Could Bike Shops and Bicycle Marketing Be Contributing to the Paucity of Female Cyclists?

Posted on April 12, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

Green Flowered Bike

 

A number of studies have been conducted, and articles written, about the gender imbalance in cycling. Women make up only 24 percent of bicycling trips.

In a post I wrote some time ago, I tried to outline the reasons why cycling might be less appealing to women than men. I did this because cycling will only become a legitimate form of transportation if it is accessible and used by many people — and those people should be representative of the general population.

As I mentioned then, some women are discouraged by the lack of bike lanes and other accommodations which would make cycling safer and more practical. But, many of the reasons for the huge difference in numbers of males and females participating in cycling remain unknown.

Based on personal observations and articles authored by women, I’ve begun to see the problem as more complex than it first appeared. On the surface, we see practical things such as safety and convenience. But there are a whole host of problems women face when trying to fit cycling into their daily lives.

One area which is rarely touched upon is the problem of riding with children. Although women seem to have found some solutions individually, very little has been done, in terms of product development and consumer education, to make riding with children practical.

Women have noted problems riding with very young children. There don’t seem to be many products available for this purpose, especially as concerns very young children. Mothers who are devoted cyclists have created their own systems of dealing with such things, although the safety of their inventions has yet to be tested. For now, safety assessment will have to be left up to the individual woman.

With respect to consumer education, many women are unclear about the rules for riding with young children. Some states have laws prohibiting cyclists from riding with children under 12 months of age. But, there is a lot of confusion among women about what the age restrictions are, and in some cases, women don’t even know that such restrictions exist.

Informally, women ask other women for guidelines. Developmental rules are generally followed, such as whether the baby can sit up steadily, and the importance of a well-fitting helmet is stressed. In the absence of products marketed for this purpose and the lack of information on this subject in parenting books, women must rely on one another to transport their children by bike.

It’s not difficult to see how women with young children would be discouraged from incorporating cycling into their lives when so little effort has been made to address their needs when designing products. In general, cycling and cycling products are aimed at men, which brings us to the next problem for women  —  bike shops.

Entering a bike shop is like walking into a candy-land for males. Sleek, shiny racing bikes line the walls. Tough-looking bikes with mean shocks are strategically positioned near the store entrance. An astonishing array of tools and maintenance products are prominently displayed for browsing. If you’re a man, you don’t know where to look first. If you’re a woman, you can saunter down to the back of the store where a few women-specific bicycles are huddled in a corner near a small rack of women’s cycling clothes.

Among the women’s products, there are very few items of practical use for women who commute. Nothing is displayed for traveling with children in tow, and things women might need, such as good pedals to use with high heels, are nowhere to be found.

Just the atmosphere is enough to turn some women off. Older stores often don a greasy sheen. Products and shelves are covered in dust. The bathroom may suffer from dinginess, dim light and too little toilet paper. And sometimes the dressing room lacks privacy, a good mirror and enough room for a woman to put down her bag and street clothes while trying on clothes.

To make matters worse, many of the sales people emphasize the technical aspect of bicycles to men and focus primarily on aesthetics with women. Not only are women interested in knowing about the technical side of bikes, but they can’t make an informed bicycle purchase decision without knowing whether the bike is designed to suit their purpose and riding style. Unless the store employs female sales people, there is often no one to ask about practical issues which face female cyclists. This is particularly true for new cyclists who may not know how to approach certain issues which are unique to women.

Why bike shops and the marketing of cycling products is geared so heavily towards men is unclear. It may have something to do with the fact that men make up the majority of the market. In America, profit trumps all, and women are an uncertain market for cycling products.

But, if too few companies take the risk of catering to women’s needs, very few women will be drawn into cycling, and the trend of women’s underrepresentation will continue. Bike shop owners and managers should reexamine their stores in terms of how welcoming or unwelcoming they are to female shoppers. Hiring more female sales people and carrying more products of interest to female cyclists would be a good way to increase business and make cycling more appealing to women.

Until more women begin to make cycling a regular part of their lives, we’ll never know why they weren’t participating. We need more women’s voices in cycling, both with respect to equipment needs and infrastructure preferences. More women must step forward to lead the way, or we’ll have difficulty implementing the changes they need to find cycling a suitable form of transportation. And in order for them to do that, we must make a concerted effort to create a more hospitable cycling environment.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , , , | 15 Comments

Anticipating Traffic Patterns Based On Vehicle Type

Posted on April 9, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

Modified Car

 

Recently, I’ve had to make regular trips to a location which is only accessible by car. As one who travels nearly everywhere by bicycle or foot, I’m not accustomed to spending so much time behind the wheel. To complicate matters, my lack of regular driving hasn’t kept my Boston driving skills honed, so I must be vigilant to avoid a catastrophic crash.

One of the few positive things about these trips by car is the amount of time I spend sitting in traffic with nothing to do. I do not use electronic devices while driving. Therefore, at every light, I have time to contemplate the wonders of the universe as I await the almighty green light, which will allow me to proceed on my way.

On one particular day, my departure was delayed, forcing me to race through traffic at breakneck speed. It occurred to me that if I studied the traffic patterns closely enough, I could shave some time off of my trip, not only that day, but every day going forward.

To begin my analysis, I studied the movement of the lanes. For the first half mile of the trip, traffic in the right lane moved faster than the left. This was surprising since there were numerous driveways, and several streets, where cars could enter and exit the road.

After passing the first major intersection, the speed of the traffic in the left lane increased. By following the flow of the traffic, I was able to move up four spaces relative to the cars which had been stopped near me at the light. I learned that at a particular intersection where many cars turned left, I would have to quickly maneuver into the right lane to avoid getting trapped behind the huge line of cars queuing up in the left turn lane.

Once I passed through that intersection, pulling back into the left lane would allow me to pick up some time. Two more intersections required staying in the left lane until I reached the last intersection where I would move into the left turn lane to turn onto the road where my trip would end.

For a couple of days, I tested this system, and found it to be fairly consistent. But, then one day, as I was sitting behind a huge truck at an intersection, it occurred to me that I could fine tune my system by more accurately predicting the traffic patterns along my route.

What’s more, I could utilize this information when riding my bike to improve my travel time and reduce the risk of an accident. Just as I was thinking this, a ridiculously tricked out pseudo-sports car pulled up alongside me.

The driver was revving his engine to make his presence known. The car itself, was obnoxiously noisy, making me wonder whatever happened to the laws against unregulated mufflers. In the absence of such laws, one would think that the local noise ordinance would come into play, but to enforce it, someone would have to keep up with the revving car which was itching to fly down the road, as soon as it found an opening in traffic.

