"...at a junction where I know it's advisable to get a head start on the traffic..."
Anywhere local?
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
The Psychology of 'Feeling Responsible'
(81 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
Comparing cycling with people's ethnicity, sexuality and religion could come across as a bit insensitive to some, even if made in jest. Ethnicity and (most probably) sexuality are matters of fact and cannot be changed, while religion can be seen as a matter of choice (in the UK at least) a beliver is a believer 24/7. Prejudice against unchangeable aspects of a person should be unacceptable.
I would argue that cyclists don't suffer prejudice - but most probably poor manners, inattention and even occassionaly agression. Even the most ardent cyclist is only identifiable as a cyclist when they are on their bike - once you dismount you are something else. I've never heard of anyone being denied a job, a house or any other service (or worse) because they are a cyclist. That is real prejudice and what gays, ethnic and religious minorities have and continue to experience.
I consider language to be important and I don't think cyclists can claim to suffer prejudice (yes, I know that means to pre-judge someone from some particular characteristic - but in practice that does not reflect the fact that this is usually manifested through negative actions against a particular group). I think we risk belittling what has happened to many people who have suffered real prejudice in trying to lay claim to this term. Just my personal view of course.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Thanks morningsider. had been drafting s'thing similar in my head, but you put it much more lucidly than i could.
Although, reading "I've never heard of anyone being denied a job, a house or any other service (or worse) because they are a cyclist." It did cross my mind that many people probably do think twice before cycling to a job interview or similar.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Prejudice against unchangeable aspects of a person should be unacceptable."
One can undergo operations to change one's sex. Presumably you don't think that this makes prejudice based on gender acceptable... you can certainly change religion with much greater ease - often just a verbal renunciation.
It's easy to find examples of people for whom cycling is much less of a choice than one might assume - say because they have either a health or a wealth issue that precludes driving but there is no alternative public transport. However it's not really germane - prejudice is prejudice whether you can avoid it by making life changes or not.
I would argue that cyclists don't suffer prejudice - but most probably poor manners, inattention and even occassionaly agression. Even the most ardent cyclist is only identifiable as a cyclist when they are on their bike - once you dismount you are something else. I've never heard of anyone being denied a job, a house or any other service (or worse) because they are a cyclist. That is real prejudice and what gays, ethnic and religious minorities have and continue to experience.
Again I don't agree. Suppose racism didn't affect jobs or housing but "only" involved people swinging heavy machinery very close to your person (where they didn't for people of other races) - or even "just" verbal abuse and intimidation - would that be OK?
I suppose what I'm saying is that I agree that the prejudice we face is not as severe, that doesn't mean it isn't just as real or the causes just as ignorant.
I consider language to be important and I don't think cyclists can claim to suffer prejudice (yes, I know that means to pre-judge someone from some particular characteristic - but in practice that does not reflect the fact that this is usually manifested through negative actions against a particular group).
So if in practice we could demonstrate that people behave negatively towards people who are on bicycles, that would qualify as prejudice?
We can test this easily enough by a simple controlled experiment. In one case, hold motorists up with a tractor and in the other, with cyclist(s). I wager that aggression and abuse will be displayed in only one of these scenarios, even though the cyclist be driving the tractor.
I think we risk belittling what has happened to many people who have suffered real prejudice in trying to lay claim to this term. Just my personal view of course.
Well, to indulge in some moral balancing, how serious is sexism really compared with all the Jews who went to the gas chambers? Does sexism belittle the holocaust?
Are the occasional war crimes committed by our troops to be ignored in case they belittle the crimes of the world's evil regimes?
I'm not sure that there is a finite amount of wrongness, basically. I think the power of calling out what we see is precisely that it makes people uncomfortable. Is a "punishment pass" on a cyclist you catch unawares on a country road really as bad as shouting a racial epithet in a drunken rage? (The latter being far more heavily punished in this country, even when the former results in death).
Posted 13 years ago # -
@Chdot "I wonder how many really know the law/Highway Code when it comes to yellow lines ASLs etc. (I wonder how many people with bikes do...)"
Very few, as part of my job we periodically administer a basic highway code test which all people in my organisation must resit (and pass) every three years to drive works vehicles.
I am constantly shocked (and dismayed and frustrated!) at drivers inability to pass this test, even with umpteen attempts.The question we must then ask ourselves, is when did I last read a current copy of the highway code? I would venture that if a year has gone by and you/I havent then is time we looked it up and at the very least read the sections specific to our chosen method of transportation.
