Mike Sales wrote:mjr wrote:I now think one probably should distinguish between "vehicular cyclists" (fine, just a way of getting around) and "vehicularist cyclists" (bad, the sort of people who oppose all cycling-specific lanes and roads as a matter of principle).
When I read Cyclecraft I was surprised to find that I had been a vehicular cyclist for many years.
When I was told that I should use the sorry apologies for British cycle facilities I became vehicularist.
Given adequate facilities I would be happy to use them.
It is not so much a matter of principle as of refusing to be shunted off into these pitiful paths for the convenience of drivers.
If you would use adequate infrastructure, you're not vehicularist. They're the ones who write letters of objection to cycleways without even looking at the plans - just because it's a cycleway. They're the ones who get picked up by Dutch police for riding on the dual carriageway outside Schipol instead of the flat smooth cycleway alongside.
No reasonable person would say you should use the sort of junk that infests the villages south of Boston, for example. Or Nuneaton.