BBC report on womens cycling & fatalities

[Crackle]

Can't see if this has been posted already.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8296971.stm

 

[Wheeledweenie]

Overall I thought it was quite good. At least they brought up the fact that statistics show more men are killed than women and it's not just that women are rubbish.

Also I'm learning from female friends that the reasons for cycling or not are actually massively different for the different genders (on the whole, not always). This article highlights that.

I don't think my attitude's that different to most men's, but the vast majority of my friends will not cycle for the reasons cited in this article. Sad but true.

 

[adds21]

Can't see if this has been posted already.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/8296971.stm

I thought it was all very sensible, except for the final paragraph:

“Women may also have less time than men, she says, because they tend to have the responsibility of looking after children before and after work, and are often carrying shopping.”

That just made me cross, because, believe it or not, us men sometimes have responsibilities too.

Ho Hum.

A.

 

[thomas]

“Women may also have less time than men, she says, because they tend to have the responsibility of looking after children before and after work, and are often carrying shopping.”

That just made me cross, because, believe it or not, us men sometimes have responsibilities too.

"may also have less time". It is probably a reasonably sensible reason. It may also suggest that the Men who die have those responsibilities.

 

[marinyork]

The bit that annoyed me was

There are no national figures but there's little reason to think it is any different. In August, a 27-year-old woman died in Leeds after her bike was in collision with a lorry.

On this topic I'm glad the BBC are talking about cycling but it just seems naivety or an attempt to start WW3.

 

[snorri]

I came up behind a Danish lorry (on a UK road) today with a small No Entry sign on the offside rear, and a small Keep Left arrow on its near side rear.

 

[HJ]

It is a start but there was a lot in it which as ill-informed, such are the myth that women are more likely to filter up the left side of lorries and that RLJing is "safer". Shame they don't seem to have any journalists who cycle to work and know what they are writing about...

 

[marinyork]

It is a start but there was a lot in it which as ill-informed, such are the myth that women are more likely to filter up the left side of lorries and that RLJing is "safer". Shame they don't seem to have any journalists who cycle to work and know what they are writing about...

Magazine is often a fairly poor standard. Amusing and what they regard as unusual and trendy stories. Isn't it supposed to have a more general and casual readership?

 

[Crackle]

I thought for the Magazine it wasn't bad, though the end paragraph struck me as an ending looking for an article but overall not bad.

 

[Bollo]

Thought most of it was reasonable as well, although as the house-husband (me part time, Mrs Dr Bollo full time and then some), the final paragraph seemed a little left-field as well.

Bollo and small friend greet Mrs Dr Bollo on her return from work......

 

[Crankarm]

The piece wasn't too bad though not written very well. Marginally better than the usual anti-cycling bile they seem to encourage.

As for the pics they show two potentially dangerous manoeuvres. Why not stick behind the HGV and wait until it has moved on from the junction whether it turns left or right is irrelevant....... If you go first there is a strong likelihood that it will have to pass you again if it follows you which poses more risk to your safety. If the HGV goes the other way to you then you are laughing and have saved yourself being put at risk. The driver will probably be pleased not to have a cyclist buzzing around him or her. Sometimes it amazes me that cyclists don't think more about the risk vehicles around them will pose.

Did anyone spot the troll post in reply below it?

Having seen the way cyclists ride in London, I'm not surprised many are involved in accidents. They ride without lights after dark, ignore traffic lights and ride aggressively as if they own the road. Apparently that is how the LCC want it in parts of London - pedestrians and cyclists only (and I'm sure they would prefer not to have pedestrians in their way as they cycle along the pavement).
Iain, Scotland

 

[PBancroft]

I don't think that was a troll post Crankers - People do think that way, and when they see cyclists behaving badly that's what sticks in their minds. Cyclists who stick to the rules don't really feature on some people's radars because we're not doing anything out of the ordinary. We just blend in.

In fact, I'm fairly confident (from personal experience only so this is subjective) that even by making ourselves more visible, by taking the primary for example, we "blend in" even more, because we are traffic. Of course people see us doing that, but its just something they can prepare for, and overcome.

Its the exceptional actions that people "see" and remember. The cyclist who has a near miss after running a red light. The cyclist who appears "out of nowhere" because he didn't have lights or fluorescent clothing.

I don't think that was a troll post, but potentially a very valid view of someone outside looking in.

 

[Crankarm]

I don't think that was a troll post Crankers - People do think that way, and when they see cyclists behaving badly that's what sticks in their minds. Cyclists who stick to the rules don't really feature on some people's radars because we're not doing anything out of the ordinary. We just blend in.

In fact, I'm fairly confident (from personal experience only so this is subjective) that even by making ourselves more visible, by taking the primary for example, we "blend in" even more, because we are traffic. Of course people see us doing that, but its just something they can prepare for, and overcome.

Its the exceptional actions that people "see" and remember. The cyclist who has a near miss after running a red light. The cyclist who appears "out of nowhere" because he didn't have lights or fluorescent clothing.

I don't think that was a troll post, but potentially a very valid view of someone outside looking in.

I tink it was a troll as it is written as sweeping generalisation in emotive terms. Unless ALL cyclists do ride as he states then he is trolling IMHO. I ain't going to lose sleep about it. Perhaps the reason his post is argumentative is because he is a Scot in London . I notice in your post you don't comment on the substance of the article but instead choose to seize on my belief that the post is by a troll.

 

[Crackle]

I tink it was a troll as it is written as sweeping generalisation in emotive terms. Unless ALL cyclists do ride as he states then he is trolling IMHO. I ain't going to lose sleep about it. Perhaps the reason his post is argumentative is because he is a Scot in London. I notice in your post you don't comment on the substance of the article but instead choose to seize on my belief that the post is by a troll.

Did someone mention sweeping generalisations?

 

[Crankarm]

Did someone mention sweeping generalisations?

Yup, I forgot to add my before you replied. Just trying to illustrate a pesky sweeping generalisation .