Bizarre Reaction

[Crackedheadset]

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

imo, cyclists make it that way.

Cyclists that routinely break the law and ride badly. gives motorists the reason to vent their fury and group us all together as lycra wearing, law breaking peanuts. You might say that this is a crass generalisation and you'd probably be right. But it's only a thought.

 

[jonny jeez]

imo, cyclists make it that way.

cyclists that royutinely break the law and ride badly. gives motorists the reason to vent their fury and group us all together as lycra wearing, law breaking peanuts. You might say that this is a crass generelisation and you'd probably be right. But it's only a thought.

my point precisely

 

[mickle]

This is what I wrote on another thread earlier this morning. I re-post it here because it is entirely pertinent to this thread.

'Yeahbut. Cyclists, even if they don't actually own the road, have a right to use it. Motorists have no rights, only permission. Motorists must pay vehicle excise duty, pass a test and obtain a license etc etc. Their vehicle must comply with a raft of regulations concerning the functioning and safety of the vehicle and its harmful emissions.

Because, let us not forget that cyclists kill less than one person per year whilst collisions involving automotive carriages kill 3000+. There is no comparison. And so, when we start complaining about the danger posed to us by cars and the response is a lot of wittering on, again and again, as they do, about how 'cyclists have responsabilities too', and how 'cyclists run red lights too' and 'ride on pavements'. I just want to punch them in the face. Very hard indeed. Because there is no comparison. Cyclists pose little more danger to the general population of the UK than fricking space aliens. Eff off. Sort your house out before criticizing cyclists. Really.'

I saw two lads, without helmets, riding the wrong way down a bicyclepath in the middle of a busy town centre last year. On a moped. No one batted an eyelid, little old ladies did not attack them with their handbags. And why? Because they were not hurting anyone, they were courteous, slow and chilled.

But the main reason is that they were in Holland. I've had quite enough of jumping through the behavioural expectation hoop thank you. I've been an exeplary cyclist for thirty years. Do the twunts treat me with the respect I deserve?

Do they ****.

 

[Crackedheadset]

This is what I wrote on another thread earlier this morning. I re-post it here because it is entirely pertinent to this thread.

'Yeahbut. Cyclists, even if they don't actually own the road, have a right to use it. Motorists have no rights, only permission. Motorists must pay vehicle excise duty, pass a test and obtain a license etc etc. Their vehicle must comply with a raft of regulations concerning the functioning and safety of the vehicle and its harmful emissions.

Because, let us not forget that cyclists kill less than one person per year whilst collisions involving automotive carriages kill 3000+. There is no comparison. And so, when we start complaining about the danger posed to us by cars and the response is a lot of wittering on, again and again, as they do, about how 'cyclists have responsabilities too', and how 'cyclists run red lights too' and 'ride on pavements'. I just want to punch them in the face. Very hard indeed. Because there is no comparison. Cyclists pose little more danger to the general population of the UK than fricking space aliens. Eff off. Sort your house out before criticizing cyclists. Really.'

I saw two lads, without helmets, riding the wrong way down a bicyclepath in the middle of a busy town centre last year. On a moped. No one batted an eyelid, little old ladies did not attack them with their handbags. And why? Because they were not hurting anyone, they were courteous, slow and chilled.

But the main reason is that they were in Holland. I've had quite enough of jumping through the behavioural expectation hoop thank you. I've been an exeplary cyclist for thirty years. Do the twunts treat me with the respect I deserve?

Do they ****.

Interesting post Mickle, but not entirely relevent imo. I think cyclists should take responsiliblity and ride in a respectful manner regardless of whether they are actually doing any harm or not. My bold should cover all road users surely? And not those that just use motorised transport.

imo and with respect it's like you are condoning illegal riding (wrt the moped) on the grounds that they are not doing any harm? Is this the right attitude to have as a road user for the greater good, no it's not imo.

