What can we do to encourage more women to cycle?

[Cyril Haearn]

There's no need or point in encouraging more women to cycle. If they don't want to do it then it's down to them. Live and let live

If more women cycle, more families cycle. More cyclists make the road safer for all of us. Also, it means more future cyclists.

I do not want 'more cycling', I want less motor traffic
Maybe some ex-motorists would take up cycling but not too many I hope

[Vorpal]

There's no need or point in encouraging more women to cycle. If they don't want to do it then it's down to them. Live and let live

If more women cycle, more families cycle. More cyclists make the road safer for all of us. Also, it means more future cyclists.

I do not want 'more cycling', I want less motor traffic
Maybe some ex-motorists would take up cycling but not too many I hope

If you want less motor traffic, how do you think the former motorists will get around?

[Cyril Haearn]

If more women cycle, more families cycle. More cyclists make the road safer for all of us. Also, it means more future cyclists.

I do not want 'more cycling', I want less motor traffic
Maybe some ex-motorists would take up cycling but not too many I hope

If you want less motor traffic, how do you think the former motorists will get around?

They will travel less
They will stop buying bottled water, walk to the shops and live near work, plenty could easily move (I plan to do that again soon)

Maybe they will cycle a bit too or even walk, that is the most reliable way and often the best

I suspect people who say they want more cycling mean they want a transfer from motor to cycle, right?

[Vorpal]

I suspect people who say they want more cycling mean they want a transfer from motor to cycle, right?

I would like to see more people cycle, rather than drive. But I would also like to see drivers transferring to other forms of transport, especially public transport. And, of course, travelling less. I'm sure that my reasons aare similar to others'.

[thirdcrank]

Just on the subject of things which lure people away from cycling, it's my impression that PCP never-never finance deals seem to have caused car sales to soar. It's only an unscientific perception but I suspect a lot more young women now find running a car within reach than before, even if it's a lot more expensive overall than paying cash. I've posted before that PCP is set to be the next financial mis-selling scandal so perhaps we may see some data about victims broken down into more detail.

[mattsccm]

Firstly , my apologies for not ploughing through every post. It's become rather tedious and uninspiring. (why do what are often the most important issue's head this way?)
Might I ask, why the desire to increase the number of women cycling? Is it a need to deal with a perceived inequality or discrimination? That's all I can see.
Please note that I am most definitely separating a desire to get people on their bike rather than out of the car.
My personal view is mixed. I teach, partly I think because I like what I do and thus want others to do it as well because things are great. They must be because I like them. To that end I would like to see anyone on a bike. I would like to see fewer vehicles on the road but getting people on bikes won't sort that one out as it won't reduce commercial traffic. I would argue that more cyclist means more traffic as people drive to a cycling venue. That's most certainly the case around here.
Spot something there?
yep. I live in the country so the idea of commuting by bike is to a great extent a non starter. Much as I would like to I am not cycling 25 miles each way to work and my wife most certainly isn't. Not because she is female but because it's a waste of time. The idea of swapping cars for bikes is largely a urban ideal.
Finally why not encourage ethnic minorities (or what ever the politically correct word is this month) to cycle? I see plenty of women about but nobody with what might be an African family history and the only ( once a year) Asians are the families who hire a bike and ride the gravel.
Finally , to my mind this all smacks mildly of discrimination. Would we be better off as a nation getting the fat, beer swilling, telly watching white male onto his bike first?
All just idle thoughts rather than any attempt to be rude or negative so please don't assume otherwise.

[Pete Owens]

So why do females in NL represent about 53% of all those cycling, which in fact is 7 times the number of ALL male/female people riding bikes for transport in the UK (as a % of mode) do you think how they treat people on bikes has any bearing on that, particularly females, as in they see it as a normal activity like walking?

I think it is that the NL is a more egalitarian society, in which societal norms put less pressure on people to conform to gender stereotypes. I would also expect to see less gender disparity in the Nordic countries. Simarly, in more conservative countries (eg Turkey), you will see a greater gender disparity.

My sport is orienteering ... <snip>

And while I think you're right that Dutch society is more egalitarian, a key point here is you go on to compare to a sport. In NL cycling isn't primarily a sport, it's a way of getting around, much like driving is here. People need to get around, they take the most convenient way, and in NL that's often a bike.

