Part of the look?!

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14993
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby mjr » 15 Jan 2016, 3:41pm

meic wrote:It could be time for an amicable separation on grounds of incompatibility.

Yep. South Shields is in a very populated area. It's only ten miles from Newcastle and closer to Sunderland. There must be a better group for you, or a latent demand for one which you could help start. I think NewCycling do occasional rides and there are/were some Friday Night Rides, plus (nods to forum sponsors) there are loads of CTC affiliates/groups on http://www.ctc.org.uk/local-groups
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Chiz
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Aug 2009, 2:19am
Location: South Shields

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby Chiz » 15 Jan 2016, 11:16pm

mjr wrote:
meic wrote:It could be time for an amicable separation on grounds of incompatibility.

Yep. South Shields is in a very populated area. It's only ten miles from Newcastle and closer to Sunderland. There must be a better group for you, or a latent demand for one which you could help start. I think NewCycling do occasional rides and there are/were some Friday Night Rides, plus (nods to forum sponsors) there are loads of CTC affiliates/groups on http://www.ctc.org.uk/local-groups


I'm going to take a look around, I'll try not to hold anything against the club, they have their own way of doing things, as do I.

Thank you to everyone for your wise words.

User avatar
mjr
Posts: 14993
Joined: 20 Jun 2011, 7:06pm
Location: Norfolk or Somerset, mostly
Contact:

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby mjr » 16 Jan 2016, 11:43am

Ah don't go too soft ;) I think the club sounds like they're being unreasonable in at least two ways, but if there's no-one else like you willing to challenge it (and there often isn't these days), it's probably better to walk away.
MJR, mostly pedalling 3-speed roadsters. KL+West Norfolk BUG incl social easy rides http://www.klwnbug.co.uk
All the above is CC-By-SA and no other implied copyright license to Cycle magazine.

Ron
Posts: 1191
Joined: 5 Jan 2007, 9:07pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby Ron » 16 Jan 2016, 11:35pm

Chiz wrote:I'm going to take a look around, I'll try not to hold anything against the club, they have their own way of doing things, as do I.

It would only be fair to the club to drop a note to their Chairman informing him/her that you were leaving due to the ill manners of a member in regard to helmet wearing.

Chiz
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Aug 2009, 2:19am
Location: South Shields

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby Chiz » 17 Jan 2016, 12:44am

Ron wrote:
Chiz wrote:I'm going to take a look around, I'll try not to hold anything against the club, they have their own way of doing things, as do I.

It would only be fair to the club to drop a note to their Chairman informing him/her that you were leaving due to the ill manners of a member in regard to helmet wearing.


I think I'll just be letting my membership lapse, it's due next month anyway. I think my reasoning will be clear, although I will probably email the chairman. Our ''disagreement' was quite public, even attracting the attention of the chairman, although all he had to say on the matter was that passions were running a bit high.

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 17178
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby [XAP]Bob » 17 Jan 2016, 8:56am

So he is well aware that the situation was getting out of hand - an email to explain that your membership will be lapsing as a result of the hostility towards discussion, possibly with a link to a suitable reference?
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Steady rider
Posts: 2187
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby Steady rider » 17 Jan 2016, 10:23am

Does the club have a precise policy regarding the issue? I would be tempted to carry on and just ride without a helmet but respect riders regardless of helmet use or not.
http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaigning/views ... le-helmets

◾Individuals should be free to make their own decisions about whether or not to wear helmets, with parents making these decisions in the case of younger children. Their decisions should be informed by clear information about the uncertainties over the benefits or otherwise of helmets.

Chiz
Posts: 64
Joined: 23 Aug 2009, 2:19am
Location: South Shields

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby Chiz » 17 Jan 2016, 11:39am

Steady rider wrote:Does the club have a precise policy regarding the issue? I would be tempted to carry on and just ride without a helmet but respect riders regardless of helmet use or not.
http://www.ctc.org.uk/campaigning/views ... le-helmets

◾Individuals should be free to make their own decisions about whether or not to wear helmets, with parents making these decisions in the case of younger children. Their decisions should be informed by clear information about the uncertainties over the benefits or otherwise of helmets.

Taken from the club website.
(insert club name) riders always ride with helmets, sorry no helmet no ride.

Riders who cannot or will not comply with the ride rules and general etiquette will be reported to the Welfare Officers whom will address this accordingly.

Steady rider
Posts: 2187
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby Steady rider » 17 Jan 2016, 12:23pm

Possibly put a motion to the CTC AGM naming the club and asking that the CTC approaches them seeking discussions and changes in their rules.

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby TonyR » 17 Jan 2016, 12:31pm

mjr wrote:I can't get sports cyclists to discuss it without such nonsense as posting abuse, calling me irresponsible and saying that I'm encouraging "greater risk-taking" by pointing out the truth that the overwhelming majority of cyclists don't wear helmets.


If you think they're bad try raising it on an American cycling forum. You'd be better off suggesting they give up their guns!

TonyR
Posts: 5390
Joined: 31 Aug 2008, 12:51pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby TonyR » 17 Jan 2016, 12:44pm

meic wrote:Time to google transactional analysis.


Also "motivated reasoning" and "cognitive dissonance". People will fight hard to not have the things they believe to be true invalidated and evidence just tends to harden their opposition and make their rationalisations more and more irrational.

Steady rider
Posts: 2187
Joined: 4 Jan 2009, 4:31pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby Steady rider » 17 Jan 2016, 8:23pm

Government Equalities Office: Equality Act 2010: What do I need to know? A quick start guide for private clubs and other associations.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/s ... -clubs.pdf

Looks like in some cases insisting that cyclists wear helmets could be illegal. It effectively tries to dictate that a persons beliefs can be set aside by imposing a condition that they wear helmets to take part.

User avatar
horizon
Posts: 10076
Joined: 9 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Cornwall

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby horizon » 17 Jan 2016, 10:43pm

This has been an amazing thread. It has tackled helmets full-on. Whether or not helmets are useful, at least this thread recognises that there is a huge amount of social and personal psychology involved with them, whatever one's final decision.
When the pestilence strikes from the East, go far and breathe the cold air deeply. Ignore the sage, stay not indoors. Ho Ri Zon 12th Century Chinese philosopher

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby beardy » 17 Jan 2016, 11:55pm

There wasnt at first.
I just got on a bike and rode it, never considered wearing a helmet, just as I never consider wearing a helmet while walking.
at least this thread recognises that there is a huge amount of social and personal psychology involved with them, whatever one's final decision.

I dont wear a helmet while walking, no social and personal psychology was involved in this decision because nobody has suggested that I do, pressured or lectured me to do so. If they did, they would get the same response that I give about cycling.

It is just like somebody nagging you until you give up, if the nagging stopped the argument would disappear too, just like when you go out walking.

There is a principle involved that there should be a good reason given to make you change behaviour or adopt a new practice. Not that you should have to justify not getting suckered into accepting every passing fad.

beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: Part of the look?!

Postby beardy » 18 Jan 2016, 12:05am

I do see helmets in a similar way to neckties. It is a part of conformity to wear one even though they have no real use.
Scarily that fad has been going on for over 300 years. :cry: