Oh, I didn't say it's a neutral word, but it's not an insult. It accurately describes what happens to all drivers inside a metal cage, i.e. risk compensation to the disadvantage of those outside the cage. Moton, on the other hand, is pretty much pure insult.
I'm not sure what you mean here.
When you say it isn't neutral, do you mean it has some slight negative loading? It certainly isn't positive, so if it isn't neutral what is it?
I'm not sure where we are with saying it isn't neutral but isn't pejorative. Is there a category slotted between them somehow?
When I see it in writing, it's often used in a phrase or passage that is essentially negative about motorists.
I drive and cycle. A lot. In my youth I rode and occasionally raced motorcycles. I don't have a particular camp or particular loyalties. I love being on bikes and in cars.
Nonetheless, I find the term 'cager' slightly offensive as a description of drivers. I imagine most drivers find it either mildly insulting, highly risible or unhelpfully finger-pointing.
Of course I feel slightly exposed when cycling, but I hardly feel wrapped in cotton wool when in a car between artics on the M50 in pouring rain.
But when I'm on my bicycle I do not see drivers (the huge majority of whom are couteous, polite and skillful) as in any way altered by their magical status of being in a passenger safety cell.
Similarly, when I'm driving I don't see cyclists (many of whom are courteous, polite and skillful) as soft-impact bean bags that I can cannon off my door mirrors while enjoying the safety of my 'cage'.
We are all road users. There are cyclists, motorists and others.
Given that most drivers probably see the term cager as negative, is there any point in uysing it unless we are trying to encourage and
'us & them' mentality?