The good news is that you don't even have to buy a copy now (and carry around it's ever expanding bulk!), it's available online for free ;-)
(and I commend it to you all...)Posted 13 years ago # -
"In one case, hold motorists up with a tractor and in the other, with cyclist(s). I wager that aggression and abuse will be displayed in only one of these scenarios"
Weeeeell
Don't agree
Also, replace tractor with caravan.
Caravan at least likely to be going a fair bit faster than a cyclist too!
Though again that's deviating from our norm - cities/Edinburgh.
I think it's rare, for most city journeys, that any delay causes by bike(s) isn't quickly made up.
So (bad) motorists really have have no excuse for some if the things they do through selfish impatience or simple ignorance.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@Smudge
Interesting!
Do/could you ask questions which would relate to bikes?
E.g. If there are no bikes in an ASL when is it permitted for motor vehicles to enter?
(Or - if nearly all the markings are rubbed away is it still an ASL?!)
Posted 13 years ago # -
It's a random question set drawn from the whole Highway code, so for example people can (and do sometimes) get questions about what horse riders should/can do as well as the usual car ones. I don't recollect bike specific ones in there apart from road signs but I expect they will appear sooner or later.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I've never heard of anyone being denied a job, a house or any other service (or worse) because they are a cyclist.
And yet, many job adverts state as a requirement possession of "clean driving licence", or even sometimes a car. This may be understandable for certain jobs (eg, travelling salesman, film crew), but for some you have to wonder. Worse, there is often an unstated assumption in many places that one will drive to work: hence the provision of road access and car parking, but nowhere to lock bikes, no showers/changing facilities (and the nearest bus stop a mile away)...
Posted 13 years ago # -
Dave - just to be clear, I consider all prejudice to be a bad thing and try and approach things with an open mind.
I appreciate my post may not have been that clear. In essence, I am arguing that while people on bikes can suffer from poor/dangerous driving this is normally due to factors other than an overwhelming hatred of cyclists. In addition, once off the bike this is no longer an issue.
This is not the same as prejudice and the resulting discrimination suffered by certain groups. Both the poor/dangerous driving and prejudice and discrimination shouldn't happen, but that does not mean they should be called (or are) the same thing.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I have gone to an interview by bike. I didn't get the job but that wasn't bike related. I left the bike in the janny's office.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Dave: "Well, to indulge in some moral balancing, how serious is sexism really compared with all the Jews who went to the gas chambers? Does sexism belittle the holocaust?"
I think Godwin's Law just kicked in.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Although strictly speaking Godwin's Law has been fulfilled, that only means that someone "mentioned the war"... if I had said "Hitler was in favour of motorists, therefore denying the prejudice of car drivers is to support Hitler", that would have been an ad-Hitlerium, which is what you perhaps feared.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I once had an idea that you could save money on expensive equalities training by just asking the attendees to cycle across Edinburgh and then discuss how it felt. But I'm not so sure now. Prejudice starts with little things which, when challenged are dismissed as a joke or not really meant. I think Jeremy Clarkson is prejudiced towards cyclists but I don't think I've encountered much behaviour I could describe as prejudiced when I was out on my bike.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I sort of assume that any motor vehicle driver butting in front of me from out of a side street or not giving way when I approach from their right on a roundabout is due to them assuming that bicycle > slow > delay > UNNACCEPTABLE > *VOOOM*, so is sort of based on a pre-formed opinion of cycles rather than the moer useful assessment of my actual speed at the time. Likewise the fearful looks of pedestrians on pedestrian crossings who don't think you're going to stop despite theatrically downshifting and braking.
Posted 13 years ago # -
To me, prejudice is (for example) that motorists may endanger you simply because you are a cyclist rather than because you as an individual annoy them.
The response from police, CPS, judiciary (and jury) being quite distinct when the victim (and/or perpetrator) is a cyclist vs anything else.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I had a "feeling responsible" moment this morning.
I've been taking the "back route" paralell to Roseburn Terrace / Corstorphine Road / St. John's Road through the housing and then connecting on to Corstorphine Railway path as it is lighter in the morning so there's maybe a little bit more chance to see some wildlife, and also I reckon it's no slower in practice as there are no traffic lights to negotiate.
