Cycling UK Forum

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style ... 27179.html

I've heard lots of anti-cycle-facility rants, but this is a new one as far as I'm concerned

because car ownership isn't discriminatory using her criteria at all. What utter nonsense.

The Aldens are well known local nutters, I'm surprised that they've not defected to UKIP yet.

The £24m plus LSTF is going into a variety of areas, such as two major spearheads of adult cycle training - I work for the providers of both of these and the clientèle is (off the top of my head) about 90% female, about 90% ethnic minority and probably about 60% middle aged or retired. There are also to be 20 "Cycle hubs" that are going to be placed in areas that have low rates of cycling: mostly low income areas with a significant ethnic minority population: these hubs will supply free cycle training, free led rides, free maintenance lessons, etc. There will also be several thousand free bikes given out to people who can demonstrate that they a have a need for them but would struggle to acquire and use a bike without help (no where in the documentation does it say anything about targeting only young white males).

The model for the above is "Bike North Birmingham" which has been running for a couple of years now. The clientèle has been mostly female and mostly from ethnic minority backgrounds.

Thus, we have to conclude that either:
1/ cycling is largely young white males so all of this money is well spent as it's bringing cycling to brand new audiences.
OR
2/ cycling isn't just young white males (as demonstrated by the real data) and the Aldens are talking out of their saddles.

Whichever, the Aldens remain nutters.

Blimey! Which planet does this woman live on?

"The vast majority of cyclists on our roads are young, white men," claims Deirdre Alden

I'm 64 and I know full well I'm nowhere near the oldest cyclist on the road, let alone on this forum! White - yes - male - yes - but I see plenty of non-white people and women on bikes.

"Most elderly people are not going to cycle, and it would be dangerous for them to start on our streets now".

Oh well, all cycling is dangerous anyway....

“women of any ethnic group who wish to wear modest clothing, and I count myself in that category, are not going to cycle."

Excuse me! Mrs P cycles as much as I do, and, being also in her 60s, she certainly wears modest clothing suited to her age - no mini-skirts or plunging necklines. Indeed she wears trousers most of the time, on the bike and off it, and uses cycle clips as need be. I think Ms Alden's comments are an insult to most women. Unless of course she favours Victorian dress and bloomers...

They are absolutely correct"?

Question is whether the fact that most drivers are also in the same groups and that the same ethnic minorities discourage women for driving makes motoring equally discriminatory?

Wow talk about missing the point. The reason most cyclists are young men is because they are the ones who can tolerate the road conditions.

Proper infrastructure done right will see everyone taking part.

"Everyone" is pushing it a bit. Quite apart from those whose infirmities preclude, there are quite a few people who just don't want to. I know a lot of people on here don't get that, just as I don't get how some people don't like Old Peculiar and Stilton, but there you go.

Irrelevant though, as is this councillor's wibbling. Making it such that anyone who wants to and is able to feels they can is all you can really hope for.

OP and Stilton, um lovely! Got to agree about 'everyone', better facilities might increase numbers, but, I'm not convinced there will ever be a massive increase in take up.

It all depends what the aim is. If people riding bicycles is seen to be a good thing for their own health and you want to enable everybody who wants to cycle to be able to do so then provision for cyclists may be adequate. If people riding bicycles is seen as part of a solution to our transport problems as part of a policy to shift people from over-reliance upon personal motorised transport then a more carrot and stick approach is needed. The latter is not so much about catering to people who enjoy riding bikes and have a particular desire to cycle to work as making the bike the cheapest and most practical mode of transport for short journeys

Ignoring the background to the councillor/politician making the "discriminatory" claims, I do wonder if there is an element of some sort of observational bias in that many people probably fail to notice the majority of everyday cyclists (ok ... drivers as well !! but that's not my point). Instead it is the few lycra louts who charge around inconsiderately, take priority they don't have, etc. who are actually noticed and register. And from what I've read here, that group may have a higher proportion of young male riders.

And people are then quicker to criticise because of the unsociable riding they have noticed.

I doubt this is the reason behind the original comment, but I find myself noticing how bad driving has got mainly because of the minority who don't give me decent clearance on passing. It is the unsociable few who tend to get noticed and their behaviour then generalised to the entire group.

Ian

Funny thing this "lycra louts". YMMV, of course, but IME it's not lycra'd roadies who flout the rules; as a rule it's yoof on mountain bikes, or more accurately £75 full sus Argos made of cheese BSOs which would fall to bits if actually taken anywhere where you'd need full sus.

But I digress.

karlt wrote:Funny thing this "lycra louts". YMMV, of course, but IME it's not lycra'd roadies who flout the rules; as a rule it's yoof on mountain bikes, or more accurately £75 full sus Argos made of cheese BSOs which would fall to bits if actually taken anywhere where you'd need full sus.

+1

Mind you, just off to see a bunch of lycra louts cycling in London today. Bet they don't stop for red lights or slow down for people standing at the side of the road.

The vast majority of cyclists on our roads are young, white men. Most elderly people are not going to cycle, and it would be dangerous for them to start on our streets now.

Women of any ethnic group who wish to wear modest clothing, and I count myself in that category, are not going to cycle. It is a discriminatory form of transport

She's a misunderstood cycling advocate. She realises the unacceptability of the hostile road conditions cyclists face and how that puts off many people who might otherwise cycle. She goes as far as to say that the city's roads are currently dangerous. She recognises the exclusionary effect of promoting cycling as a sport which requires special clothes, hi-vis and helmets rather than a practical mode of transport which anybody can do in their everyday clothes.

It's just a shame that the newspaper misrepresented her views by missing off her next comments about "going dutch", "presumed liability" and a vigorous attack upon what she sees as "a culture of victim blaming".

A true visionary

Blimey! I must have read a different article, tongue in cheek?

Phil Fouracre wrote: tongue in cheek?

Just a bit