This Wiggins incident has brought the numpties out...

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Dan B

Disengaged member
Drivers seem somehow branded by other road users as part of a single group
My experience doesn't really match yours: my friends and acquaintances routinely distinguish drivers by such attributes as the car they're in (Audi, BMW, Saxo), the branding/company name on the side (Foxtons, Royal Mail), or the nature of the vehicle's use (taxi, minicab).

I'm sure that someone will be along in a minute to say that this is a bad attitude and we should treat all drivers just the same, as if they were part of a single group
 

deptfordmarmoset

Full time tea drinker
Location
Armonmy Way
...
Similarly, drivers who cycle may have a sense of what a cyclist in traffic is planning to do. I do hear cyclists I know getting themselves quite worked up about drivers. It is not an absolute rule, but these tend to be cyclists who do not drive.
...
Whereas, as someone who does both, I find the drivers who wind me up are those who pay so little attention to the road that they would maim themselves were they on a bike.
 
My experience doesn't really match yours: my friends and acquaintances routinely distinguish drivers by such attributes as the car they're in (Audi, BMW, Saxo), the branding/company name on the side (Foxtons, Royal Mail), or the nature of the vehicle's use (taxi, minicab).

I'm sure that someone will be along in a minute to say that this is a bad attitude and we should treat all drivers just the same, as if they were part of a single group

This is a good point. I'm afraid I've been guilty in the past of branding drivers by vehicle or employer. Sadly, there can be a correlation between marque, model, employment type and road behaviour. I wish it were otherwise.

What I wes referring to in my observation was that other road users (whether cyclist, driver or motorcyclist) will sometimes treat a novice driver, an elderly driver and a testosterone-overdosed youth as one and the same.

I take entirely your point about there being clues in vehicle type, much as I'd prefer to think there are not.

Indeed one might say the same about cyclists... but I don't want to start another comparative debate between brand-obsessed lycra missiles and low-cadence, nodding novices. Nor do I accept that either group even exists in any identifiable form.

Thank you.
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
There is nothing I disagree with here, but I do not believe it has anything to do with what I was saying originally. We frequently see on these pages a reference to somebody riding without lights, it is almost without exception that somebody will reply to that with, what I consider to be, the rather tiresome "Well you saw them didn't you?" I don't believe that the vast majority of the posters who reply in such a manner are doing so because they are attempting to make a point about infrastucture, driver attitude, social standing or retail expenditure, I think they're doing it because they think it sounds clever. My issue with this is that the extension of it is that riding without lights is somehow acceptable because the individual clearly wasn't invisible. I doubt that anybody reading these posts would take take this as a reason to ditch their lights but I don't personally see it as the witty quip which I'm convinced the majority of people that post it believe it to be, as I said, maybe I'm being a little precious about it.

Fair enough. The last time a motorist pulled alongside me (dusk, my back light had stopped working and I was unaware of it) and said, quite gently, "I can't see you at all", I thought it would be churlish to to take issue with the truth of his observation. But had he addressed me in a more adversarial tone I'd have felt quite justified in doing so. Which is just to say that there are times when sounding like a smart arse is exactly what is called for.
 

GrumpyGregry

Here for rides.
Fair enough. The last time a motorist pulled alongside me (dusk, my back light had stopped working and I was unaware of it) and said, quite gently, "I can't see you at all", I thought it would be churlish to to take issue with the truth of his observation. But had he addressed me in a more adversarial tone I'd have felt quite justified in doing so. Which is just to say that there are times when sounding like a smart arse is exactly what is called for.
There are times when sounding like a smartarse is appropriate. At other times actually being a smartarse is more effective. Verbal interaction with chastising car drivers? Generally the latter, but not usually hard, they set the arse benchmark quite low after all. I find "Shuttit fatty" does the trick.
 

theclaud

Openly Marxist
Location
Swansea
You can both take your pedantry and place it discretely where it will be safe from UV light.;)

I think it should be, "you can each take your pedantry"...
 
Top Bottom