My point is about physical activity rather than sport - I just used orienteering as a specific example that I had hard figures for. Whatever your idea of cycling (and I am certainly a slow utility rider rather than spots cyclist) it cannot be denied that it is physically active. The social norm for respectable females is to avoid such. Just visit your work canteen tomorrow lunchtime and look at the shoes and clothing worn by men and women. How many of each do you think would be able to climb on a bike in the clothes that they were wearing while retaining their diginity?

And gender stereotypes don't just govern cycling - women are less likely to drive than men and more likely to use buses (the reverse of what you would expect if the choice was governed by fears of personal safety). And as others have mentioned the real issue that is important in public policy terms is reducing car use.

There is no particular merit in riding a bike other than to replace a car journey - and women seem to be doing rather better than men at not driving everywhere even if this doesn't involve cycling. So perhaps we should rephrase the question as "What can we do to discourage more men from driving? "

[Cyril Haearn]

Firstly , my apologies for not ploughing through every post. It's become rather tedious and uninspiring. (why do what are often the most important issue's head this way?)
Might I ask, why the desire to increase the number of women cycling? Is it a need to deal with a perceived inequality or discrimination? That's all I can see.
Please note that I am most definitely separating a desire to get people on their bike rather than out of the car.
My personal view is mixed. I teach, partly I think because I like what I do and thus want others to do it as well because things are great. They must be because I like them. To that end I would like to see anyone on a bike. I would like to see fewer vehicles on the road but getting people on bikes won't sort that one out as it won't reduce commercial traffic. I would argue that more cyclist means more traffic as people drive to a cycling venue. That's most certainly the case around here.
Spot something there?
yep. I live in the country so the idea of commuting by bike is to a great extent a non starter. Much as I would like to I am not cycling 25 miles each way to work and my wife most certainly isn't..
..
.. .

You should move home or job to save money time resources and danger
50 miles a working day for 40 years makes 390 000 miles plus the miles your wife does
Obviously driving is too cheap and attractive
I just started a new job 20 km away, plan to move soon so I can walk to work

Some people may have trouble moving but plenty could if they wanted, teaching is a steady job, you are not likely to be relocated by your employer, right?

Driving is often b****y dangerous, last week someone drove into the back of a stationary vehicle and killed himself a couple of stops down the Autobahn at 9:30, he must have been just a few minutes behind me

[ThePinkOne]

Another issue is clothing. 2 aspects- size and social expectations.

Size. Not all ladies who want to cycle are size 8-12 and built lightly, however it's rare to find ladies cycle clothing above a size 12, and when it does exist, a smallish size 18 is generally all that can be had. Try getting a decent ladies-cut cycle waterproof when you have a 48-inch chest (bust) and wide shoulders. Nor is men's kit an answer as sleeves tend to be too long and hips too narrow, plus the shaping around the bust doesn't really work properly. Even Corinne Dennis and Altura don't cater for ladies with large busts (max size 18 which is about a 42-inch bust- at a push). Thank goodness for Fat Lad at the Back (Lasses range) and Cleverhood cycle capes; but these are not exactly budget options.

Social expectations. There are very strong (generally unspoken) social expectations on how women should dress for the workplace, these make it more difficult to cycle to work. Unless of course you are luckly enough to work in a sector where a degree of "imperfect grooming" is tolerated. TBH, the social expectations for (work) clothing get in the way of all cycling, but I'd say it's far worse for women then for men. I spend a fair bit of time in places like construction sites and engineering workshops, so can get away with wearing a pair of (Corinne Dennis) cycle tights as leggings and adding my site jacket and safety boots, and I keep my hair in a "no fuss" style that works under a hard hat or bump-cap (as my hairdresser says- cutting my hair uses barbering techniques really ). However, I am very much in the minority; most women in work are expected to dress in a very stereotypical "female" way and have "well-groomed" hair/makeup.

Nor is "have a shower when you get to work" an option as female grooming to the social expectation generally involves considerably more than a quick shower; think: putting on makeup, drying/styling hair etc. (Just becasue I don't do it doesn't mean to say I don't know what is involved ).

TPO

[thirdcrank]

... And gender stereotypes don't just govern cycling - women are less likely to drive than men and more likely to use buses (the reverse of what you would expect if the choice was governed by fears of personal safety).

