Victim blaming?

[irc]

Even if something is matt black, it is still visible!

Well short of total invisibility anything is visible. I think matt black is far less visible at night though. Were night fighters not painted matt black?

All else being equal light coloured or reflective clothing is more visible at night or during the day.

[The utility cyclist]

Even if something is matt black, it is still visible!

Well short of total invisibility anything is visible. I think matt black is far less visible at night though. Were night fighters not painted matt black?


profile_A0724_small.jpg

All else being equal light coloured or reflective clothing is more visible at night or during the day.

Is it, where is the evidence? There is no equal, there never has been nor never shall be, there simply is no situation to simplify it thusly, not ever.

[pwa]

Even if something is matt black, it is still visible!

Well short of total invisibility anything is visible. I think matt black is far less visible at night though. Were night fighters not painted matt black?


profile_A0724_small.jpg

All else being equal light coloured or reflective clothing is more visible at night or during the day.

Is it, where is the evidence? There is no equal, there never has been nor never shall be, there simply is no situation to simplify it thusly, not ever.

I use the evidence of my eyes to assess these things. I see cyclists and pedestrians more easily, and sooner, at night if they have light clothing and reflectives. The reflectives work better than the light colours at night. In daytime my eyes pick out light clothing easier than dark clothing, and for some reason I find bright yellow the easiest to spot. I'm a careful driver so I am unlikely to run over a cyclist in black with no reflectives, but that cyclist is more reliant on my skills and concentration than I would consider wise.

[irc]

Even if something is matt black, it is still visible!

Well short of total invisibility anything is visible. I think matt black is far less visible at night though. Were night fighters not painted matt black?


profile_A0724_small.jpg

All else being equal light coloured or reflective clothing is more visible at night or during the day.

Is it, where is the evidence? There is no equal, there never has been nor never shall be, there simply is no situation to simplify it thusly, not ever.

It is self evident. Examples. When hillwalking and seeing distant groups of walkers. Those in dark clothing are invisible while those in light clothing stand out.

Lifejackets - always bright orange or yellow. Because it is easily seen. Are centuries of seafaring experience wrong?
Roadworkers - bright yellow or orange. Are you seriously saying they would be as safe in black?

There is room for debate about how much safer it makes cyclists. There is no debate that they are more visible.

[Vorpal]

Even if something is matt black, it is still visible!

Well short of total invisibility anything is visible. I think matt black is far less visible at night though. Were night fighters not painted matt black?


profile_A0724_small.jpg

All else being equal light coloured or reflective clothing is more visible at night or during the day.

Is it, where is the evidence? There is no equal, there never has been nor never shall be, there simply is no situation to simplify it thusly, not ever.

There is evidence that light and reflective clothing is more easily seen, and is seen at a greater distance.
https://www.researchgate.net/publicatio ... d_injuries

There is no evidence that it makes anyone safer, and to the contrary, there is limited evidence of the opposite effect. This may be partly due to cyclists overestimating their own visibility
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7513000821

[irc]

There is no evidence that it makes anyone safer, and to the contrary, there is limited evidence of the opposite effect. This may be partly due to cyclists overestimating their own visibility
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7513000821

I agree any safety benefit is only when all else is equal. Risk compensation etc.

[pwa]

There is no evidence that it makes anyone safer, and to the contrary, there is limited evidence of the opposite effect. This may be partly due to cyclists overestimating their own visibility
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7513000821

I agree any safety benefit is only when all else is equal. Risk compensation etc.

So if you have to cycle along a dark lane and you are going to do it anyway, better to wear some reflectives and remember not to assume the vehicle behind has seen your signal for a right turn?

[Vorpal]

Or better to also wear some reflectives on the arm signalling the turn and still assume that no one can see you.

[pwa]

Or better to also wear some reflectives on the arm signalling the turn and still assume that no one can see you.

Which seems to me to be a sound approach. Nothing to do with putting all the blame or responsibility on the potential victim, but on empowering that potential victim to reduce the risk in the ways that they can. I encourage my teenage daughter to avoid walking dark town centre streets on her own at night, not because I think it would be her fault if something happened but because I think anything that reduces risk is good, even if the "blame" lies with others.

[mjr]

Is it, where is the evidence? There is no equal, there never has been nor never shall be, there simply is no situation to simplify it thusly, not ever.

It is self evident. Examples. When hillwalking and seeing distant groups of walkers. Those in dark clothing are invisible while those in light clothing stand out.

Lifejackets - always bright orange or yellow. Because it is easily seen. Are centuries of seafaring experience wrong?
Roadworkers - bright yellow or orange. Are you seriously saying they would be as safe in black?

There is room for debate about how much safer it makes cyclists. There is no debate that they are more visible.

I think that's confusing anecdotes with "evidence" and something like easier to identify with "more visible".

Lifejackets - seen against a blue/green/grey sea. Roadworkers - nearly always orange now (because yellow is not as good, even on roadscapes), nearly always full neck-to-ankle (so it looks person-shaped, unlike typical cycling jackets) and nearly always against tarmac. Those examples are a step forwards from the railway-based research that's usually used to justify it, but there's not a great deal of evidence supporting them and even less suggesting the same reasons might apply to ordinary people. I'm sure most of us here have seen the counter-examples, like motorists failing to see lollipop ladies/men dressed in compulsory hi-vis.

There is no evidence that it makes anyone safer, and to the contrary, there is limited evidence of the opposite effect. This may be partly due to cyclists overestimating their own visibility
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ar ... 7513000821

My suspicion remains that it's at least as much to do with motorists identifying a hi-vis "obstruction" too early to do anything useful about it (so deciding it needs no action at that time), failing to reconsider it at the appropriate time (because it's already been dealt with as no-action-needed) and failing to recognise at a subconscious level common hi-vis patterns as a person.

...Nothing to do with putting all the blame or responsibility on the potential victim, but on empowering that potential victim to reduce the risk in the ways that they can. I encourage my teenage daughter to avoid walking dark town centre streets on her own at night, not because I think it would be her fault if something happened but because I think anything that reduces risk is good, even if the "blame" lies with others.

And do you also "empower" her by encouraging her to dress in Victorian floor-length skirts and a chastity belt with the key at home? Have you done anything to encourage the police to take violent crimes against women more seriously?

[The utility cyclist]

Or better to also wear some reflectives on the arm signalling the turn and still assume that no one can see you.

Which seems to me to be a sound approach. Nothing to do with putting all the blame or responsibility on the potential victim, but on empowering that potential victim to reduce the risk in the ways that they can. I encourage my teenage daughter to avoid walking dark town centre streets on her own at night, not because I think it would be her fault if something happened but because I think anything that reduces risk is good, even if the "blame" lies with others.

You describe victim blaming to a tee, you fail to understand the mental aspect with respect to that as so many others have and will continue to do so until we massively shift the onus back towards those doing the carnage and address the thought process with respect to responsibility and safety.

How people cannot see that we have gone down the slippery slope so far with respect to offsetting those doing the harm that we are at a point of dressing with reflectives/high visibility garments and crash protection systems or be blamed for our demise or as worse excluded and castigated by our own like. That we have to hugely modify our behaviour not the other way around. That we are being forced from the very infrastructure that some cycling clubs lobbied and paid for to be improved over a 100 years ago that we are now at the point were our lawful right to ride where we want is threatened at every avenue both physically and in unlawful acts, that gettingabout is curtailed, made more difficult, fearful due to others not taking their full responsibility.

I'm sorry but I won't wear reflectives to offset the responsibility of others, as it stands I have to have a rear light, I don't necessarily agree and as we've seen (or not) blame is put upon those with not bright enough lights, not wearing helmets/hi-vis, even being on the road itself all from the very people sworn on oath to keep the peace That is sick and twisted and yet more evidence that we are being pushed further down and victim blamed, where does it end?
How far will we have to go to further offset the dangers presented by others, electronic tags was one suggestion recently, given the carnage still happens it's clear this method is not working and it's easy to undestand why.

[MikeF]

I'm sorry but I won't wear reflectives to offset the responsibility of others, as it stands I have to have a rear light, I don't necessarily agree and as we've seen (or not) blame is put upon those with not bright enough lights, not wearing helmets/hi-vis, even being on the road itself all from the very people sworn on oath to keep the peace That is sick and twisted and yet more evidence that we are being pushed further down and victim blamed, where does it end?

The meaning of "camouflage" is??

[[XAP]Bob]

I'm sorry but I won't wear reflectives to offset the responsibility of others, as it stands I have to have a rear light, I don't necessarily agree and as we've seen (or not) blame is put upon those with not bright enough lights, not wearing helmets/hi-vis, even being on the road itself all from the very people sworn on oath to keep the peace That is sick and twisted and yet more evidence that we are being pushed further down and victim blamed, where does it end?

The meaning of "camouflage" is??

The meaning of due care and attention is?
The meaning driving well within the distance you can see to be clear is?

Reading the CTC objections to compulsory lights is very interesting, and informative...

[The utility cyclist]

I'm sorry but I won't wear reflectives to offset the responsibility of others, as it stands I have to have a rear light, I don't necessarily agree and as we've seen (or not) blame is put upon those with not bright enough lights, not wearing helmets/hi-vis, even being on the road itself all from the very people sworn on oath to keep the peace That is sick and twisted and yet more evidence that we are being pushed further down and victim blamed, where does it end?

The meaning of "camouflage" is??

Nothing is 'camoflaged' to me and many others, I see it as a failing on my part to have not looked properly or taken enough time if on the rare occasion I miss something, because I built in a safety margin a slight error on my part won't end in mishap. We bother to take driving/riding seriously, we bother to look and understand, we bother to have a second look, we don't get distracted so easily.
I actually enjoy making progress whilst driving, some say i go too fast, go through at junctions/gaps etc when they might not, drive in an odd/wrong position on the road but it's me who has looked, advance planned for the hazard and the environ around me, taken time to look and see and understand my responsibilities when on the road.
YMMV

[pwa]

Or better to also wear some reflectives on the arm signalling the turn and still assume that no one can see you.

Which seems to me to be a sound approach. Nothing to do with putting all the blame or responsibility on the potential victim, but on empowering that potential victim to reduce the risk in the ways that they can. I encourage my teenage daughter to avoid walking dark town centre streets on her own at night, not because I think it would be her fault if something happened but because I think anything that reduces risk is good, even if the "blame" lies with others.

You describe victim blaming to a tee, you fail to understand the mental aspect with respect to that as so many others have and will continue to do so until we massively shift the onus back towards those doing the carnage and address the thought process with respect to responsibility and safety.

How people cannot see that we have gone down the slippery slope so far with respect to offsetting those doing the harm that we are at a point of dressing with reflectives/high visibility garments and crash protection systems or be blamed for our demise or as worse excluded and castigated by our own like. That we have to hugely modify our behaviour not the other way around. That we are being forced from the very infrastructure that some cycling clubs lobbied and paid for to be improved over a 100 years ago that we are now at the point were our lawful right to ride where we want is threatened at every avenue both physically and in unlawful acts, that gettingabout is curtailed, made more difficult, fearful due to others not taking their full responsibility.

I'm sorry but I won't wear reflectives to offset the responsibility of others, as it stands I have to have a rear light, I don't necessarily agree and as we've seen (or not) blame is put upon those with not bright enough lights, not wearing helmets/hi-vis, even being on the road itself all from the very people sworn on oath to keep the peace That is sick and twisted and yet more evidence that we are being pushed further down and victim blamed, where does it end?
How far will we have to go to further offset the dangers presented by others, electronic tags was one suggestion recently, given the carnage still happens it's clear this method is not working and it's easy to undestand why.

I'm certainly not completely disagreeing with you in principle, but in practice you are sacrificing your safety (or the bit of it that is under your control) to make a point. I would not do that and I would not recommend it to anyone I cared about. Just as I would not recommend my teenage daughter to walk around dark urban streets alone in the early hours, even though she really ought to be able to do that without a worry.