At that moment, as I stared in disbelief at this noise and air pollution generating machine, it occurred to me that I could make predictions about the type of cars around me to determine the flow of traffic. For instance, it would not be difficult to predict that a tricked out car, or any sports car for that matter, would be driving faster than the average speed on the road.

It would also stand to reason that such a car would weave in and out of traffic, just like the cars in a video game, to maintain its speed and beat out the cars around it. Not surprisingly, this driver gunned the accelerator at the first hint of a green light. He was off and running.

Unfortunately, in front of me sat an old beat up car with a fading paint job. How difficult would it be to predict that a rundown sedan would drive slowly with an inattentive driver? Just as I imagined, the driver was slow to react to the green light. Both cars behind me blasted the horn out of impatience with this daydreaming wonder.

As his car drifted over the white line into the adjacent lane, his driving revealed itself as careless and unmeasured. Looking down at the dashboard instead of the road ahead of him, his car weaved back and forth, swaying in the breeze of uncertainty. Getting away from him was mandatory to avoid an accident.

I passed him on the left and accelerated to move away from him. Directly in my train of sight, stood an unwieldy minivan. Such a car would probably be occupied by a parent with children who would drive slowly out of concern for the offspring, and who might be distracted by their actions. A lumbering vehicle of this type was not the sort any serious Boston driver would want to be stuck behind, so I made a note to myself to switch lanes as early as possible any time such a car came into view.

Behind me, an obscenely expensive luxury car crept up my bumper. I was not surprised by the driver’s impatience. Despite her dangerous attempts to nudge my car forward, when there was nowhere for me to go, she glanced into the rearview mirror repeatedly to check and touch up her makeup. The combination of aggression and distraction came across as particularly dangerous, so I made a mental note to myself to be wary of expensive cars with entitlement minded drivers behind the wheel.

The longer I studied the cars, the better I became at predicting car behavior based on the type of car, the condition of the car, the size of the car and the color of the car — muted colors seemed to be more low-key, while screaming, bold cars were more likely to be aggressive.

Once home, I climbed onto my bike, where I felt more at home, and set out to test my theory in a car and bicycle road sharing scenario. Sure enough, based on my predictions about the type of car, I could position my bike to be in the right place at the right time.

Not only did this improve my ability to maneuver in traffic, but it also led me to conclude that many strategies used behind the wheel can be employed when riding a bike. So, despite my dislike of time spent waiting behind the wheel, I felt that I had spent my time well and had discovered something my highly attuned bicycling state would never have allowed me to observe.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , | 3 Comments

Driving As A Social Activity

Posted on April 5, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

When we think of driving, we imagine it as a clearly defined activity. In some ways it is. Certain actions are mandatory for operating a car. Steering, shifting gears, accelerating and braking are all part of the physical activity of driving. And, everyone who is familiar with the act of driving, would agree that these physical actions are inherent to the activity of driving.

Harder to define, and more easily disagreed upon, are the cognitive and psychological aspects of driving. These facets of the driving experience rarely come to mind when considering the task of driving. The most logical explanation for this is that cars are equated with a method of travel, so the mechanical aspect of driving is the focus of this mode of transportation.

The driver, however, is more than just the operator of the vehicle. Mastering the rudiments of operating a vehicle is only half the battle. Understanding the rules of the road, how to anticipate various driving scenarios, and how to apply sound judgment are all crucial to good driving. Yet, the last two are not tested at the time of licensing, or at any point after a license is issued. They should be. These factors are critical to determining who should be allowed to drive and who should not.

One of the problems with setting standards for acceptable rates of anticipation and situational judgment is that perspective and subjectivity come into play. For instance, an article recently appeared in the New York Times about whether people with autism spectrum disorders should be allowed to drive.

Some people question whether these individuals are fit to drive, due to the nature of their impairment. What sets this group apart from “normal” people is their difficulty with social cues, rigid adherence to rules, difficulty adapting to unexpected situations and impulsiveness.

To complicate matters, this group runs along a spectrum, which makes each of them a little different, in terms of the severity of their symptoms. So it’s not possible to determine, precisely, how well this group can drive. Learning about the challenges autistic people face, makes one worry about how safe it would be to let them drive.

What was most fascinating about the discussion which ensued, on the above-mentioned article, was the emphasis on what the commenters referred to as the “social” aspect of driving. To them, driving is a social activity.

They drew this conclusion from their observations of autistic people struggling with social cues. Some commenters, who had autistic family members, saw this as the biggest obstacle to their learning to drive well.

By “social activity” these commenters meant: an activity where drivers must be courteous, and read each other’s expressions. Maybe knowing autistic people leads to viewing driving as an activity requiring courteousness.

Courtesy, on American roads, was abandoned a long time ago. Most drivers only notice another driver’s expression when they are engaging in road rage or some other aggressive or inconsiderate behavior. The rest of the time, they watch other cars’ positions, relative to their own car, and try to determine whether they will maintain their current course, or make a change in direction.

The driver’s intentions are what one should look for. Is the driver’s head turned or positioned to view traffic to the rear? If so, this would indicate an intention to change position in traffic. The driver’s emotions and facial expression are less important. So, it’s hard to see where those who are trying to judge the suitability of autistic people for driving get the idea that social skills are necessary to safely operate a motor vehicle.

Impulsivity, and the ability to adapt to the unexpected, would be more problematic. These traits affect judgment, which is far more likely to cause an accident than the inability to read social cues. Even so, the idea of driving as a social activity came up time and again on this article’s comments, as well as on other threads I read on this subject.

As I was thinking about the discussion on the New York Times article, I reflected upon my own experiences with a high-functioning autistic boy. I’m certainly no expert on autism, and one autistic person can’t serve as a model for all autistic people. Still, when trying to decide what constitutes fitness for driving, we have to look at what skills are necessary and determine who is able to learn those skills.

A number of years ago, an autistic boy moved into the condominium complex where I lived. He was around 14 years old.

His mother told the neighbors about his autism to help us understand some of his unusual behaviors. One thing she relayed to us was that he didn’t interact with strangers, so we shouldn’t be surprised if he walked past us without acknowledging our presence.

After hearing this, I never expected to have any contact with him. Shortly after he moved in, I saw him riding a bike in our parking lot. He rode, intently, in circles around the parking lot, yet he seemed aware of the cars driving around him.

One day, he was out riding, and he saw me come home on my bike. When I noticed him watching me, I said “It’s a nice day for a bike ride, isn’t it?” Imagine my surprise when he looked me in the eye and said, “Yes, it is.”

From that moment onward, we had something in common: we were both cyclists. Whenever I saw him around, I said hello and asked about his bike riding. Before long, we began having conversations, not only about bikes, but about his school and other assorted topics.

After getting to know him, I began to think he was capable of more than what his mother had told us. Even though our condominium association allowed him to break a few rules — pertaining to where he could ride and park his bike — he managed to compromise when asked to store his bike in the basement (a new location) for the winter.

Unfortunately, he was bitterly disappointed on his sixteenth birthday when his parents told him he could not get a learner’s permit. He loved cars, which he talked about incessantly, and had to accept his parents’ decision not to allow him to drive. To this day, I question his parents’ decision. I can’t help but wonder whether they were limiting him by unduly fearing for his safety.

After all, he did learn to interact with me, and a few other neighbors. He was able to compromise at times, despite his rigid adherence to daily rituals. And, overall, he was very bright.

Based on my own experience, I believe it’s impossible to lump people into groups, and categorically deny them the right to drive. Each person has to be considered as an individual; this holds true with respect to disability, illness, or age.

As cyclists, we want drivers to be as competent as possible. Incompetent drivers increase the risk of our losing life and limb. But, we really must ask ourselves, what is driving competency? How can we measure it? And, how can we ensure that it’s applied on an individual basis, and not as part of a sweeping generalization?

Regardless of how we, as a society, approach the training and testing of drivers, we must recognize the human tendency to allow personal perspectives to taint one’s view of what’s required to do something well. Is driving a social activity? In my view, it’s not. But, if you’re the parent of an autistic child, your views may vary.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , | 1 Comment

Deflecting Criticisms For Engaging In Unsafe Practices Like Cycling

Posted on April 2, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

Bike On Car Rack

One of the most common criticisms levied against cyclists is that they should not ride on the same streets as cars because it is dangerous. To this end, cyclists are characterized as foolhardy, stupid, reckless, and worse.

Not a day passes when cyclists don’t hear about how they deserve the injuries they suffer on American roads since they have chosen to engage in a dangerous practice. Stories are relayed about one or more cyclists who fell victim to a negligent driver in an area considered, by non-cyclists, to be too dangerous to ride a bike.

Occasionally, other cyclists will chime in and utter disapproval of cyclists who choose to ride in areas where they would not ride themselves. Most of the time, such cyclists ride on bicycle paths or secluded roads with little traffic. So they project their own fear of traffic onto cyclists who have more experience in heavily trafficked areas.

Whether the criticisms come from drivers or cyclists, they share one thing in common: the cyclist is blamed for danger which he or she did not create.

The danger cyclists face when sharing roads with drivers is caused, not by their own behavior, but by the behavior of drivers. Cars make roads dangerous, not bicycles. If the numbers were reversed, and bicycles were the majority, American roads would be the scene of very few injuries, and even fewer deaths.

But, the roads are clogged with more cars than they can handle. And many of those cars are driven by people who are either unskilled or inattentive. That’s where the danger lies.

Still, we do not hear anyone telling drivers to stay off of the roads due to danger. Nor do we hear anyone blaming drivers for their own injuries when another driver’s negligence causes them to be involved in an accident.

This sort of treatment is reserved for cyclists. Part of the problem is that cyclists are more vulnerable. Their vulnerability works against them when others judge the amount of risk they’re taking by riding on the roads.

While it’s true that drivers are encased in a steel shell, the risk of injury is quite high if a crash occurs at high speed. And, in single car accidents, as when a car veers off of a road and hits something, driver and occupant injuries are often far worse than what the average cyclist would experience when crashing a bicycle.

Factor into this certain types of accidents which are specific to cars, such as landing in a body of water after losing control of the car. Depending upon the circumstances, the car’s occupants may find themselves trapped as the mechanics of a sinking car can make it difficult to open the doors or windows in order to escape.

In a similar situation, a cyclist, unless seriously injured or unconscious, would simply wade or swim to dry ground. The lack of a steel cage around the cyclist would make the accident safer. Yet, we don’t tell drivers to avoid driving along rivers, lakes or oceans because the risk of drowning is too great. On the contrary, we assume that they will not crash or veer into the water, so we do not criticize them for taking a risk by driving in a higher risk area.

With respect to risk-taking criticism of cyclists, they are actually being blamed for conditions which we, as a society, should correct by means other than censure. Rather than telling cyclists to stay off of the roads, we should be looking for ways to correct the underlying problems of dangerous roads.

Drivers are only part of the problem, albeit a large part. Roadway design is also a significant problem. The designs don’t take into account the needs of vehicles other than cars. And often, they don’t consider the safety of pedestrians either.

Cyclists shoulder the blame for their own lack of safety as a result of other people passing the buck. Motorists refuse to accept the additional attentiveness required to share the road with anyone or anything other than motor vehicles. In addition, they don’t want to be held accountable for careless driving.

Drivers don’t want to modify their driving habits or to allocate tax dollars to making our streets hospitable to all modes of transportation. Maintaining the status quo is cheaper, and it maintains the advantages cars have enjoyed for decades.

Drivers and cyclists have a precarious relationship. As with any relationship there is a balance of power. This balance is rarely equal, but in the best case scenario, the power ratio between the parties fluctuates so that both have an opportunity to experience the dominant position.

Moving forward, a fluctuating balance of power is what cyclists should aim for. It’s unrealistic to think that they could ever be entirely dominant on the roads, as cars have been. But, it’s not unrealistic to imagine a world where, at times, the view of the cyclist becomes dominant, or where the benefit of the cyclist is considered over that of the driver.

To achieve the dominant status, cyclists will have to work hard to deflect criticisms and accusations about their irresponsibility for riding on roads where the risk of injury is high. It should not be too difficult to deflect such criticism because what this accusation amounts to is little more than blaming the victim.

Cyclists are victims of roads designed without thought for their existence. They are also victims of drivers who believe that anyone who takes a risk they wouldn’t take deserves to suffer consequences of that risk.

Nonetheless, with the wisdom of an evolving society, we have come to the realization that victims do not cause their own victimization. The cause lies outside of them, with someone else. A perpetrator’s conduct always causes their victim’s injuries. And, cyclists are no exception; their victimization is just less obvious to those who don’t understand cyclists’ rights or requirements on the road.

There is a light at the end of the tunnel: with strong voices, stronger determination, and education, cyclists will eventually overcome these unfounded criticisms and will shake the blame for the actions of others.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Mental-Peasants and Their Beliefs About Pedal-Nazis

Posted on March 29, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

 

Bicycle Road Racer

 

Online research is unlike any other type of research; it yields unpredictable results, and it uncovers information the researcher would never have thought to look for. Such a situation happened to me recently.

I was looking for commentary on a popular post I wrote, and I found a discussion in a forum where I would least have expected to find it. The forum appeared to be devoted to financial matters, particularly the Capital Markets, although there were so many threads of a political and societal nature that I couldn’t tell who frequented this forum, or why.

Among the posts, I found a group of forum regulars who were discussing the outcome of the death of a local cyclist, which I wrote about recently. The driver who killed her was charged with Criminally Negligent Homicide.

The original poster (OP) named the thread discussing this charge: “The Problem With Running Over A Peasant.” He made several key points about the incident.

First, was an observation about the article’s description of the cyclist as a wonderful young woman. Second, the OP assumed that the driver, who had previously worked as an investigator in the local DA’s office, was being protected by his cronies, and as a result, it took them a year to figure out how to take care of one of their own, while still appeasing the “proles.” And, third was the OP’s proclamation: “Silly peasant! Laws are for YOU.”

The reference to the cyclist as a “peasant” perplexed me. Since I’m not a regular on that forum, I can’t say for sure whether the OP meant this literally, or whether it was some sort of inside joke about people who weren’t well-connected. Either way, it set the stage for the other derogatory descriptions this group used to refer to cyclists and anyone who attempted to help the poor and disadvantaged.

As concerns the cyclist, a quick search would have yielded information about her life which would hardly classify her as someone of “peasant” stock. She lived in an affluent neighborhood and graduated from a private university. The name of the university was even mentioned in the thread, yet the OP, who was apparently incapable of rational thought, still looked down on this cyclist as riffraff.

After a few demeaning comments were made about the cyclist, someone wrote a rude comment disparaging those who try to help others. Expression of this attitude was precipitated by an explanation of why she was riding on that road; she was participating in a fundraising event for affordable housing.

The people discussing this story expressed disdain for anyone who would spend their time helping the poor. Maybe on a forum dedicated to making money and attaining wealth, disdain for the poor shouldn’t come as any surprise.

But, digging deeper into the forum, I discovered a number of conservative, far right-wing threads. There was a lengthy thread devoted to the “Birthers” (the group who questions President Obama’s place of birth), along with discussions bashing left-wing and centrist views.

While this may seem to have little to do with cycling, it sets the backdrop for a type of hatred only aimed at cyclists by an extremist segment of society. This hatred revolved around the idea that cyclists who wanted to have all the rights afforded to other vehicles were such a menace that they should be called “Pedal-Nazis.”

As an aside, I may not associate with the right people because I’ve never heard this term before. Although I got the gist of it, I wasn’t certain exactly who they were referring to when they used this pejorative term. I was, however, relieved to find few references to it online, so it must not be as common as I first thought.

At first, due to their constant references to brightly colored spandex cycling clothes, I thought they meant road racing types who ride around in a world of their own. But, they made reference to other cyclists who take the lane or who have the audacity to ride on narrow winding roads. So, I concluded that the term “Pedal-Nazis” referred to everyone who was in the way of a driver who didn’t want to share the road.

Aside from calling cyclists “Nazis,” several members of this group cited cases where they thought it was acceptable to run down a cyclist, on the pretext that if the cyclist didn’t do what was best for the motorist, then he or she was asking for it. Views of this sort are not unique to this group, but the level of hatred they had for cyclists was above the norm.

A lack of knowledge and understanding of history often leads people to misuse terms. The term “Nazi” is a good example. In modern usage, it refers to someone who is an extremist in their beliefs, and who doesn’t allow people to oppose them. Yet, Nazis were fascists who put nation above the individual and who espoused autocratic or dictatorial control of the masses. Riding a bicycle on a road dominated by cars hardly fits this definition, even if a group of cyclists is engaging in this behavior.

Further, cyclists are a minority. They could never attain the power necessary to forcibly suppress the majority or impose any form of societal regimentation, as fascists do. So, clearly, this term was coined just to be inflammatory and to justify hatred of and violence towards a minority group who inconveniences the majority.

Anyone who adheres to such a view, and who uses such insulting terminology to describe a group of people who are doing nothing illegal, has proven him/herself to be a “Mental-Peasant.” In fact, I’d like to use this term to describe all of the rabid cyclist-haters who resort to using misnomers to validate their negligent and irresponsible behavior on the road.

If it’s any consolation, these Mental-Peasants don’t confine their irrational hatred to cyclists. They aim it at the poor, at the working class, at presidents who they don’t approve of, at liberals, and at anyone else who doesn’t agree with them — and more importantly — who doesn’t give them their way.

Knowing where the enemy comes from, and what he believes, is the first step in devising a good defense strategy. A glimpse into the narrow, uneducated, inarticulate world of the “Pedal-Nazi” haters is a good place to start.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , , | 3 Comments

Bicycles Yielding At Stop Signs

Posted on March 26, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

Figure Holding Stop Sign

For the past 30 years, Idaho has had a law which allows cyclists to roll through stop signs once they yield to oncoming vehicles. They are also permitted, after stopping, to proceed through a red traffic light, if there is no oncoming traffic. As more bicycles have begun to use the roads, several other states have proposed similar laws.

Such laws have generated quite a bit of controversy. Some drivers see these laws as giving cyclists preferential treatment. They want all vehicles to play by the same rules, and don’t understand why, if bicycles are vehicles, they shouldn’t behave like vehicles.

Even some cyclists are against amending traffic laws to allow cyclists to roll through stop signs and red lights. From their perspective, cyclists have fought hard to be regarded as vehicles. Asking to be treated differently seems like a step in the wrong direction because it sends the message that while bicycles are vehicles, they aren’t really equal to motorized vehicles. This brings us back to a position of inequality on the roads. Either all vehicles are equal or they’re not.

The idea of changing the rules of the road to accommodate one group is problematic. It brings us to the virtually untenable position of arguing that two classes of things, vehicles in this case, are different but equal.

Whenever things are presented as different, people regard them as unequal because it is human nature to equate equality with identical things. This concept of equality has been challenged when minor differences were cited, such as between human males and females. Both are members of the species Homo sapiens, but have different physical characteristics.

Despite previous opposition to the idea of different but equal, in today’s world, most people acknowledge that minor differences between the same class of things can be disregarded because those differences are not essential to the nature of the thing. But, if they are classified as the same class of things, they are expected to be treated the same. And, there’s the rub.

When equal but different members of a class ask for special treatment, due to a difference, a great deal of arguing commences. The group which is denied the special treatment feels discriminated against, even if they don’t need the accommodation the other members are asking for. This is the position cyclists find themselves in if they ask for special accommodations on the road.

It’s true that bicycles and motor vehicles are different. As many cycling advocates have already pointed out, cyclists rely on momentum to ride efficiently. Stopping and starting uses a great deal of energy and slows them down considerably. This is particularly true in urban areas where there is a stop sign or traffic light at nearly every intersection.

Motor vehicles, of course, don’t have this problem. Stopping and starting is a matter of pressing pedals, which requires little expenditure of energy. And stopping at stop signs and traffic lights is crucial for motor vehicles because of the massive amount of harm they can cause to pedestrians, cyclists and other drivers if they fail to yield at an intersection.

Still, does this mean that cyclists should be allowed to roll through stop signs and go through red lights just because they are only risking injury to themselves?

To the untrained eye, it might seem wise to allow cyclists to injure themselves if they place momentum and efficiency above optimal safety. After all, in highly trafficked areas, cyclists are primarily risking their own lives, not the lives of others. So, what this view boils down to is personal choice.

This is the same personal choice that anti-helmet zealots cite when they want to ride in dangerous environments without a helmet. While it should be a personal choice, it may not be a wise one. And, the same is true of cycling through red lights.

To the trained eye, this picture looks different because the problem is far more complex than just personal risk-taking. There are legal ramifications to consider, as well.

Cyclists have been fighting for years to get drivers held accountable for killing cyclists. They are tired of watching negligent and reckless drivers get away with murder, just because they killed a cyclist with their car.

To prove that the driver is negligent, or at fault in the accident, everyone must be playing by the same rules. If, with respect to traffic laws, bicycles and cars are allowed to follow different rules, this could work against cyclists when determining fault in an accident.

What if, for instance, a cyclist decides to enter an intersection, when she has the red light, and a car comes flying out of nowhere and strikes her? Who is at fault?

In every state, drivers are expected to be in control of their vehicles at all times. Therefore, it isn’t permissible to strike anything that is in their way. They must stop, even if they have a green light. However, the matter becomes complicated if the cyclist is seriously injured or killed.

If the driver can prove that the cyclist entered the intersection against the red light, the cyclist will be partly at fault, even if a driver is expected to be in control of his vehicle. Even if the laws are strengthened to protect cyclists from negligent and reckless drivers, it will be difficult to convict a driver if the cyclist was partially at fault in causing the accident.

This is why it would be best to carefully consider the value, benefit, and long-term consequences of creating laws which allow cyclists to enter intersections against a red light. Just as with the often cited example of wearing a helmet to deflect accusations of irresponsible riding — irrespective of whether the helmet protects one’s head or not — coming to a complete stop and waiting for a green light may outweigh the benefit of maintaining momentum, should a car arrive at an intersection too quickly to stop for the crossing cyclist.

Although a stop sign will be less problematic, particularly if there is a four-way stop, the value of preserved momentum should again be weighed against the idea of assigning fault in an accident. By looking at the issue this way, the complexity of the problem becomes more clear.

One way to avoid the problem of increasing the cyclist’s liability, in the event of an accident, is to eliminate the idea of momentum as essential to efficient riding and replace it with more practical problems, such as the difficulty of triggering lights when there are wires in the road. Bicycles are often too light to cause the light to change, and therefore, have trouble traveling through the intersection.

In cases where the cyclist would be unable to navigate the intersection, it would be fair to enact laws allowing a cyclist to go through a red light after waiting a reasonable amount of time for the light to change. A law of this type would not be a case of preferential treatment, it would address a physical difference between vehicle types, with respect to how roads are constructed.

While there is probably no harm in passing laws to allow cyclists to make rolling stops and pass through red lights after slowing down or stopping to look for traffic, we must be cognizant of the legal ramifications of placing the burden of when to enter the intersection on the cyclist’s judgment, rather than the changing of the light.

Any cyclist who chooses to follow such a law, and makes a regular practice of going through red lights, must consider that this will work against him/her in the event of a serious accident. Just because something is a law, doesn’t mean it has to become a regular practice of a particular cyclist.

In any event, if we are going to pass laws to allow cyclists to yield at stop signs and traffic lights, then such laws should be enacted throughout the country. It is too confusing to have these laws in a handful of states, since people travel by car, and won’t know about the change in laws. As it stands now, most states require bicycles to obey all of the rules of the road as if they were cars.

Maybe it’s best to leave things that way, so as not to muddy the waters, and instead to have lenience, in terms of enforcement, when a cyclist must go through a red light due to an inability to trigger a green light. Placing the emphasis on enforcement, rather than the passage of special laws, may allow cyclists to have the best of both worlds — the ability to go through a red light when it’s impossible to get a green light, and the ability to avoid liability by obeying the same laws as motor vehicles do, when sharing the road.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , , , , , | 5 Comments

A Hint of Justice

Posted on March 22, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

Justice is an elusive concept, fraught with emotion, intuition and idealism. It exemplifies all that is good in humankind, while in the face of evil, it represents a longing for who we want to be.

Within the context of a less than perfect world, each of us lives a life filled with trials and tribulations. Such a life cannot always be measured by minutes, hours and days; it is the sum total of a spirit who existed independently of space and time.

Nine months ago, in June of the year 2011, the life of a young cyclist, Christina Genco, was extinguished prematurely by a brush with fate. At the time of her death, she was with a group of cyclists who were riding across the country as part of a national campaign called Bike and Build. Their goal was to raise money for Habitat for Humanity and to help build affordable housing. I wrote about her misfortune on this blog because she represented the countless cyclists who lose their lives to negligent drivers on American roads.

As a young person, on the brink of adulthood, she hadn’t had a chance to make a name for herself. But, according to interviews of her friends and family, which appeared in articles in several states, she had touched the lives of many people with whom she had contact.

Small deeds, such as participating in a long-distance bike ride designed to facilitate the building of affordable housing, often go unnoticed. And, for this reason, I was not optimistic that she would receive the justice owed her.

For months I followed her case. After the initial reports, there was little in the way of news from Alabama, where Christina lost her life. Only a brief report that the investigation had ended was made public, and a hint that it would go to a grand jury to determine whether the driver, Craig Chandler, would face charges.

To keep the story alive, I attempted to contact members of the media, and a few Alabama authorities, to find out the status of this case. No one replied to me. Nonetheless, due to the constant traffic on my blog post, I heard from Alabama residents who were just as upset about what had happened to Christina as we were, here in Massachusetts. So, I knew that some people in Alabama cared. And, as a blogger, I watched my words influencing the way people thought about this situation.

Nearly a year after the accident, one or two news sites reported on the conclusion of the investigation. They told us that the grand jury had indicted Craig Chandler for Criminally Negligent Homicide, a misdemeanor. If convicted, he could face up to a year in jail and a $6,000 fine.

I had mixed feelings about this outcome. On one hand, Chandler was facing charges, unlike the many drivers who get off scot free after killing cyclists. On the other hand, the penalty was ridiculously small for taking a human life.

As much as I wanted to write about this story, I decided to go out for a bike ride to crystallize my thoughts. Despite the unusual hour, well past midnight, I put on my helmet and headed outdoors. Under the glow of street lights, I decided to ride through Newton, Massachusetts, Christina’s hometown.

Once my trip was underway, I rode past a place where I remembered seeing Christina. I flew by it just as the Bike and Build riders must have ridden past scenery along their cross-country route. Turning onto a side street, I headed towards the center of Newton.

Suddenly, something broke the silence, and drowned out the whirring drivetrain of my freshly cleaned and lubed bike. Looking in the direction of the noise, I noticed something moving alongside the road. To my complete and utter dismay, it was a runner.

I had never seen anyone outdoors at that hour. As I got closer, the shadowy figure turned into a young man. He must be a student, I thought, since he was running towards Boston College. I steered my bike into the center of the road and eased up on my pedaling, so as not to startle him.

He barely looked up as I passed, but I imagined that he was as surprised to see me as I was to see him. I took this sighting as an omen. Not long after, I turned onto Beacon Street, with the goal of riding all the way across Newton.

I had the barren road to myself. Yet, I decided to ride smack down the middle of the five-month-old bike lane, which had been installed to make Newton more bicycle friendly. I recalled the night, in October 2011, when I had passed through Newton Centre, only to encounter screaming white lines painted on the road.

It took me a minute to figure out what they were. Once I spotted a bicycle painted on the road, I realized that the lines were there for me, and I positioned my bike accordingly. As I rode up the hill in the newly-minted bike lane, I spotted a crew of workers painting lines on the other side of the street. They looked up when they saw me.

One called out to ask how I liked the new bike lanes. I shouted back my approval in a tone of voice which conveyed a gleeful smile through the darkness, and I rode on.

Another bicycling memory came to mind as I sailed down a deep descent, while glancing at the spot near the post office, where a bicycle safety sign had been placed last summer. It was a rotating, flashing safety sign which inspired my post, Bicycles Are Everywhere, named after the message on the sign. Even though the post was written in jest, I really liked that sign because it grabbed drivers’ attention and imprinted an indelible bicycle safety message in their minds.

Once back in the present, I rode lost in thought, not a car in sight, and my trip was uneventful. The air was warming through the night as I pulled into my driveway and proceeded to my destination.

Finally seated at my computer, I stared at a photo of Craig Chandler. He looked calm, with a half-smile below his shaded eyes, and I wondered how he could not have seen Christina riding along the road — which is what he told the investigators, who concluded that there were no allegations of intoxication or impairment, and nothing relating to speed.

I reread a few articles about the accident and began to wonder how this conclusion had come to be. After the investigation, I pondered, a grand jury had heard the evidence against Chandler. Although we can’t know for sure what they considered, we can always speculate.

According to an Alabama cyclist and bicycle shop owner, Darren Haramija:

“Many Alabama drivers are unaware or do not acknowledge that cyclists are allowed to be on the same road. Alabama still remains one of the states that doesn’t have a three foot passing law on the books. Hopefully the legislators will take note and give this an opportunity for them to make some needed improvements, helping to take care of cyclists.”

In Alabama, there is still prejudice against cyclists, and there are weak laws on the books, which can’t ensure their protection. This may have worked in Chandler’s favor, since the grand jury was made up of his peers.

Fortunately, the Marshall County district attorney will prosecute the case, because Chandler is a former investigator for the DeKalb County District Attorney’s Office. The DA said that the grand jury considered several possible charges, including manslaughter and vehicular homicide, before reaching the Criminally Negligent Homicide indictment. They arrived at this charge because the murder was unintentional, but due to gross negligence, there was approximate cause of an individual’s death.

Since there is no three foot passing law in Alabama, requiring a motorist to allow that amount of distance when passing a bicycle, they will use a different motor vehicle law against Chandler. “The driver of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left thereof at a safe distance and shall not again drive to the right side of the roadway until safely clear of the overtaken vehicle.” (Code of Alabama Section 32-5A-82)

Essentially, the gist of the prosecutor’s case rests upon the notion that Chandler failed to exercise the appropriate rules of the road when passing a vehicle, which in this case was a bicycle. Therefore, he is being charged with a moving violation, not with the murder of a cyclist.

This situation represents a bittersweet victory for cyclists. It shows how weak the laws are for protecting cyclists. It shows how prejudice against cyclists can work in favor of motorists. And, it shows how knowing the right people can sway a grand jury into believing that you simply failed to see a cyclist  —  who was riding among a large group of cyclists —  and had neither ill-will towards nor impatience with cyclists who were sharing a road some drivers see as belonging to cars.

We’ll never know what was going through Chandler’s mind when he struck Christina from behind with his SUV. But, maybe the jury in his trial will give him a year to think about what happened, by putting him behind bars  — even if it is no more than a mere gesture.

On the bright side, the prosecutors are planning to focus on the rights of cyclists on the road, as well as the responsibilities of motorists. And, cyclist Darren Haramija managed to get several Share the Road signs posted around Guntersville, Alabama. He is hoping to raise driver awareness to reduce the number of car-bicycle accidents.

To help clarify the facts, WHNT News 19 in Huntsville, Alabama posted a couple of good news videos about the indictment. Due to technical limitations, I cannot embed the videos on this blog, but below are a few preview shots from the accident scene.

Bike And Build Riders At Christina Genco Bike Accident

Christina Genco Bicycle Accident Scene

Christina Genco Bicycle Accident Alabama

While this outcome may be little more than a hint of justice, it is a start. Christina wanted to help people and to make a difference. In addition to influencing the lives of people in need, and her friends across the country, Christina educated people in two states: Alabama and Massachusetts. The former will attempt to deliver justice in her wrongful death. They may also try to strengthen their laws to protect cyclists, and try to lay the legal groundwork necessary for holding negligent drivers accountable in the future.

The latter, Massachusetts, will be the home of a new foundation, created by Christina’s family, to continue her legacy. The goal of the Christina Clarke Genco Foundation (CCGFoundation.org) is: “To inspire youth to find their passion and make a difference in their communities… There are three primary focuses of the foundation: bicycling safety education, athletic scholarships, and support for affordable housing.”

If nothing else, and in the absence of true justice, we can take away from this sad situation the knowledge that one person can make a difference. One person can change attitudes. One person can change lives. One person can change laws. Each of us can make a difference. And, even in the face of tragedy, we must never forget the power of an individual life.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , , , , , , | 4 Comments

Maneuvering a Bike to Control Cars

Posted on March 19, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

Train Tracks

 

A recent comment I received on this blog made me think about how experienced cyclists maneuver their bikes to control and interact with cars around them. The commenter had a problem when trying to cross railroad tracks which were at an angle to the road. The road in question was very narrow.

To cross the tracks at a 90° angle, he had to ride from the right-hand side of the road into the middle of the lane. As he concentrated on not catching his narrow tires on the tracks, he didn’t hear a car approaching from behind. Fortunately, the car blew its horn to alert him and managed to stop in time to avoid hitting the cyclist.

Stories like this are common. Many cyclists have had their attention drawn away from the traffic when trying to avoid an obstacle in the road. This is one of the pitfalls of sharing the road with cars, and although it can happen to anyone, it is more likely to be a problem for inexperienced cyclists.

Most people learn to ride a bike as kids. They are taught to balance the bike while pedaling and to steer it in the direction they want to go. During their childhood, these are the only skills they need to use their bikes.

Sometime later, as they approach or reach adulthood, bicycles take on a new meaning. They can be used for recreation or transportation to work or school. This is when the problems begin.

Few people are taught to ride bicycles in traffic. Despite educational programs in the past and present, which teach people to ride a bike like a car, there hasn’t been much emphasis on how cars and bikes differ when using roads.

The biggest differences lie in the difficulties potholes, debris and obstacles cause for a bicycle versus a car, the maneuvering required for a cyclist to make him/herself visible, and the need to avoid getting doored when passing parked cars. To address these problems, a bicycle cannot, and must not, act like a car.

Individual cyclists have different styles of addressing such problems, but the underlying principles remain the same: when riding in traffic, it is necessary to maneuver a bicycle to control cars. To accomplish this, cyclists must acquaint themselves with what certain roads have in common. For instance, urban roads often contain cars parked along the road. Traffic can be heavy, and cars jockey for position to turn and change lanes.

Riding in an urban environment takes knowledge, skill, finesse, and above all, anticipation. In fact, anticipation is the key to interacting with cars in a way that enhances a cyclist’s safety.

Familiarity with a particular road can also help. Knowing that a road narrows or leads into a blind curve can allow a cyclist to plan ahead. Gradually positioning oneself in the center of a lane, with the intent of slowing traffic or moving cars away from one’s bicycle, can reduce the odds of an accident.

Unless there are no cars parked along a road, an urban cyclists should always ride in the center of a lane to avoid getting doored. While blowing horns, under these circumstances, are typical, experienced cyclists will not let the noise force them to the right-hand side of the road. It’s important to learn to hold one’s ground and not to give drivers the impression that they can use aggression to intimidate cyclists off of the road.

Sudden moves should be avoided. Although there are times when something unexpected causes a cyclist to swerve or change course, such maneuvers should be few and far between. Road cycling is an activity which requires grace and agility. All movements should be as coordinated as possible so that drivers know what to expect from a cyclist.

The same holds true on suburban and rural roads, although the presence of parked cars is less frequent. Reduced traffic can lure a cyclist into a sense of false security. While the value of alertness would be obvious when amid the chaos of urban roads, it is often abandoned on long open stretches. And, this is where inattention can be most dangerous.

When only a few cars travel on a road, the bouts of silence in-between cars can make it harder to hear a single car approaching. This shouldn’t be too much of a problem if there is a shoulder to ride on. But, when a road has either a small shoulder, or no shoulder at all, cyclists must position themselves to control approaching cars. Moving into the center of the lane — although it may seem counter-intuitive — is the best way to avoid surprises, particularly on unfamiliar roads.

Taking the lane will force approaching cars to slow down. They will either have to move into the next lane, or wait for a break in oncoming traffic to pass the cyclist. Novice cyclists are sometimes afraid to take this tack for fear of being struck from behind. A rear end collision is far less common than a collision caused by a cyclist swerving into the center of a road to avoid an obstacle.

Fear can be reduced by listening closely to traffic and preparing oneself to interact with an approaching car. A quick glance over the left shoulder can provide information on how fast the car is approaching, and where it is positioned. On a two lane road, a cyclist can move slightly to the right of center to accommodate a car which is following too closely, and which seems unable to pass. Cooperation is the key to safety in such situations.

Overall, cyclists must understand both the similarities and differences bicycles and cars face when sharing the roads. A cyclist is always more vulnerable than a driver and must take that into consideration when maneuvering through traffic. However, adjusting one’s position as early as possible is the secret to using a bike to control the flow of traffic to the cyclist’s advantage.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , , | 4 Comments

The Relationship Between Bicycling Infrastructure and Public Transportation

Posted on March 15, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

 

Subway Map

 

Cyclists have been struggling for a long time to convince leaders in American cities and towns to invest in bicycling infrastructure. They have also been fighting for respect, rights and an acknowledgment of bicycling as a legitimate form of transportation. Some progress has been made in all of these areas, although much work still remains to be done.

Until bicycling facilities are considered an essential part of road planning, bicycles will always be an afterthought. Cyclists must take this into consideration when advocating for more bicycling infrastructure. And, they must work towards obtaining representation on road planning projects.

Having a voice can go a long way. And, that voice cannot be distant, but must be close to where the decision-making is taking place. Even so, there comes a point where advocacy in isolation is not enough.

Cyclists cannot continue to be solely a special interest group. This doesn’t mean that they shouldn’t advocate for things specific to cycling, but rather that they should advocate in the context of the world they want to live in — a world where roads are not clogged with idling cars, and bicycles and pedestrians can travel in safety.

In most discussions about transportation, roads are the core of the debate. We talk about sharing the road. We talk about bike lanes. We talk about traffic laws. And, we talk about livable streets.

To date, the roads have been our battle ground. And they will continue to be for the foreseeable future. Yet, something is missing from this conversation, namely, transportation which occurs outside the bounds of the roads.

It’s ironic that cyclists, who tout the merits of cycling as a way to reduce congestion, typically fail to mention other ways of contributing to the reduction of cars on the road. From their love of and devotion to their preferred form of transportation, they are blinded to the obvious: cycling has a companion in its quest to reduce the number of cars on the road, one which quietly runs in the background, chugging away unnoticed due to its unglamourous role. But, no one seems to notice. That companion is none other than public transportation.

Public transportation is infrequently spoken of in livable streets debates. This silence works against cyclists in insidious ways. The idea of sharing transportation is antithetical to the American dream because attaining this dream rests upon the idea of making it for oneself. It is an ideal of independence, self-sufficiency and individuality. Nowhere in the portrayal of the self-made man do we find the notion of sharing what one has attained.

This mindset is the basis for our car-centric society. Having the means to travel solo, in style, is a sign of success. And, it promotes the idea that a life of ease, in the form of door-to-door transportation, connotes status. Changing this idea will be difficult because people tend to be lazy and because people want to be seen as members of a higher class of society.

How, then, does a concept like public transportation, where a ride is shared by many, and controlled by an outside force, fit into American society? This question is more complex than it first seems.

Public transportation usage is seen as something done by the masses, not the elite. It is also associated with the poor, who cannot afford cars. In addition, public transportation is regarded as slower than motor vehicle transportation, and it only takes riders to an approximate destination. At the end of the trip, some other method — such as walking or driving — is required to reach a specific destination. Needing multiple forms of transportation to travel from point A to point B is a deterrent for many travelers, but this needn’t be so.

To address this problem, densely populated states should invest more in public transportation. They should not allow current systems to deteriorate or go unused. Whenever possible, systems should be expanded to cover more territory. Money should be allocated for providing transportation throughout urban areas and the surrounding suburbs. But, this is rarely done.

Part of the problem is inefficiency, and part is lack of interest. The former must be addressed at the management level. But the latter falls within the purview of cyclists and pedestrians.

Although it appears obvious that cyclists would benefit from expanded public transportation, bicycle advocates rarely make this point. They don’t encourage cyclists to use or support public transportation because their emphasis is on getting more people to ride bicycles. Fair enough. But, one has to question whether there will ever be enough people riding bicycles to significantly reduce the number of cars on the roads.

Cars outnumber bicycles by a wide margin. Even if 20% of drivers switched to cycling, it would barely make a dent in traffic. And, many Americans will never exert themselves to travel, so it would be unrealistic to expect even a third of drivers to abandon their vehicles for cycling. However, there may exist some possibility of persuading them to compromise by convincing them of the benefits of using public transportation for at least some of their trips.

If even half of all drivers used public transportation for 10% of their trips, there would be a noticeable decrease in traffic. Add that to the 20% who might make bicycling a major part of their transportation strategy and you have an even more noticeable reduction in the number of cars on the road at any given time.

By combining trips on public transportation with bicycle travel, our roads would become more bearable for everyone, including drivers. To achieve this, there must be a concerted effort by cyclists, pedestrians and public transportation proponents to work together to create travel options.

People should be encouraged to use multiple forms of transportation instead of just one type, which usually ends up being a car. A little advanced planning would allow drivers to save money on gas, parking and wear and tear on their vehicles, by allocating a percentage of their trips to bicycle riding or public transportation.

Unfortunately, encouragement may not be enough. Public transportation needs an image makeover. This can only be accomplished by demonstrating that public transportation can run efficiently and can take riders to places where travelers commonly go. Of course, there are still class problems to address, but this could be overcome by getting more professional and affluent people to adopt this form of transportation. Such people would probably not agree to this change for convenience sake alone, but they might agree to it for environmental reasons. So any push in this direction should include a goal of reducing pollution.

By working in tandem, cyclists, pedestrians and riders of public transportation can form a union to advocate for a shift away from individual motorized transportation to a cleaner, healthier method of travel, which will serve to reduce traffic congestion as an added benefit.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , , , | 2 Comments

Theories About the Number of Cyclists on the Road

Posted on March 12, 2012 by IsolateCyclist

 

For years now, cycling experts have been telling us that the number of cyclists on the roads is directly proportional to the rate of cycling injuries. They quote all sorts of studies about the number of cyclists riding at any given time and how many accidents occurred at each time. All of the statistics point to an increase in injuries at times when there are fewer cyclists on the roads.

Bicycle advocates have used these numbers to encourage cycling. Their contention is that the more cyclists there are on the roads, the safer cycling is for everyone.

This may well be true. When drivers become accustomed to sharing the road with cyclists, they are less surprised to see cyclists on the road and are more careful to look for bikes around them when they change lanes or turn.

Experienced cyclists can probably agree on the safety in numbers theory. In all aspects of society, we talk about raising awareness, the idea being that when people are educated about unfamiliar things, they change their behavior. Cycling should be no different. However, the inverse of this theory is more difficult to believe, namely that fewer cyclists on the roads leads to more injuries.

This assumes that any encounter between a car and a bicycle is due to the driver’s lack of awareness of bicycles, and therefore results in injury to the cyclist. Statistics may show a larger number of injuries when ridership is low, but this could certainly be related to factors other than the number of cyclists on the roads.

My personal experience tells a different story than the statistics. As a kid, I rode the streets of two different cities, in two different states. Cycling was not a popular activity. For the most part, kids rode bikes and adults drove cars.

Even though I was a kid, I used my bike as transportation and rode quite a few miles. So did my friends. Still, none of us were ever injured. In fact, the roads were safer then, both for cyclists and pedestrians.

I can remember cars stopping and waving me across a street at a time when cyclists were few and far between. I can also remember cars stopping to let me pass before turning right into a side street. Overall, I felt safer.

Now, maybe some of this can be attributed to my youth. Kids always feel invincible. The idea of having an accident doesn’t cross their minds, so they ride with reckless abandon. That’s what I did. But unlike today, where I ride with caution, eyes glancing around to all sides and over my shoulder, nothing happened to me.

Could this be attributed to luck? Possibly. But it could also be attributed to cultural differences. When I was a kid, people were courteous, especially the older people. They all had manners and conformed to the rules of etiquette. None of them wanted to be perceived as gauche.

Today, nearly everyone is rude and self-centered, regardless of age. A habitual public aggressiveness has become ingrained in our culture. As a result, few people consider the welfare of others when sharing public spaces.

Such cultural changes could have as much to do with cycling injury rates as the number of cyclists on the roads. In general, factors other than the number of cyclists on the roads and injury rates haven’t been considered.

Statistics can be a good thing. They can work in our favor. They can be used to encourage cycling and keep us safe by making cycling a valid form of transportation. Still, we must be careful not to place too much emphasis on numbers and not to place too much stock in things which may be coincidental.

By emphasizing the number of cyclists on the roads, with respect to injury rates, we may be overlooking more serious problems, which if addressed, might actually make cyclists safer. Perhaps bicycle advocates should reconsider using the same statistics time and again, and look for other causes of injury — such as driver aggressiveness or lack of common courtesy.

As the saying goes, familiarity breeds contempt. Bringing up the same points to convince individual drivers, cities and towns to accommodate bicycles may not be the best strategy in the long run. We need new ideas about what keeps cyclists and all road users safe, and new suggestions for how to achieve those things.

Statistics can only go so far. At some point, we need to stop talking numbers and turn to creativity to effect change. We can do this by looking at the big picture, and imaging what livable streets should look like, because well conceived action, not fear tactics based on statistics, is what will effect positive change.

Posted in Cycling | Tagged , , , | 2 Comments