Lycra fraternity and Multitudes of cyclists on paths...

07Lapierre

Tombo2001 wrote: »

True -

I remember Fintan O'Toole writing an article whining about cyclists on footpaths - only a few years later it dawned on me that two principal traffic routes towards where he lives actually have bike paths on the footpath - i.e. that's what they are supposed to do.

And then if you don't go on the footpath, you get the @there's a perfectly good footpath and they wont go on them@ merchants.

Got it in one!

Bad cycling infrastructure is worse than no cycling infrastructure!

AndrewJRenko

Roadtoad wrote: »

Off thread: Idiots on bikes without lights (in dark or twilight) should have their bikes confiscated there and then.

And all the cars running with one or two broken brake lights, or one broken headlight, or no back lights at all due to DRLs on - all those should be confiscated too presumably?

Hope you have a big pound.

Kaisr Sose

Can I suggest a fraternity tie is included in the next Boardsies cycling kit order!

Dermot Illogical

I decided to alter it a little, just to highlight how much othering it contains.
_______________________________________________________________

There is a sense of entitlement developing among motorists which is not very nice at all.



I drive to work about three times a week in my trusty commuter and I have another car - admittedly not much used yet - for fast spins into the countryside, so I'm fully supportive of trying to get more people into cars and ­having a proper structure of roads, motorways and ­traffic-enhancing measures.


Yet the more that seems to be given to motorists, the more badly behaved many seem to be.

Driving in the mountains at the weekend, I find that groups of the furry dice fraternity seem to relish holding up the traffic by driving in positions that militate against passing. Yet that is a minor issue compared to the many urban drivers who break red lights, ignore speed limits, drive while texting, fail to look where they are going, drive while drunk or hungover, fail to indicate, have faulty lights, know nothing about lane discipline and drive up bus lanes with impunity. Then there are the multitudes who think the road is for them and not for anyone else.


When I'm walking Sam at night, I reckon that nearly three-quarters of the drivers who pass us are speeding.

Drivers have to cop on. We deserve a better infrastructure and to be treated with respect on the roads.


The more drivers, the worse it is for the nation's, and planet's, health. And respect works both ways. The four-wheeled fraternity have to obey the laws, not upset other road users and not be rude or arrogant.

tomasrojo

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

I decided to alter it a little, just to highlight how much othering it contains.

Works rather well!

tomasrojo

flatface wrote: »

He first claims that he is a cyclist so he can legitimise his anti-cyclist rant - but then takes great pains to differentiate himself (sturdy steed) from another kind of cyclist (Lycra fraternity) that need to somehow "Cop on".

Strangely in the same paper Brendan O'Connor was in the Lifestyle on about cycling but was again at pains to differentiate himself (upright riding heavy steal bike) with others (angry rude racing types).

I have three bikes, all steel. And yet, I feel no need to distance myself from crappy journalists.

Kaisr Sose

Dermot Illogical wrote: »

I decided to alter it a little, just to highlight how much othering it contains

An excellent piece. A career in Motoring journalism beckons.

HivemindXX

That these people feel the need to be specific about what sort of cyclist they are whining about is a victory of sorts.

They now realise that a significant number of their readers have a bike for a leisurely spin with the kids on a nice day or down to the shops (not anyone our lovely lord mayor knows of course) or (ironically) for getting back from the pub. Or at least they know someone like that. So the rhetoric has to be directed at those "lycra" types, not normal cyclists like you...I mean US.