Why women don’t cycle?

Simon E wrote:

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

yes clearly based on what is simply anecdotal evidence such as the hilarous tale of a friend who was blasted in the face by an airhorn. These are dangers all women face.

It was an opinion piece about why she is afraid to cycle so by definition it’s anecdotal.

But I don’t understand why you think that feeling threatened in the street is so hilarious.

Probably because it’s filed under none of this happened and I had to think of something to write. Don’t write, don’t get paid. 

Sorry but I just find the mental image of someone getting randomly airhorned quite funny. Dom Jollyish.  

Seriously though if women were so afraid of men doing ‘something’ everything they went out they’d never go out. Men’s actions/violence are usually direct towards other men. I’ve had my wife mouthing off over supermarket parking at some bloke  who would could have snapped me in half, safe in the knowledge he’s not going to do shit to her. Told her to leave that sort of stuff out as it would have been me getting the pasting if he’d turned thug. If he’d agree to cycling a mile up a 15% hill before we set to it I’d maybe have a chance but as a male I think you’ve got to pick your battles more carefully than women. 

Yorkshire wallet wrote:

yes clearly based on what is simply anecdotal evidence such as the hilarous tale of a friend who was blasted in the face by an airhorn. These are dangers all women face.

But I don’t understand why you think that feeling threatened in the street is so hilarious.

Simon E wrote:

From the horse’s mouth – “This is why I’m too scared to cycle in Bristol” by Bronwen Weatherby for Bristol Live.

https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/news-opinion/opinion-im-scared-cycle-bristol-1755838

 

Good read, I’m still laughing 5 minutes later.

Very real danger persists for cyclists, particularly women

yes clearly based on what is simply anecdotal evidence such as the hilarous tale of a friend who was blasted in the face by an airhorn. These are dangers all women face.

As my friend and fellow reporter Grace Earl recalls having a young man blast an air horn in her face as she cycled home late from a meal with her boyfriend – it is clear women are deemed a target easier to mess with.

WHO KNOWS WHEN AIRHORN MAN MAY STRIKE AGAIN!?!

and then

But, the reality this, while more isn’t being done to minimise the dangers, harassment and humiliation women cyclists can face day-to-day, those who do choose to cycle will have to go on enduring it, while so many women will choose not to bother.

Once again no evidenced commentary just what this drivelhead perceives. Doesn’t cycle but writes article explaining why not based on no experience of actually doing it. Hmmm…

Is that even her real name? Sounds like something off Brasseye or The Day Today.

I work in Kingston Upon

I work in Kingston Upon Thames and the number of women who cycle in and around the town is larger than the typical percentages given for womans involvement in cycling.  There are, at times 30-50% of the bikes in the racks are of the type typically aimed at women i.e. step through frames, flowery graphics etc (I appreciate that this not a definite indicator of the sex of the rider).  Kingston is not a “dutch” paradise despite the efforts of the local council but there is just enough infrastructure to make cycling appear to be safe and you can see the infrastructure from your car as you queue on the inner ring road.  Cycling also allows you to get right into the town as most of it is pedestrianised rather than walking from the car parks outside the inner ring.  

There are also push forces, parking is expensive and you often have to queue for spaces at busy times. 

Woman want to be safe (doesn’t everybody) if you make it safe they will cycle

I’m with Davel here I’m

I’m with Davel here I’m afraid.

We often ride around the Peaks and cross wheels with the GB development squad, I have to admit that some of them are considerably better on a bike than me, with or without a penis (them not me)?

Your confirmation bias perhaps comes from observation of completely different people irrespect of gender. If you’re a weekend warrior the likelihood is you see more males cycling, the same if you’re an inner city commuter. These are then also likely to want to own the road. On the other hand, you may also then see Doris bimbling along with a basket to purchase a loaf of bread, her aim is to ride slowly and safely to the shop and not come into conflict with Jo Subaru.

Regardless of their skill sets, I’d expect the responsible, qualified motorist to try not to hit them with their 2 tonnes of metal, surely you would too. Unless you rank the importance of their life based on their cycling skill set?

It is nice though that you get the better half to check your work before you post it out in the wild, which helmet fits best around a skull with a thumb attached?

Legs_Eleven_Worcester wrote:

hawkinspeter wrote:

@Legs_Eleven_Worcester – sounds like confirmation bias to me.

There’s certainly lots of cyclists around with poor road-craft, but I prefer to celebrate that. Each person wobbling precariously on their bike is a person not sat in a car and is someone getting health/fitness benefits.

It’s easy to predict that a cyclist is going to overtake a slow/stationary bus, so give them plenty of room to do so safely (which usually means slowing down to their speed for passing the bus and then zooming off afterwards).

Overtaking on the left is not a good idea (filtering excepted, though) and to be honest I’m surprised that you have more women doing that to you than men. The usual archetype is that male cyclists are the more aggressive/speed focused gender and the way you describe the undertake makes it sound like a move born out of frustration.

Anyhow, we want people with poor road skills to be going out and about on bikes rather than being cooped up in a deadly tonne of metal. Damage limitation – get as many idiots onto bikes as possible.

No, I don’t believe that this is confirmation bias. 

So you’ve done an objective study then? Because if you haven’t, you must realise (hence your preface) that

‘I don’t believe that this is confirmation bias’

just comes across as

‘ranty misogynist thinks he’s right’.

And your wife agreeing with you, whether your wife’s a woman, a budgie or a paper clip, doesn’t exactly count as peer review.

hawkinspeter wrote:

@Legs_Eleven_Worcester – sounds like confirmation bias to me.

There’s certainly lots of cyclists around with poor road-craft, but I prefer to celebrate that. Each person wobbling precariously on their bike is a person not sat in a car and is someone getting health/fitness benefits.

It’s easy to predict that a cyclist is going to overtake a slow/stationary bus, so give them plenty of room to do so safely (which usually means slowing down to their speed for passing the bus and then zooming off afterwards).

Overtaking on the left is not a good idea (filtering excepted, though) and to be honest I’m surprised that you have more women doing that to you than men. The usual archetype is that male cyclists are the more aggressive/speed focused gender and the way you describe the undertake makes it sound like a move born out of frustration.

Anyhow, we want people with poor road skills to be going out and about on bikes rather than being cooped up in a deadly tonne of metal. Damage limitation – get as many idiots onto bikes as possible.

No, I don’t believe that this is confirmation bias.  Or at the very least, it didn’t start out that way.  I’m certainly not anti-woman.  I didn’t set out looking for ‘bad behaviour’ on the part of any cyclist, irrespective of gender.  But after a while, I remember thinking, ‘Fuck me .. why do so many women do that??’

FWIW, my wife agrees with my points.  I WhatsApped her the text of my comment before posting it.

As for the overtaking of buses, a lot of cyclists don’t overtake stationary buses.  Especially the slower ones.  I often do it if I’m particularly worn out from a day at work, or if I’ve done a lot of miles over the weekend.  

But I do take your point about getting more people out of cars and onto bikes. 

Well, this won’t make me very

Well, this won’t make me very popular, but then you’ve probably understood that that doesn’t bother me.   The proportion of women involved in accidents almost certainly dissuades them from getting on the road, and that is a genuine shame.   Unfortunately for the crew-cuts over at the Guardian, this over-representation has nothing to do with nasty behaviour on the part of heterosexual white men, and a lot to do with the fact that women have shit road sense.  

On every commute into London, and on every commute home, I will see the following at least once: 

1.  at the ASL, someone will stop far over to the right well forward into the ASL.  Well, that’s OK right?  Except that that person will be the slowest rider and when the lights change to green, the faster riders are forced either to undertake – which is dangerous, stupid and potentially actionable in case of collision – or else to sit patiently behind that rider either until that rider moves further across to the left of lane 1, or else a gap opens in lane 2 (which is generally filled with motor vehicles doing => 150% of the posted speed limit).  

2.  When riding slowly, another rider will shoot past me on the left, in a gap which may be no more than an inch or two wider on each side, than the rider’s handlebars.  The most outstanding – that is to say, egregious – example of this was last month, as I was coming up Tooley Street where it becomes Duke Street Hill.  The road was pretty busy, and traffic was at a standstill all the way down to the entrance to the posh shops on the riverside.  As I was coming up, a car was waiting to pull out from Tooley Street, indicating right to go up Duke Street Hill, so I slowed as I couldn’t get past safely.  On my left was a small van – Transit size and at no more than five or six feet from my elbow.  Suddenly, ‘out of nowhere’, appeared a cyclist on my left, squeezed between me, right shoulder brushing my left elbow, and then tottering up Duke Street Hill.  

3.  Pulling out without looking.  There I am, cycling along at (depending on how knackered I am) 13-25 mph in a bus lane.  There’s a bus stopped ahead of me, so I’ll do the ol’ lifesaver thing and glance over my right shoulder and start to pull into the next ‘live’ lane, if it’s free.  Ahead of me will be another cyclist – closer to the bus but going more slowly.  As I’m about 20 feet behind the bus and aiming to pass it on the right, this cyclist will – without a single effing glance over the shoulder and without signalling, pull right out into my path.   

And almost every single time that I witness the above behaviour, it is exhibited by a female rider.  Not exclusively, of course.  A lot of men ride like utter twats, too.  But almost every time, it’s a female.  In the third one I have mentioned, I remember on one occasion, exasperated by this behaviour, I said, ‘next time, try looking!’ as I swerved out to pass.  ‘I did!’ she responded.  Well, she didn’t, because I would have seen her head turn (and I watched my helmet cam footage later on and confirmed: she had not looked) – but even if she were not lying, claiming that she had in fact seen me but decided nonetheless to pull into the path of another vehicle, sort of explains why so many of them are being mown down.  

Now, it goes without saying that it’s no less a tragedy when a rider is killed, and if a car driver does something twattish and/or illegal, then he or she should be hammered and never let behind the wheel of a car again.   But considering that men ride a lot faster and (admittedly) take a lot more risks – not forgetting the fact that there are more of us – trying to explain away the gender disparity in accident statistics by ‘nasty men slapping our bottoms’ is just more of the feminist claptrap which has come to define that hate movement.