Cyclists need to act and ride in a responsible manner, just because others don't give us respect does not give us the right to use that sort of behaviour as an excuse not to care ourselves. It does not get anyone anywhere and only goes around in circles withb respect to the whole motorists vs cyclists debate.

 

[Paul J]

Why ride down the street the wrong way if you know its wrong. I wouldn't move out of the way of an idiot riding the wrong way down a one way street. Set an example that you are a responsible road user and either walk your bike or ride around the block. It makes no difference what mode of transport you use, it only takes a few idiots to tarnish the efforts made by more responsible road users.

 

[BentMikey]

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

Jonny, not all people are as deep as you. Most are a lot shallower. "Think of how stupid the average person is, and then realise that half of them are a lot more stupid still" is a quote I'm reminded of here. They just see people looking different, doing a strange thing, and that's enough for racism to form.

 

[jonny jeez]

This is what I wrote on another thread earlier this morning. I re-post it here because it is entirely pertinent to this thread.

'Yeahbut. Cyclists, even if they don't actually own the road, have a right to use it. Motorists have no rights, only permission. Motorists must pay vehicle excise duty, pass a test and obtain a license etc etc. Their vehicle must comply with a raft of regulations concerning the functioning and safety of the vehicle and its harmful emissions.

Because, let us not forget that cyclists kill less than one person per year whilst collisions involving automotive carriages kill 3000+. There is no comparison. And so, when we start complaining about the danger posed to us by cars and the response is a lot of wittering on, again and again, as they do, about how 'cyclists have responsabilities too', and how 'cyclists run red lights too' and 'ride on pavements'. I just want to punch them in the face. Very hard indeed. Because there is no comparison. Cyclists pose little more danger to the general population of the UK than fricking space aliens. Eff off. Sort your house out before criticizing cyclists. Really.'

I saw two lads, without helmets, riding the wrong way down a bicyclepath in the middle of a busy town centre last year. On a moped. No one batted an eyelid, little old ladies did not attack them with their handbags. And why? Because they were not hurting anyone, they were courteous, slow and chilled.

But the main reason is that they were in Holland. I've had quite enough of jumping through the behavioural expectation hoop thank you. I've been an exeplary cyclist for thirty years. Do the twunts treat me with the respect I deserve?

Do they ****.

nice piece...I like your approach...but not totally relevant to my discussion. I am trying to make a point that all our actions (all of them..whatever our chosen mode of transport) have a reaction and we need to be aware of this.

The point that does have resonance with me is your dutch scooterists...no one batted an eyelid, because they ensured they made a positive impression...if they had sworn, been dangerous, abusive...they would have had a mob after them, some of which would have subsequently compartmentalised them into a "group" that they would make a point of hating in the future, to the extreme of seeking evidence to support their hate.

But they didnt, they chilled... and people thought them "cool"...they liked them...they felt akin to them...even aspired to be like them.

so did you

see how that works

 

[jonny jeez]

Jonny, not all people are as deep as you. Most are a lot shallower. "Think of how stupid the average person is, and then realise that half of them are a lot more stupid still" is a quote I'm reminded of here. They just see people looking different, doing a strange thing, and that's enough for racism to form.

Hahah...

 

[HLaB]

Why ride down the street the wrong way if you know its wrong. I wouldn't move out of the way of an idiot riding the wrong way down a one way street. Set an example that you are a responsible road user and either walk your bike or ride around the block. It makes no difference what mode of transport you use, it only takes a few idiots to tarnish the efforts made by more responsible road users.

Because the GPS told me Bless me father for I have sinned. A few years back the tour guide in Spain had plotted a gps route for his off day I was still cycling), it went straight through a town I had never been in before but straight down a wide one way street (against flow, although there was none). I circled around a couple of times with no success, so on the third time I went down it

 

[Paul J]

Because the GPS told me

Explains alot, stupid is as a stupid does.

 

[mickle]

nice piece...I like your approach...but not totally relevant to my discussion. I am trying to make a point that all our actions (all of them..whatever our chosen mode of transport) have a reaction and we need to be aware of this.

The point that does have resonance with me is your dutch scooterists...no one batted an eyelid, because they ensured they made a positive impression...if they had sworn, been dangerous, abusive...they would have had a mob after them, some of which would have subsequently compartmentalised them into a "group" that they would make a point of hating in the future, to the extreme of seeking evidence to support their hate.

But they didnt, they chilled... and people thought them "cool"...they liked them...they felt akin to them...even aspired to be like them.

so did you

see how that works

I'm sure it's entirely my fault that you have missed my points completely.

 

[jonny jeez]

I'm sure it's entirely my fault that you have missed my points completely.

I've not missed them Mickle, you made them very well....It's just that they are not what i'm talking about.

Apologies if I appeared dismissive, not my intention

 

[mickle]

Interesting post Mickle, but not entirely relevent imo. I think cyclists should take responsiliblity and ride in a respectful manner regardless of whether they are actually doing any harm or not. My bold should cover all road users surely? And not those that just use motorised transport.

imo and with respect it's like you are condoning illegal riding (wrt the moped) on the grounds that they are not doing any harm? Is this the right attitude to have as a road user for the greater good, no it's not imo.

Cyclists need to act and ride in a responsible manner, just because others don't give us respect does not give us the right to use that sort of behaviour as an excuse not to care ourselves. It does not get anyone anywhere and only goes around in circles withb respect to the whole motorists vs cyclists debate.

I do ride within the law at all times, I see it as my duty. But we are not the problem. Here we are navel gazing about how best to present ourselves so as to be taken seriously by other road users. The joke is that they don't give a shoot, the haters will hate us however we ride. We need to stop apologising for our existence and start standing up for ourselves. And one of the first things we must do is to communicate loud and clear that cyclists pose no danger. Ultimately I don't give a shoot how many cyclists run red lights, ride on the pavement etc, we don't kill people, motorist do. Before I listen to any criticism of cyclists we need to have a good long discussion about what drivers intend to do about the carnage on the roads.

 

[jonny jeez]

I do ride within the law at all times, I see it as my duty. But we are not the problem. Here we are navel gazing about how best to present ourselves so as to be taken seriously by other road users. The joke is that they don't give a shoot, the haters will hate us however we ride. We need to stop apologising for our existence and start standing up for ourselves. And one of the first things we must do is to communicate loud and clear that cyclists pose no danger. Ultimately I don't give a shoot how many cyclists run red lights, ride on the pavement etc, we don't kill people, motorist do. Before I listen to any criticism of cyclists we need to have a good long discussion about what drivers intend to do about the carnage on the roads.

I disagree.

Firstly I dont think people fall into hater and non- hater groups...that is a product of experience (which i do think we can adjust) also I dont think your acting in a sensible manner is in any way "an apology" for your existence...nor mine

I'd say ignore the haters (as you put it)...its too late for them and keep focusing on those that haven't made up their mind yet. These are the people who will gain a positive experience from your approach and will ultimately benefit each of you.

 

[enas]

A person who has yet to form an opinion WILL do as soon as they gain a poor experience...ie a RLJer.

Again, you're missing the point. You might be entirely right that some drivers will form a negative view of all cyclists after they see one RJLer. The question is why they do this generalisation. That's because they're racists (in my - not so - fictional story). Have you heard of any person who has formed a bad opinion of all drivers because they saw one run a red light? Of course not. Most persons would put that down to the individual, and that's all. That shows that there's something different and specific with cyclists that doesn't concern the majority group, i.e. motorists. Which brings us to your first question.

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

I can't provide a definite answer to that, but the document in question is the closest thing I've read to an answer. I refer you to section 2.3.1 Drivers' perception of road users, paragraph Road users' hierarchy, and to section 2.5 Findings in relation to social psychological theory.
Now I really think I've said all I could say on this subject, so I'll withdraw from this discussion. It was nice chatting with you.