I'm not sure that choice of public transport against the car is anything to do with gender stereotypes. It's economic reality that some groups have less access to private motor transport than others through differences in economic status. That's what I was getting at with my PCP reference above. An increasing number of women are taking the chance of being able to buy a car, increasingly a nice new on on the never-never.
==================================================================
PS For anybody who has forgotten or didn't know, this thread was started a decade ago by the CTC Press Office looking for answers for some media hype.

[Username]

I suspect people who say they want more cycling mean they want a transfer from motor to cycle, right?

I would like to see more people cycle, rather than drive. But I would also like to see drivers transferring to other forms of transport, especially public transport. And, of course, travelling less. I'm sure that my reasons aare similar to others'.

*shudders*

<post removed as i can't be bothered to take out each bit of swearing.individually>

[Vorpal]

If we don't get more people out of cars, into public transport, and onto their feet and pedal/electric cycles, we don't have half a hope of preventing environmental destruction. Electric cars are not the answer, for all kinds of reasons, although it may be possible to improve them enough to make some versions of car sharing or lyft/uber style cars on demand feasible.

We also need to reduce how much people travel altogether; find ways to allow more people to work from home, encourage people to live closer to work, return to local school attendance, provide transport where this isn't feasible (school buses or public transport), reduce consumption of natural resources....

It goes way beyond the topic of this thread, but while public transport needs improvement, as part of an integrated transport system it will be absolutely crucial to moving people around for least environmental impact.

[Wanlock Dod]

If we don't get more people out of cars, into public transport, and onto their feet and pedal/electric cycles, we don't have half a hope of preventing environmental destruction...

And they seem to be destroying society even faster than they are destroying the environment...

[CJ]

In reply to Thirdcrank & Cyril Haearn: cycle sport is part of the problem because of its tendency to dominate cycling culture, because it is more exciting and because its practitioners view themselves as more expert cyclists than the rest of us. To whom does the media turn for a comment on cycling in this bike-forsaken country? To a pro or ex-pro cyclist. Currently they usually get Chris Boardman, who fortunately can see the bigger picture and totally gets it that what is right for racing is not right for every day. But he is the exception that proves the rule and on other occasions we get a cringeworthy comment from someone with muscle for brains.

There's a vicious spiral in which hostile conditions for cycling - that have obtained in all English-speaking countries since at least WW2 - deplete cycling of its gentler participants, effectively 'boiling down' the activity to a 'hard core' of enthusiasts, where the hardest sporting enthusiasts dominate. Fast, aggressive and dangerous forms of cycling are the only forms ever seen on TV. The clothing, protective equipment and other accompaniments of this kind of cycling are presumed necessary for ANY kind of cycling. It is assumed that you can't cycle to work without workplace showers (that the Dutch do not have) or in your work clothes (like the Dutch do) and without a helmet (that the Dutch do not wear). These trappings, that cycling gets from cycle sport, get in the way of normalising and expanding the activity into the sphere it previously occupied and still does in countries that never lost their everyday cycling culture. Cycling thus becomes locked into a sporty cul-de-sac, where the only possible expansion is into the sporty, thrill-seeking minority of the population, who happily accept these trappings as outward manifestations of the 'seriousness' of their activity.

And for sure, there are just as many, probably more sporty cyclists in the Netherlands, but they are still a small fraction of the population, most of whom in THAT country cycle for transport, thereby diluting the sporty ones to the point that they become almost invisible. And in fact, because riding a city bike in normal clothes is such a normal part of being Dutch, a lot of the Dutch sport cyclists also have such a bike and use it just like everyone else when they are not doing sport - something unthinkable for most English-speaking sport cyclists.

Sport taps into the human instincts that are useful in time of war, not exclusive to but most manifest in the male of the species. So any activity that is dominated by its sporting elite, tends to be dominated also by men - especially if it is perceived to be dangerous. And if one is perceived to need a helmet for it... no more need be said on that score.

[Cyril Haearn]

CJ is right about cycle sport

Eddy Merckx is the greatest, Barry Hoban (he handed me a medal once), Granville Sidney, Beryl Burton
Boardmans dad was a good tester, got in the top ten of the BBAR

I think for many people the American who did not win the TdF seven times has discredited cycle sport. History had to be rewritten, just like in '1984'

Unfortunately there is a lot of money in it

CJ: sport has to do with war..
I hate war but I love national anthems!