Cycling UK Forum

Can someone take the journalist out cycling so he can get to know what he writes about?

brooksby wrote:Rab McNeil's article claims that cyclists "cause cars to overtake into oncoming traffic." Really? I thought that it would be up to the driver to decide whether or not they think its safe to overtake, or do cyclists use some sort of mind trick on them??

If I could do mind tricks, the congestion would be awful... due to all the abandoned cars while the drivers strutted about scratching the floor and pretending to be chickens.

mjr wrote:

brooksby wrote:Rab McNeil's article claims that cyclists "cause cars to overtake into oncoming traffic." Really? I thought that it would be up to the driver to decide whether or not they think its safe to overtake, or do cyclists use some sort of mind trick on them??

If I could do mind tricks, the congestion would be awful... due to all the abandoned cars while the drivers strutted about scratching the floor and pretending to be chickens.

Many do not need to pretend as they have been headless chickens for years and years. Others just "play chicken". Many make crowing noises and do strutting-about.

My own mind-trick would be to cause them to forget how to start their filthy chariots. Of course, if this were a globally-emanated ray, we also would become starter-ignorant, which might be good for us too as the bike mileage would go up, along with the efficiency of our thrusters and burners, as our filthy chariots rusted on the drive or in the garage. They could be used as chicken coops (of the proper sort, not those for headless, playing or crowing chickens).

Cugel

661-Pete wrote:"Hate crime" or no, grossly insulting and likely to provoke hostile attacks on cyclists: that's always the danger when this sort of article gets exposure.

"Rab McNeil", eh? Sounds like a Scottish name, but hardly qualifies this idiot as a Scotsman. I'd call him no more than a Ned...

A Ned and likely also a jakey (a prevalent tradition amongst this class of "journalist"). He is possibly habitually sottered when behind the wheel of his cyclist-squasher. I believe that the procurator fiscal should apply the polis to him, with full vigour & vim inclusive of directions to the polis station with their truncheons.

Cugel

I believe 'jokes' about black people, females and other groups are non grata now

There must be many groups like cyclists that may be derided with immunity, railway enthusiasts, stamp collectors, chess players for example, any more suggestions?

What legislation is needed? How can we fight back? We could publicise jokes about stupid motrons for example, plenty among the Clean Jokes

There is no protection under law but plenty of protection under social pressure.
Like the editor who just got sacked for his Vegan jokes. Which I wasnt bothered by in the least, even though I would consider myself on the vegan side of any lines that he was drawing.

Cyril Haearn wrote:I believe 'jokes' about black people, females and other groups are non grata now

There must be many groups like cyclists that may be derided with immunity, railway enthusiasts, stamp collectors, chess players for example, any more suggestions?

What legislation is needed? How can we fight back? We could publicise jokes about stupid motrons for example, plenty among the Clean Jokes

Yeah but if deriding a group such as cyclists was to be made illegal or non grata the same might well apply to deriding "motrons" as a group.
There's some hypocrisy in this thread about derision of cyclists when a poster uses terms of abuse like Ned(Glaswegian for chav) and Jakey - an abusive Scottish term analogous to the English Pikey but directed against people even lower down the social order. I guess there's also hypocrisy from those who deride motorists here when they are themselves car owners. I don't share their anti car prejudice but if I did wouldn't have a car and adapt life accordingly.

Cyril Haearn wrote:I believe 'jokes' about black people, females and other groups are non grata now

So just White Males then .......The biggest group of tax payers in England .....Supporters of families .. etc ...
Yes i know it's a bit of a Troll-ish statement ... but its the reality check on this post ....

landsurfer wrote:

Cyril Haearn wrote:I believe 'jokes' about black people, females and other groups are non grata now

So just White Males then .......The biggest group of tax payers in England .....

I am a white male, quite happy with that

No! New taxes!

Cyril Haearn wrote:I am a white male, quite happy with that

No! New taxes!

Is that. No new taxes! or No! New Taxes! .....

On a technicality, white females are a larger group of taxpayers in the UK.

White males are fewer in number but 'earn' more and pay more tax

I love paying tax, wish I could pay more

Yes! More taxes!

pete75 wrote:

Cyril Haearn wrote:I believe 'jokes' about black people, females and other groups are non grata now

There must be many groups like cyclists that may be derided with immunity, railway enthusiasts, stamp collectors, chess players for example, any more suggestions?

What legislation is needed? How can we fight back? We could publicise jokes about stupid motrons for example, plenty among the Clean Jokes

Yeah but if deriding a group such as cyclists was to be made illegal or non grata the same might well apply to deriding "motrons" as a group.
There's some hypocrisy in this thread about derision of cyclists when a poster uses terms of abuse like Ned(Glaswegian for chav) and Jakey - an abusive Scottish term analogous to the English Pikey but directed against people even lower down the social order. I guess there's also hypocrisy from those who deride motorists here when they are themselves car owners. I don't share their anti car prejudice but if I did wouldn't have a car and adapt life accordingly.

A Ned is any person who .... behaves like a Ned. The status is voluntary and therefore a legitimate state for mockery should one find Ned behaviours egregious. Anyone can be a Ned or not-be a Ned.

"Jakey" is Weegie for "a habitually drunken person actually or bordering on being an alcoholic, with associated egregious behaviours resultant" and nothing to do with that other unpleasant term you mentioned. Again, the choice is made by that person, who may choose the alternative and thus become not-a-jakey.

Motons are not so much car owners as those who drive them like morons - another definition based on egregious and highly dangerous behaviour, not some involuntary condition; or even the voluntary condition of owning and driving a car (which may be done considerately and carefully).

***********

I feel you need to get a better grasp of these taxonomies and nomenclatures so that you can differentiate those that are defined by voluntarily bad behaviour from those that refer to involuntary conditions such as sexual orientation or skin colour. They are not the same sort of names and they are not used to express the same sort of derision or disapproval.

So there.

Cugel

landsurfer wrote:

Cyril Haearn wrote:I believe 'jokes' about black people, females and other groups are non grata now

So just White Males then .......The biggest group of tax payers in England .....Supporters of families .. etc ...
Yes i know it's a bit of a Troll-ish statement ... but its the reality check on this post ....

Ha ha - the biggest group of taxpayers because privileged to be awarded the most opportunity for getting a job rather than being discriminated against. Also the greatest payers of tax because the biggest owners of property, big business and other exploitative means that make them very rich indeed.

But no doubt you are sure that everything you have and have achieved is entirely due to your own brave efforts and natural worth.

Cugel, more a sort of dirty pink.

Cugel wrote:

pete75 wrote:

Cyril Haearn wrote:I believe 'jokes' about black people, females and other groups are non grata now

There must be many groups like cyclists that may be derided with immunity, railway enthusiasts, stamp collectors, chess players for example, any more suggestions?

What legislation is needed? How can we fight back? We could publicise jokes about stupid motrons for example, plenty among the Clean Jokes

Yeah but if deriding a group such as cyclists was to be made illegal or non grata the same might well apply to deriding "motrons" as a group.
There's some hypocrisy in this thread about derision of cyclists when a poster uses terms of abuse like Ned(Glaswegian for chav) and Jakey - an abusive Scottish term analogous to the English Pikey but directed against people even lower down the social order. I guess there's also hypocrisy from those who deride motorists here when they are themselves car owners. I don't share their anti car prejudice but if I did wouldn't have a car and adapt life accordingly.

A Ned is any person who .... behaves like a Ned. The status is voluntary and therefore a legitimate state for mockery should one find Ned behaviours egregious. Anyone can be a Ned or not-be a Ned.

"Jakey" is Weegie for "a habitually drunken person actually or bordering on being an alcoholic, with associated egregious behaviours resultant" and nothing to do with that other unpleasant term you mentioned. Again, the choice is made by that person, who may choose the alternative and thus become not-a-jakey.

Motons are not so much car owners as those who drive them like morons - another definition based on egregious and highly dangerous behaviour, not some involuntary condition; or even the voluntary condition of owning and driving a car (which may be done considerately and carefully).

***********

I feel you need to get a better grasp of these taxonomies and nomenclatures so that you can differentiate those that are defined by voluntarily bad behaviour from those that refer to involuntary conditions such as sexual orientation or skin colour. They are not the same sort of names and they are not used to express the same sort of derision or disapproval.

So there.

Cugel

I was unaware what teh term jakey meant so I looked it up. According to the Oxford living dictionary a jakey is a homeless person or tramp especially one who habitually drinks large quantities of alcohol. As I said someone even lower down the scale than those some call a pikey. They may drink a lot which may well be a result of their living conditions. You really think many homeless people choose to be so.
The same source describes a Ned as a stupid or loutish boy or man. People have no choice over either their birth sex or level of intelligence.
Both are derogatory terms used to describe certain groups of people.
Using your definition of choice it would be fine to use the term pikey as applied to travellers. That lifestyle is a choice is it not?