Anyway, that's an aside. Had just passed through Pinkhill station and there was a cyclist on MTB quite far off approaching me and an old dear walking her dug between us. She was well in to the side, the dug was doing what dugs do and was wandering happily around the place sniffing at things.
We were on a collision course as to who would reach old dear first, so I slowed as she and dug could see me coming and thought I'd let the MTB do the negotiation part. He made a possibly over-fast and close pass around the dug (not inbetween it and her) and zoomed off. As I passed I made eye contact with her and she growled "HE DOES THAT EVERY MORNING". If she'd had a walking stick she would have been shaking it.
I circled back around to stop and speak to her and found myself agreeing that yes he should pass slower and wider and did she not think that he gives the rest of us a bad name? It turns out she did "it only takes one" says she. I agreed. "One time he'll do that infront of a car and he'll get what he deserves". I didn't reply on that bit.
Lesson of the day is pass old dears and their dugs slow and wide. And if you do it every day, perhaps a bell or a friendly greeting to let them know of your presence behind them.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Master Kaputnik's Steel Banana style Courtesy Fu is very strong.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Good work Bananaman!
Posted 13 years ago # -
That's an interesting tale and if you read it alongside Anth's tale of the taxi, it sort of helps solidify a thought I was having about how some people whose vehicle is an extension of themselves - like taxi drivers and frequent cyclists - develop an awareness of its size and how close they can pass without hitting anything.
They don't, I think, realise (and if they do, don't care) that although they might be in full command of the machine and there's little risk, it still frightens the crap of people.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I had just that discussion (and epiphany) one day a couple of years ago Insto.
Guy in a Polo dropping his wife off for work, the way he manouevred I thought he was going to hit me. He knew exactly what he was doing, knew I was there, knew that he wasn't going to come close to me. I shouted, he shouted something back, I turned round for a discussion which kinda left with both of us on friendly terms.
Sometimes, just sometimes, things aren't quite as reckless as they seem.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Sure, but the problem is knowing. I don't know whether or not they know what they're doing and I'm not about to be the guinea pig. Like, riding in along Corstorphine Road, loads of the cars approach the junctions with side streets quickly and almost always they stop on the line. I've never actually seen one go so far as to be dangerous but every time, I swing out to the middle of the road just in case, this time, this is the one that isn't stopping.
Posted 13 years ago # -
The other one with vehicles turning right (coming towards you) at a junction you are going straight through. A lot of the time they just drive straight at you. Presumably they know they are not going to hit me but I don't know.
Posted 13 years ago # -
On the flip side I pass an old lady with two dugs on the Innocent most mornings and always say hello or thank you if she's moved her dugs or whatever.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Insto - I'm with you on that one, as many years ago a car pulling out of a side street didn't stop and hit me. It really does hurt.
Posted 13 years ago # -
If we'd like motor vehicles to leave us a little bit of wobblespace for pothole-contingency course deviations it's only fair to give peds a little more room than the bare minimum predicated on their maintaining their current position or velocity. One needs only to have walked down a pavement to know how unexpectedly and quickly codgers can change course, often with a lateral speed well in excess of their mean forward speed. Even though I tend to find myself glowering at dogs before I know I'm doing it my braking and downshifting should be obvious enough for their owners to detect.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@Instography "the problem is knowing"
Exactly - heading north on Craigmillar Park in the
buslarge cycle lane, and a driver pulls out from one of the roads to my right.I feared he was going straight across (clearly no left indication, couldn't see a right indication) and so shouted to alert him to my presence.
He swung neatly round the traffic island and joined me heading north in the right hand lane, looking most put out that I had felt the need to shout.
Of course, I didn't know that he was heading north, nor that he was skilled enough to do so without drifting into my lane in the course of the turn (how many folk do we see swing left before turning right, or vice versa, without a long trailer to explain the manoeuvre?).
All road users stereotype each other...
Robert
Posted 13 years ago # -
"All road users stereotype each other..."
Very like the zebra crossings on George Street. People seem to have no qualms about stepping out to stop cars; but they get hesitant when a bike is approaching.
Posted 13 years ago # -
Interestingly I was riding home last night through Roseburn Park and dug walker coming towards me apologised for their dog wandering around infront of me as I slowed right up to pass them. I said not to worry about it... But it was nice they didn't have a go at me or something.
Posted 13 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
