Bizarre Reaction

[jonny jeez]

You can download it entering dummy details, but the PDF is online in other locations, such as here.

Brilliant, thank you. I shall pour over this during the day. So far it is an interesting document I am especially interested to read the results of the "testing of the research"...as this seems most likely to be the area that will either challange or confirm my view.

However, as you say it is worth reading through (so I shall resist the temptation to cherry pick)

 

[BentMikey]

I'm slightly amazed you have doubts about that TRL, Jonny. Sure, I applaud your critical approach, but this sort of thing should be fairly obvious to most experienced cyclists, I would think. It's also obvious from many of the comments you see on newspaper articles.

 

[jonny jeez]

Its not doubts BM...it a question regarding the formation of negative views. I believe that poor experience (and poor education/imparted opinion is the key)

As such I SPECIFICALLY beleive that RLJ'ers all make our lives harder by enforcing a negative stereotype.

Enas doesn't

Enas, quoted the TRL to support his/her view.And so I accepted the challange to review the content and challange this (or accept I am wrong).I have to say that, so far I've yet to find anything in the doc that support Enas's position (to the contrary infact)...but its early days...and its a huge body of work.

 

[enas]

As such I SPECIFICALLY beleive that RLJ'ers all make our lives harder by enforcing a negative stereotype.

Enas doesn't

I think you're still missing my point. I'm absolutely not denying the fact that wrongly-behaving cyclists reinforce negative perception of cyclists. This is also mentioned in the said document. However, that's only anecdotical (one paragraph in the whole document, if I remember correctly). The real question this document tries to address is why drivers (this refers to those drivers that do so, not all drivers in general) hold this negative perception, which pre-existed their reinforcement by wrongly-behaving cyclists, and why they generalise it to all the "cycling population" (which asks why the "cycling population" is perceive as a single coherent entity). My point is that I refuse to hold what any other guy does while cycling (you can call him cyclist if you wish) as responsible for how any driver behaves towards me.

We both accept that bad cyclists affect us by enforcing a negative stereotype to some drivers. You say, make them stop. I say, cyclists are just humans choosing a bicycle as a means of transportation, I have nothing more in common with all cyclists than I have with all wearers of black striped socks, assuming I was wearing them (I am not actually wearing them, I just like the image). Therefore, I have to put up with the fact that you'll find all sort of people among them, as among any other road user really. The change I want to see is a significant change in the environment that will: 1) lessen or stop this aforementioned phenomenon (drivers forming an opinion on cyclists as a whole), 2) reduce the likelihood that such drivers can do any harm on me. The said document gives some clues about how to achieve this, although it is not in its main scope.

Finally, as I final disclaimer, I have to stress that I live in Ireland, which is why I'm very little actively involved in this forum, although I follow it rather extensively. I got involved in this discussion as I believe it raises points that are in no way specific to the UK, but I can't guarantee there are not some misunderstandings due to "cultural" differences (as similar as the contexts are, they're still two different settings).

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

In my opinion, yes there are the people who's negative opinion is defined by observation, but I believe in another cause of the aggression. It's territorial behaviour.

It's their 'right' to proceed as they see fit against ours. I'd say that the same people that vent their anger upon cyclists are the same ones that then tailgate, intimidate and carve up any other form of traffic. In their eyes it's their roads, their tax, our trespass upon it.

 

[enas]

Its not doubts BM...it a question regarding the formation of negative views.

Look, if that can help make my point, I just devised a story. Suppose you're an honest law-abiding citizen. Suppose you're black. Suppose you live in a country where there is some strong anti-black racism. Sure, you know that the majority of the population is made of normal rational people. However, the racist minority is really making your life hard, in fact they're making it dangerous because they'll go to extreme and irrational levels of violence against you simply because you're black. Now, you have very well noticed, from newspapers, in the media, in fact from everywhere (those racists are also very vociferous) that those racists employ any incident involving a black person as a justification for their racist views (things along the line "Did you hear about that guy who robbed this poor old lady? Yes, he was black. And people call me racist?"). And you infer that those criminals (only the black portion of the criminal population, the rest doesn't matter) are partly, in fact greatly, responsible for all this racism that affect your daily life, because it reinforces the racists views of racist people. So, do you go and try to convince every single black person in this country to stop committing any crime, as an attempt to eliminate racism? Or do you feel that this is exactly what racism is about (the non-racist doesn't give a shoot that the aforementioned criminal is black, and doesn't relate you to this black criminal, in fact he doens't give a shoot that yourself, the criminal, or anyone else is black or not), and what you want is indeed to fight racism, by fighting racists themselves?

Does that story sound sadly true? Now replace black person with cyclist and racist person with driver holding negative views of cyclists, read again, and draw your own conclusions.

 

[growingvegetables]

Yup - I like the way you're developing your position, Enas.

 

[jonny jeez]

Yup - I like the way you're developing your position, Enas.

So do I, it's thought provoking...However I am now stuck with a mental image of Enas in black and white stripey socks which isn't really helping.

 

[jonny jeez]

So, do you go and try to convince every single black person in this country to stop committing any crime, as an attempt to eliminate racism?

This is a good argument...but its just not the same thing.

Criminals wont stop commiting crime just because it gives other criminals a bad name...regardless of their skin colour.

Cyclists on the other hand are not generally committed criminals, so asking them to stop commiting a small offence as it negatively colours the impressions of the rest of us...IS a sensible request.

What I am interested in is (taking your example) is why...in this hypothetical country that you describe is there a "strong anti black racism"... in the first place

if not from poor experience or education

poor experience breeds contempt..contempt breeds hatred, (racism) hatred breeds reaction

...and the circle is now complete (in my best darth vader voice)...ism's (is cylistism a real word?) begin with poor impressions...lets stop making poor impressions before we are all labelled as "cyclists" and help to breed cyclistim.

 

[BentMikey]

The problem is not just poor experiences, Jonny. Drivers will form negative opinions about cyclists when cyclists take the lane, or move wide around parked cars. At the same time they will excuse actual and more serious mistakes by other drivers, simply because other drivers are part of the in-group, and cyclists are never right as outsiders.

 

[Arfcollins]

Look, if that can help make my point, I just devised a story. Suppose you're an honest law-abiding citizen. Suppose you're black. Suppose you live in a country where there is some strong anti-black racism. Sure, you know that the majority of the population is made of normal rational people. However, the racist minority is really making your life hard, in fact they're making it dangerous because they'll go to extreme and irrational levels of violence against you simply because you're black. Now, you have very well noticed, from newspapers, in the media, in fact from everywhere (those racists are also very vociferous) that those racists employ any incident involving a black person as a justification for their racist views (things along the line "Did you hear about that guy who robbed this poor old lady? Yes, he was black. And people call me racist?"). And you infer that those criminals (only the black portion of the criminal population, the rest doesn't matter) are partly, in fact greatly, responsible for all this racism that affect your daily life, because it reinforces the racists views of racist people. So, do you go and try to convince every single black person in this country to stop committing any crime, as an attempt to eliminate racism? Or do you feel that this is exactly what racism is about (the non-racist doesn't give a shoot that the aforementioned criminal is black, and doesn't relate you to this black criminal, in fact he doens't give a shoot that yourself, the criminal, or anyone else is black or not), and what you want is indeed to fight racism, by fighting racists themselves?

Does that story sound sadly true? Now replace black person with cyclist and racist person with driver holding negative views of cyclists, read again, and draw your own conclusions.

My opinion is that what you see is an example of the lazy prejudice that all of us can be guilty of. Examples abound on these forums, and even on this string you will see:

There's your problem.

Volvo's seem to have the ability to make people become complete twunts. In particular the estate versions. Always seem to be driven badly.

I guess that 400bhp has experienced a badly driven Volvo estate. I expect all of us have. I'm not raising this just because I drive one. I can't tell how seriously 400bhp is making his statement, but it is fairly typical of the anti BMW, Audi, 4x4 etc etc that we have come to expect here. It was a telling point that, in the face of my recent question as to what marque of car is perceived as generally containing a good driver, the responses were scant to say the least.

This is no different from some drivers classifying all cyclists as idiotic/dangerous/lawbreaking/tax avoiding nuisances. Though maybe if they were as perceptive as some of our cycling community they would be able to name the type of bike that carries the most numpties. Personally I always steer well clear of Cannondales. It is the bike that attracts the very worst riders.

 

[jonny jeez]

The problem is not just poor experiences, Jonny. Drivers will form negative opinions about cyclists when cyclists take the lane, or move wide around parked cars. At the same time they will excuse actual and more serious mistakes by other drivers, simply because other drivers are part of the in-group, and cyclists are never right as outsiders.

Couldn't agree more.

But Mikey, aren't those poor experiences. If a driver had experienced you taking the lane, they would also had experienced a pleasant feeling afterwards as they noted the thanks you give and an acknowledgement that you have held them up in some way. In that way, you are proof that positive experience promotes positive relationships.

I'm not debating the in/out group dynamic...which I believe is totally valid. I am debating how the group is formed in the first place. Why do car drivers consider motorbikes and out group...or motorcyclists consider scooters...or scooters b cyclists. we are all just road users

Granted you cannot stop extremists like racists and criminals, by just being good yourself...but drivers and cyclists are not criminals and racists...they are just drivers & cyclists as such you CAN adjust their perception...by providing a positive experience.

Wow...I need a cigarette ( and I don't even smoke)

 

[BentMikey]

You could have 100% of cyclists riding well and being "positive", and not making mistakes, and even after years you'd still have the angry driver being cycle-racist problem. The point is that it doesn't matter what we do - that out-tribe feeling will still exist, and we'll be blamed for all sorts of things we're not responsible for.

Motorcyclists aren't considered an out-group, at least not to nearly the same degree.

 

[400bhp]

My opinion is that what you see is an example of the lazy prejudice that all of us can be guilty of. Examples abound on these forums, and even on this string you will see:

I guess that 400bhp has experienced a badly driven Volvo estate. I expect all of us have. I'm not raising this just because I drive one. I can't tell how seriously 400bhp is making his statement, but it is fairly typical of the anti BMW, Audi, 4x4 etc etc that we have come to expect here. It was a telling point that, in the face of my recent question as to what marque of car is perceived as generally containing a good driver, the responses were scant to say the least.

This is no different from some drivers classifying all cyclists as idiotic/dangerous/lawbreaking/tax avoiding nuisances. Though maybe if they were as perceptive as some of our cycling community they would be able to name the type of bike that carries the most numpties. Personally I always steer well clear of Cannondales. It is the bike that attracts the very worst riders.

Feck me you must be fun in real life.

IT ISN'T TO BE TAKEN LITERALLY

 

[jonny jeez]

The point is that it doesn't matter what we do - that out-tribe feeling will still exist,

but why...how did the "TRIBE" form in the first place.

In groups, out groups, racists, extremists, golfists, cyclists....we are all just people, why do we segregate so quickly into tribes.

I believe this segregation is formed from poor experiences and bad education. A person who has yet to form an opinion WILL do as soon as they gain a poor experience...ie a RLJer.

I don't particularly think we can change the entire tribe/group attitude (although in isolation this does occur) but we can stop people forming a negative first impression