New word needed to differentiate cyclists

Discussion in 'General Cycling Discussions' started by Dogtrousers, 2 Apr 2019.

  1. lane

    lane Über Member

    Yes exactly my experience as well. In Holland the Lycra cyclists are out at the weekend especially Sunday rest of week mainly see the "pootlers"
     
    Gravity Aided likes this.
  2. roadrash

    roadrash cycle chatterer

    Why do we need yet another label, if someone is riding a bicycle then they are cycling , therefore a cyclist
     
    Afnug, Smokin Joe, snorri and 5 others like this.
  3. OP
    OP
    Dogtrousers

    Dogtrousers Kilometre nibbler

    There are cyclists who race. There really aren't all that many of these. These people have racing licences. Even that isn't clear cut because there is road racing, TT-ing, CX, Triathlon, various kinds of MTB, with all different kinds of regulations and licencing. These will all go into the "cyclist" classification (the bad one, lycra yobs, boo hiss, they don't deserve any rights).

    Then there are "sporty" recreational cyclists. They may belong to clubs. But they don't necessarily all take part in racing activities beyond the occasional club TT. They may even ride sportives, and upload data to Strava. Despite not racing they go into the "cyclists" bin, because they really are lycra louts, despite not actually racing.

    Then there are unsporty recreational cyclists. Audaxers, tourists and the like. Despite some being distinctly oddballs, and possibly not wearing lycra, these people are still just riding for the hell of it and not for worthy utility purposes. Right. Into the "cyclist" bin with you. Lycra louts the lot of you. Get off the road.

    There are commuters. These fall into all kinds of categories. Some of them may look suspiciously sporty. That lot, you're all "cyclists".

    And at the last we have the Good People. Cycling in normal clothes for a utilitarian purpose. These people are the salt of the earth. Give them a new word.

    Divide and conquer.
     
  4. rugby bloke

    rugby bloke Über Member

    Location:
    Northamptonshire
    This is an interesting idea, however I feel that the subtle differentiation will be lost on the average angry, knuckle dragging cyclist hating road user and I fear it would be a test of both patience and imagination trying to explain.

    Personally I feel conflicted - by the week I am a semi lycra dressed commuter, by the weekend I am a full on lycra lout ... do I get to have 2 names ?
     
    Pat "5mph" likes this.
  5. meta lon

    meta lon Guru

    How about " The Healthier People"

    I couldn't care less what a none cyclist thinks, in fact I don't care what anyone thinks whatever I do...
     
    Gravity Aided likes this.
  6. I was accosted by a fellow parishioner at church last Sunday, asking me why I, and my liberal friends, had to take up part of street to ride our toys. I explained to him that there was room for both his and our toys on the street, as it's quite a wide street, and that some people, even in this paradise of capitalism, had no other means of getting about than riding their "toy" everywhere. Even to clean and prepare food for workers at a company that insures all such toys. Which is why that street, and not others.
     
    Pat "5mph" likes this.
  7. lane

    lane Über Member

    Yes any differentiation (not that's it's valid) will be lost on most people. I work with a BMW driver who doesn't really like cyclists. His comment one morning was that on his drive to work he saw a cyclist riding in the rain - "what is that all about?" was his honestly mystified response.
     
    Gravity Aided and Pat "5mph" like this.
  8. bladderhead

    bladderhead Active Member

    We recumbent riders do not suffer from that condition.
     
  9. swee'pea99

    swee'pea99 Legendary Member

    At the risk of derailing a discussion on terminology (which, in passing, is IMHO a bit daft), it does seem to me to raise a substantive and significant issue. People often look at me like I'm crazy when I say I don't wear a helmet. (I got a lot of this from medical professionals recently after my accident.) I say I am at much greater risk from motorists than I am from anything I'm likely to hit my head on, and my best protection against motorists is to appear not as a 'cyclist' but as a bloke, who happens to be on a bike. Helmets, again IMHO, do more harm than good, in reinforcing this kind of us & them mentality - far more dangerous to any cyclist than head impacts.
     
    Afnug, Smokin Joe, dave r and 2 others like this.
  10. OP
    OP
    Dogtrousers

    Dogtrousers Kilometre nibbler

    Sharp intake of breath ...

    @swee'pea99 you're treading on thin ice there. I hope you've got your tin hat on. Or not ... as the case may be. ;)
     
    dave r likes this.
  11. YukonBoy

    YukonBoy Extra solar

    Location:
    Ultima Thule
    Car crazies
    Car clowns
    Dickhead drivers
    Dangerous drivers

    How should we classify our more sedentary folk?
     
  12. roadrash

    roadrash cycle chatterer

    I stated upthread that I don't think we need another label, after some thought how about we use an existing label we already have, how about person or human being
     
    DCBassman likes this.
  13. Pale Rider

    Pale Rider Guru

    I agree.

    Anyone using the meaningless word 'substantive' should be banned.
     
  14. snorri

    snorri Legendary Member

    Agreed, and even more so when cyclists wear coloured goggles which further conceal their identity, and gender!
     
  15. swee'pea99

    swee'pea99 Legendary Member

    Well, the Oxford & Cambridge dictionaries don't seem to have any problem with it:

    upload_2019-4-4_17-25-31.png

    But hey, what do they know?
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice