to do with cars. It has nothing to do with my choice in clothing, where I live, where I work, how long I wear my hair, how many lights I turn on during the evening, or the fact that I hate mushroom and love chocolate.

Being a "Cyclist" has everything to do with riding bicycles.
JoeyBike wasn't concerned about whether he is or is not a cyclist - he was uncomfortable about being introduced as a cyclist. Words (or labels, rather) come with "baggage" - all kinds of implications and suppositions and assumptions (maybe those last two are the same thing) that various people associate with them. The very fact that JoeyBike is ambivalent about the label is because he's wary of all those other linked attributes being attached to him. Plus we all have a million attributes - parent, teacher, car owner, office temp, guitar player, blonde, and on and on and we don't view all of them as key to our identity, or want to be introduced as that type of person: "This is John - he's a finicky eater. John, meet Mary, she's a nail-biter." We'd prefer to be introduced with a label we see as key to our identity and hopefully one with a positive vibe. That leads us in this thread to a wider discussion or what it means not just to be a cyclist in plain fact, as presumably we all are, but to be labeled as a cyclist (thread title) as if that is the key to our identity.

Last edited by cooker; 11-20-13 at 10:57 AM.
cooker is offline  
Old 11-20-13, 12:34 PM
  #100  
Roody
Sophomoric Member
 
Roody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Dancing in Lansing
Posts: 24,221
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 711 Post(s)
Liked 13 Times in 13 Posts
Originally Posted by FenderTL5
I came across this article/blog yesterday on this subject: ..instead of cyclist?
It seems some bicycle oriented publications are beginning to reduce the usage because it carries a negative connotation.
Good find!

I say again: Who knew? I thought cyclist was a synonym for person on bike. For a while, I was labeling myself as an everyday cyclist, based on somebody who rides a bike every day or for everyday purposes, but that never really caught on. Now I usually use transportation cyclist, but that term seems either redundant or too limiting, depending on how you think about it. I often say rider, both because it seems more romantic, and it puts us on a par with drivers. But professional cyclists call themselves riders, so it's probably an equally objectionable term to those who object to cyclist.

Let me describe a typical day of my bike activities: do a fast 10 miles on a rural highway (fitness), ride slowly along a river on the MUP (recreation), take my son and grandson out for ice cream (family fun), impromptu race with random teenager on a BMX (competition), getting groceries (utility), and riding to work (commuter). And I'm probably wearing padded Lycra bike shorts under a pair of cargo shorts or khakis.

How the hell am I supposed to label all that?
__________________

"Think Outside the Cage"
Roody is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.