GrumpyGregry
Here for rides.
Really though? Really truly? One can truly like cycling and at the same time truly like something which makes cycling so unpleasant and is doing so much damage to society and the planet? Or does one restrict ones cycling to avoid interaction with the metal boxes? Or is it not more likely that one can own and ride bicycles, whilst not really 'getting' cycling and also like using motor vehicles as well. (Don't assume I'm a cyclist. I'm not. I ride bikes. In the same way as I play bass but am not a musician.)You are suggesting that Adrian is a Feminist ?
Whilst we digress in search of a bit of levity, the core of the argument is about the increase in the cost of fuel. One can like cycling, but also like using motor vehicles as well. You don't have to be in one camp or the other.
Cycling isn't just a lefite pursuit in the same way that driving isn't just for the DM readers (don't you know)
Cycling, for recreation, and for transport when one has an economic choice, is a socially left-of-centre pursuit. Merely riding a bike it isn't. It, cycling, is making a statement through exercising a choice. If cycling has a soul then it is certainly a left leaning, socially aware, collective soul.
The questions that always gets missed are not "What is a cyclist?" and "What is cycling?" or "What is a bicycle?" but "When is a cyclist?" and "When is cycling?" and "When is a bicycle?"