Do you really have to be a card-carrying British Cycling member as Sir Bradley Wiggins implies, or will simply riding a bike do

Comments by Sir Bradley Wiggins have raised the question of what it takes to be a 'cyclist' is riding a bike enough to qualify you as a cyclist or is more required - like a British Cycling membership card?

> Wiggins: London cyclists need to stick to the law

According to Oxford Dictionaries, a “cyclist” is “a person who rides a bicycle.” But the country’s most famous cyclist appears to suggest an even narrower definition – perhaps even implying that he or she must also be a member of British Cycling.

Cyclists in high-vis (CC licensed image by garryknight)

He said that people on bikes who commit offences such as riding through a red light “are termed under the phrase ‘cyclist’ but they’re not cyclists as such, they are not membership holders of British Cycling.”

The ins-and-outs apart of the wider points Wiggins was making – and his words have attracted plenty of comment here and elsewhere – he does raise an interesting philosophical point; what is a “cyclist”?

Is it enough simply to use pedal power to get around, or do you need to have certain competences, to be a member of some organisation before you can truly call yourself one?

Cyclists probably breaking the speed limit in Richmond Park (CC licensed by adambowie:Flickr)

Or does the act of thinking of yourself as a cyclist - metaphorically affixing that six letter label - to the inside of your head automatically confer 'cyclist' status?

It’s the kind of thing you might see in forum postings, or in below-the-line comments to news articles on websites such as this one that report on cyclists breaking the law whether traffic-related, or some other type of offence.

Cyclists at traffic lights (©Toby Jacobs)

You don’t have to wait too long for someone to point out that the person in the article wasn’t actually a “cyclist” but just someone who happened to be on a bike.

Many will point out that it’s wrong an entire class of people get tarred with the same brush due to the actions of a few – the “all cyclists jump red lights” mentality some motorists hold, for example.

But the fact remains that to most non-riders, people on bikes are a pretty homogenous bunch, and “cyclists” is what they call them; no-one ever seems to suggest that a motorist committing a string of offences shouldn’t be called a “driver.”

So, are you a cyclist? And how would you define what it takes to be one – someone on two wheels (or a unicycle, or a trike), or does it take something else and if so, what? Let us know in the comments below.

Born in Scotland, Simon moved to London aged seven and now lives in the Oxfordshire Cotswolds with his miniature schnauzer, Elodie. He fell in love with cycling one Saturday morning in 1994 while living in Italy when Milan-San Remo went past his front door. A daily cycle commuter in London back before riding to work started to boom, he's been news editor at road.cc since 2009. Handily for work, he speaks French and Italian. He doesn't get to ride his Colnago as often as he'd like, and freely admits he's much more adept at cooking than fettling with bikes.