Cycling and Socioeconomic Status

Stop Sign In Ghetto


Over time, the activity of cycling has developed certain connotations. In the early days, it was seen as a form of short distance transportation and later became a form of recreation. At some point, bicycles began to be associated with children and childhood. Young children would start their mobile adventures with tricycles and move up to more grown-up two wheelers. This was a way for children to play and travel through their neighborhoods.

During the latter part of the twentieth century, after a period of derision towards athletics, a fitness craze emerged. Adults began looking for ways to exercise, and cycling started to make a comeback.

From this change in culture came a renewed interest in bicycles as transportation. At the time, cars were an entrenched part of American life, making bicycles appear to be intruders. With cars at the core of society, there was less emphasis on conservation; gas prices and pollution weren’t as much of a concern as they became subsequently. So people used cars for trips as short as a drive across the street.

Such use of cars was associated with economic success. Being able to afford to maintain and drive a car everywhere was a sign of having made it to the middle class.

In America, where most people aspire to upward mobility, status symbols, such as cars were representative of one’s place in society. Luxury cars were an extension of this view and exuded external signs of financial position.

In this milieu, bicycles came to be seen as a mode of transportation for those who were less well off. Many people assumed that cyclists were riding bikes because they could not afford cars. Therefore, riding bicycles for transportation became associated with a lower class of people.

Cyclists, unlike drivers, had to exert effort to transport themselves from one location to another. The sweat and strain was diametrically opposed to the effortlessness associated with motor vehicles.

On some level, the relative price of the vehicles, and degree of effort involved in operating them, added a class element to the struggle between drivers and cyclists.

Today, many drivers see themselves as members of the upper echelons of society. Perched in prestigious vehicles, they look down on small, nearly naked cyclists as vermin on the road. This mentality is akin to the mindset born by some when passing a housing project where less fortunate individuals are forced to live out of necessity. The well-off person tends to look down on people who find themselves in predicaments like poverty.

In such scenarios, it’s not uncommon to blame the less fortunate for their own problems. When you’re well-off, and not facing a long ascent out of poverty, it’s easy to be judgmental. For those looking from the bottom up, the weight of recrimination is an added burden.

So it is with drivers and cyclists. Drivers look upon cyclists as a demented, misguided, subaltern class of people who exist at the bottom of the heap. Drivers think that cyclists should give up their childish, low class ways and ascend to the motorist class which has “made it” in society.

A touch of snobbishness can be seen when drivers speak scoffingly about scofflaw cyclists, painting all cyclists with a broad brush as a lesser group. Similar sentiments waft through the air when drivers blast horns at bicyclists who are in their way. The sound rings out like a loud, obnoxious wail of superiority, as the driver asserts his class privilege and demands deference.

What ensues is a typical class struggle, with the cycling under-class fighting for recognition, fairness, and an equal chance to fully participate in society. And, the motorist “upper class” (by their own definition) fights to maintain its edge, its advantage.

All of this is nothing more than a war of perceptions. Transportation choices know no class. Better-off people choose to ride bicycles for personal reasons including exercise, environmental concerns and convenience. Poorer people use bicycles to save money by avoiding the expenses associated with owning and operating a car. People whose finances fall in between ride bicycles for a variety of reasons, but generally not due to economic hardship.

Still, it’s difficult to obliterate the notion of bicycles as transportation for the poor. Years of marketing cars as opulent items has tainted views of other vehicles. Cars, with all their bells and whistles, give the impression of making the traveler fully equipped. Bicycles, with their skeletal form, give the impression of denuded machinery.

Among the challenges of integrating bicycles into our roadways is the need to dispel class associations for cars and bicycles. Until bicycles are disassociated with the idea of poverty and a lower, less valuable class, they will never obtain the same level of respect as cars have enjoyed for decades.

This entry was posted in Cycling and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Cycling and Socioeconomic Status

  1. H says:

    Your analysis makes sense until you get to present day. You contend that bicycle commuters still project an image of misfortune and poverty, while in reality this could not be further from the truth. your socioeconomic analysis is based on 15 year old observations.

    Bicycling, as a sport, has become incredibly mainstream – to the point where bicycle prices have become artificially inflated. The average American is now well aware of the fact that a bicycle can cost up to $18,000, moreover they know how to identify such a bicycle. Antagonism towards cyclists, more often than not, is fueled by the frustration and jealousy motorists feel towards cyclists.

    Picture an urban driver who has just spent half his yearly salary on a brand new luxury car – a car, which in its advertisement, was shown gliding through wide open roads with elegance. Picture that same driver sitting in morning rush hour traffic, while a fit, toned, energetic cyclist nonchalantly whizzes by him on a $4,000 bicycle. That driver (who is most likely overweight), now feels weak, emasculated, and foolish…so he may lash out by throwing something at the cyclist, making a profane gesture or shouting verbal insults.

    If, as you claim, this behavior was prompted by feelings of superiority, then urban homeless would be tormented and ridiculed much more often than they actually are, and by individuals other than aggressive youths and marginalized teens.

    The fact is, motorists have developed an inferiority complex towards cyclists…we make them feel small and insecure, whether about their laziness, lack of originality, or poor physique, and that is why they turn hostile (much like grade-school bullies).

    Motorists see bicyclists as a threat to their ego…and rightfully so, more often than not we cyclists are superior.

    • “Motorists see bicyclists as a threat to their ego…and rightfully so, more often than not we cyclists are superior.”

      I like your conclusion “more often than not we cyclists are superior,” even though I disagree with some of your points.

      To some degree, you are conflating bicycling as a sport and bicycle commuting. These are two very different things. Commuters come in all shapes and sizes, including overweight (see my post on bicycle weight limits), and sport cyclists are fit and toned. Typical commuters don’t ride $18,000 bicycles (or even $4,000 bicycles); some ride bikes costing over $1,000, others ride beaters to avoid theft when locking their bikes outdoors.

      You’re also giving people way too much credit when you say: “The average American is now well aware of the fact that a bicycle can cost up to $18,000, moreover they know how to identify such a bicycle.” I don’t know too many people, outside of the sport of cycling, who can correctly identify, let alone price, a high-end bicycle. Most non-cyclists don’t know that bicycles costing more than a few thousand dollars exist — being a bicycling blogger will teach you this. And, how does a $4,000 – $18,000 bicycle compare to a $60,000 – $80,000 luxury car, in terms of socioeconomic status?

      If you spend some time reading online comment sections, where the question of bicyclists using the road is being discussed, you will see that the majority of drivers consider cyclists to be inferior, and consider bicycles to be inferior to cars. In fact, it’s not uncommon for drivers to refer to bicycles as “toys” and cyclists as “children.”

      As for the urban homeless, they don’t share the road with drivers, so they aren’t in the drivers’ way. If they were, they would be ridiculed and tormented as much as cyclists are.

      I wish you were right about motorists having developed an inferiority complex towards cyclists. I don’t see this where I live, and I don’t generally hear such views from drivers or cyclists — but I’m looking forward to that day.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *