Vorpal wrote:That almsot reads like it's a problem that he isn't a cyclist, but it's a rpoblem that he *is* a cyclist. I'm not sure I follow the argument.
The argument is that his passions seem to change depending on what job he's hired for, making the most of any small link in his background, and that BC club riders are cyclists but few are everyday/ordinary cyclists or see the point of transport cycling - compare the car park full of cars with bike racks on at the many BC club events to the CTC riding from where they live to a mid-morning meet-up point before riding to lunch together - and some BC riders even express horror and confusion at the idea of cycle-touring.
And your passions have never changed? How about interests? I was passionate about women's football when I played women's league football and sat on the management committee for a football club. I was passionate about cycling when I taught Bikeability, did led rides in may areas, volunteered for all-ability cycling days, and campaigned for cyclist's rights. I have also been a 'club cyclist' for much of my adult life. FWIW, the word 'passionate is overused in this kind of context, but I guess it sounds good to PR people, so it keeps getting used.
Club cyclist also means, and has long meant, CTC members who show up for Sunday rides, go to rallies, etc. It's certainly not limited to BC. And as it happens, many (maybe most) of the BC members I know are also, or even mainly transport cyclists. why did they join? Insurance (and it was cheaper than CTC).
I don't think it does any cycling organisation any good to have rivalries, or look down on one another for any reason. It certainly doesn't help cycling.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom