It turns me off.

[johncharles]

I am not bothered what moral attitudes vegans or veggies have to food but I see why my choice of my choice of food cannot be supplied as well.

If you have any particular dietary requirements you should probably state them when making any food booking. I'm sure the volunteers at a not for profit cycling event will do all they can to help.

I don't have any particular dietry requirements but unless the advertisement for the occasion actually states that the food is only veggie then fine but if not why shouldn't there be meat based food without anyone asking for it in advance.

Why can't I ask for meat products ?

[johncharles]

It's a fact based on what research then. It's the generalisations that some on here give who I disagree with.

You don't don't believe in generalisations then? You think the police waste their time with psychological profiles? You think similarly of psychologists?
As I said earlier, you may not like it but we all fall into patterns and it's the little things we do everyday (like reading the Mail) that allow others to (correctly) pigeon hole us.

No need for me to dig out research, it's pretty much fact - however feel free to show the world why it is nonsense.

So everybody who reads the Daily Mail are leaning towards where then politically.

I think the police waste a lot of time and money on lots of things including profiling.

People generalise on very flimsy evidence which happens on here very regularly.

You are obviously far more expert in these matters then I am Kwackers

[Jack]

You are obviously far more expert in these matters then I am Kwackers

Yes

[kwackers]

So everybody who reads the Daily Mail are leaning towards where then politically.

I think the police waste a lot of time and money on lots of things including profiling.

People generalise on very flimsy evidence which happens on here very regularly.

You are obviously far more expert in these matters then I am Kwackers

Is that a generalisation aimed at the police? Based not, one would hope on superficial evidence...
The only reason profiling can be a waste of time is because it's often based on the flimsiest of evidence. Given a decent amount of information though it's very accurate.

[bigphil]

I am not bothered what moral attitudes vegans or veggies have to food but I see why my choice of my choice of food cannot be supplied as well.

If you have any particular dietary requirements you should probably state them when making any food booking. I'm sure the volunteers at a not for profit cycling event will do all they can to help.

I don't have any particular dietry requirements but unless the advertisement for the occasion actually states that the food is only veggie then fine but if not why shouldn't there be meat based food without anyone asking for it in advance.

Why can't I ask for meat products ?

Why would you specifically expect to be given meat or animal based food stuffs? Is it really that important to eat animal based products when attending a conference? If it was I'd suggest you have a specific dietary requirement.

[grw]

Why would you specifically expect to be given meat or animal based food stuffs? Is it really that important to eat animal based products when attending a conference? If it was I'd suggest you have a specific dietary requirement.

bigphil - I think you are missing the real point here. It's that meat is part of the British way of life, and its tree hugging hippy environmentalists with their underhand vegan ways trying to force their beliefs on to the rest of us. They're trying to undermine our great agricultural industry, and our farmers, defending our green and pleasant land. What I want to know is this - will there still be a European gravy train be if there's no meat to eat? Is it worth having a train for a nut roast?

[bigphil]

Why would you specifically expect to be given meat or animal based food stuffs? Is it really that important to eat animal based products when attending a conference? If it was I'd suggest you have a specific dietary requirement.

bigphil - I think you are missing the real point here. It's that meat is part of the British way of life, and its tree hugging hippy environmentalists with their underhand vegan ways trying to force their beliefs on to the rest of us. They're trying to undermine our great agricultural industry, and our farmers, defending our green and pleasant land. What I want to know is this - will there still be a European gravy train be if there's no meat to eat? Is it worth having a train for a nut roast?

So lunch is not acceptable unless it has meat?

[Ain't no monkey]

They're trying to undermine our great agricultural industry, and our farmers, defending our green and pleasant land.

So lunch is not acceptable unless it has meat?

Phil, I think he's being ironic

[reohn2]

I don't disagree that vegan evangelism has no place at a cycling confrence and you make your point clearly - but you miss my point again. A menu does not necessary reflect an agenda.

If the menu was pizza would you automatically assume there was some kind of Italian agenda?

Personally I'd assume that the person who volunteered to make the food was talented at making pizza - and further more if it tasted good I'd be grateful for it. If during lunch the chef was around I'd also be happy to have a conversation about what I was eating.

I think the whole point of the matter is the fact that the OP said that there was a point made(including a "small sermon") that the food was Vegan,the inference being that Veganism is the "right" way to eat.
That is why so much fuss is being made about the food issue.
For the record if I'd paid £20 to attend a cycling conference and someone who had cooked the food was rabbiting on (pun intended) about how whatever quisine was being served as being "the right" way to eat,I for one would be damned annoyed.

[glueman]

To return to the OPs point, what I took away from it was some people like austerity for austerity's sake, and some arrive at the same destination from joie de vivre, like our Jag riding lady who discovered the company of womenfolk from the saddle instead of counting her diamonds.
Somewhere along the way Campaigning piggy-backed onto our club and some people say the piggy is not for eating. The CTC has always campaigned but it didn't package its market into a if you like riding to work you'll enjoy lentils and George Monbiot lectures before. It would be better if it stopped.

[patricktaylor]

... The CTC has always campaigned but it didn't package its market into a if you like riding to work you'll enjoy lentils and George Monbiot lectures before. It would be better if it stopped.

If I'd known the CTC was going to go on Facebook I wouldn't have joined. It's losing its dignity, and gives the impression it will gleefully campaign on anything that goes. That's a turn-off.

[reohn2]

To return to the OPs point, what I took away from it was some people like austerity for austerity's sake, and some arrive at the same destination from joie de vivre, like our Jag riding lady who discovered the company of womenfolk from the saddle instead of counting her diamonds.
Somewhere along the way Campaigning piggy-backed onto our club and some people say the piggy is not for eating. The CTC has always campaigned but it didn't package its market into a if you like riding to work you'll enjoy lentils and George Monbiot lectures before. It would be better if it stopped.

Well said!
The CTC was a, perhaps the cycling club but lost its way when it went corporate and then had to attract government funding.

[voujan]

I am not at all convinced that climate change is affected by motor cars or human behaviour

You're not alone there voujan. Why be swayed by the overwhelming body of evidence based science when unfounded opinion and wishful thinking give a good excuse to ignore the implications, especially when the implications will mostly affect other people.

My point of view is not an excuse nor is it based on unfounded opinion. I don't own a car, I grow a lot of my food and and could be seen as good example of someone who has a low carbon footprint. The amount of published evidence on links between CO2 and global warming is overwhelming but the more I read of it, the less convinced I am. Scientists are finding it very difficult to publish anything that disagrees with what is now being presented as fact. If a fraction of the time and money spent on green politics was used to help the developing countries grow sustainable food and combat AIDS it would be a much better world.

[
Cycling is riddled with environmental and sustainability benefits from a personal to a global level. It would be strange for CTC to stand back from them and just say 'cycle cos its nice'.

I agree that cycling brings much benefit to the living environment. It is good to be rid of noise and pollution and stressfull living and that is certainly worth promoting. Also as Si points out, we are a bad influence to the industrialising Eastern nations who now want status symbols. My objection to the CTC taking up a stance on "green issues" is that it re-inforces the stereotype and makes all other reasons to cycle seem trivial, as you put it "coz its nice to ride". My reasons for cycling are to get from A to B, keep healthy, and enjoy the natural environment. I want more people to cycle because it will make a better living environment. My point of view on environmentalism will not be popular with most people, and many will will assume I'm ignorant because I don't agree that what is now being taught in schools as fact, but despite not being an environmentalist, my lifestyle is one that would be seen not to conflict with the environmentalist's way. I want the CTC to represent cycing, end of. That is the common interest we have. I would not expect eveyone to cycle for the same reasons I do, so why should I be expected to support green politics just because I ride a bike.

[kwackers]

I agree that cycling brings much benefit to the living environment. It is good to be rid of noise and pollution and stressfull living and that is certainly worth promoting. Also as Si points out, we are a bad influence to the industrialising Eastern nations who now want status symbols. My objection to the CTC taking up a stance on "green issues" is that it re-inforces the stereotype and makes all other reasons to cycle seem trivial, as you put it "coz its nice to ride". My reasons for cycling are to get from A to B, keep healthy, and enjoy the natural environment. I want more people to cycle because it will make a better living environment. My point of view on environmentalism will not be popular with most people, and many will will assume I'm ignorant because I don't agree that what is now being taught in schools as fact, but despite not being an environmentalist, my lifestyle is one that would be seen not to conflict with the environmentalist's way. I want the CTC to represent cycing, end of. That is the common interest we have. I would not expect eveyone to cycle for the same reasons I do, so why should I be expected to support green politics just because I ride a bike.

Sorry I really don't get this.
You don't want the CTC to 'sell' cycling on it's green merits? This seems to be a common theme from a lot of people on this thread and tbh I've never heard so much nonsense.

Do we want the CTC to sell cycling to the general public? (I'll assume a Yes here.)

If they're going to sell cycling shouldn't it be sold on ALL it's benefits?

Isn't using less finite resource (fuel) a benefit? (I think it's safe to assume that nobody on here actually believes it isn't)

So selling the 'green' side is a fact, not a political statement.

Are people really of the opinion that the only reason given to cycle by the CTC should be "because it's nice" (which if you're a first time cyclist, I reckon there's a good chance you'll get off and think that it was anything but.)

If you want to sell cycling sell it on ALL it's benefits because if you don't then the very act of being selective makes YOU the person responsible for making the issue political.

[voujan]

Sorry I really don't get this.
You don't want the CTC to 'sell' cycling on it's green merits? This seems to be a common theme from a lot of people on this thread and tbh I've never heard so much nonsense.

Do we want the CTC to sell cycling to the general public? (I'll assume a Yes here.)

If they're going to sell cycling shouldn't it be sold on ALL it's benefits?

If you want to sell cycling sell it on ALL it's benefits because if you don't then the very act of being selective makes YOU the person responsible for making the issue political.

"Sell" to me implies doing something for profit, or something is given in exchange; I'm comfortable with the word "promote". Yes, I want the CTC to promote cycling and hopefully, people will decide to take it up when they see the benefits. I want the CTC to promote ALL the benefits of cycling, whether that be the spectacle of the Tour De France, or a means to reduce your carbon footprint. What I don't want is for the CTC to stereotype the individual viewpoint of cyclists. I love the Tour De France, but I wouldn't want the CTC to promote the idea that all cyclists are into racing, speed, lyra and all that goes with it. I am not an environmentalist and I am not convinced that CO2 causes global warming, however the CTC has a clear policy on this:

from CTC Policy Overview,
"We will show that climate change is linked to our transport choices and that anyone who owns a cycle can do something to reduce their emissions from transport."
"Yes governments and International corporations will make the biggest impacts, but we can all influence those decisions by our voices and our actions."
"Defra have asked us to help communicate climate change issues to cyclists & the general public."

That is political. That is the promotion of an ideal not the promotion of cycling.

Are people really of the opinion that the only reason given to cycle by the CTC should be "because it's nice"

I hope not: Racing, Mountain biking, touring, commuting, tandems, mechanics, cleaner towns, better society, safer roads, cheaper transport, low carbon footprint.. etc,
Promote them all, just don’t say all cyclists should conform to any one of those.