"1) I want to look normal - cyclists are too often seen as "other" - and 2) I want to say by my actions "actually cycling is not that dangerous and you don't need to wear lots of safety gear to do it".
Excellent.
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
Told I'm not very visible, what would you do?
(74 posts)-
Posted 10 years ago #
-
@ fimm
I'm glad your opinion is that it was genuine concern :-)
I also respect your decision to "campaign" as it were, for normalisation. I, on the other hand will continue to "viz-up" when I deem it appropriate, but I avoid wearing it when it's bright enough (unless weather dictates me putting the extra layer on up top anyway).
Different strokes for different folks.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I also don't buy the inference that as long as your lights are legal, that's enough. Sometimes it may be, other times not, in my opinion. I've seen plenty of cyclists who have what I consider good enough lights but who still don't stand out well because they are entirely clothed in dark materials.
Agree that the bare minimum of legal light is possibly not of a standard appropriate for a busy city centre, given other bright lights etc.
However, if the lights don't make them stand out enough, then surely they're not good enough? (or are you saying "good enough" to comply with the legals?
Posted 10 years ago # -
There is something of a lumen war going on out there with car lights getting brighter and brighter and, for my money, that means bike lights need to keep up in order to be noticed.
More likely the bike's lights will simply be drowned out in the car headlights' beam. I'd say when headlights are increasingly Xenon ultra laser bright blue retina searing types it's important to wear something reflective, and have reflectors on the bike too (reflective tyre walls are good for junctions).
Posted 10 years ago # -
An alternative response would be to simply sing Johnny Cash to them:-
"Well, you wonder why I always dress in black
Why you never see bright colors on my back
And why does my appearance seem to have a somber tone
Well, there's a reason for the things that I have onI wear the black for the poor and the beaten down
Livin' in the hopeless, hungry side of town...."Whatever. I'm not stopping wearing black. It's the only colour I like wearing.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@ PS
Yes, I meant good enough from the legal sense. I opted not to say "lights that were legal" as I naturally can't tell what model they are, let alone see their safety standard marks :-)
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Focus
For me, the fact fimm says the lady was polite and pleasant suggests less potential victim blaming than just pointing out something they were concerned about for a rider's safety. Had they been ranting, I would have had an altogether different opinion.I think the woman's demeanour - the fact that she was polite and pleasant - does nothing to make her "advice" less potential- victim blaming. However she says it, what the woman is saying is, in effect, that it's up to fimm to make herself brighter if she wants to avoid being run over. If she'd come to fimm and said, "I just want to say that seeing you cycling along with adequate lighting and wearing a perfectly reasonable set of clothes has made me realise that drivers really do need to be on the ball the whole time if we're to avoid hurting other road users with our powerful machines" then I'd be impressed. It may be genuine, concerned, polite potential-victim blaming but potential-victim blaming nonetheless.
Let me put it this way, if I were to offer similarly polite and genuinely concerned advice to a woman about how she should dress given the existence of sexually predatory men, would that just be good advice or would it be potential-victim blaming?
Posted 10 years ago # -
I've had my say, I'm leaving it there.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Its all about context: if you said to your daughter, "dont go out dressed like that" is that victim blaming or concern ?
In this case, perhaps the old woman knows that there are really crap drivers out there who are used to nanny-state signage and lighting, and find it harder to see an adequately lit cyclist, and simply warns her that they're out there.Posted 10 years ago # -
She wasn't an old woman - I would guess we were similar in age.
I do wonder if there's an assumption that a person on a bicycle must be young (for whatever definition of young)? I've had a driving licence for over 20 years now, so maybe I do know something about how to use the road...
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Min, where can you get black reflectives?
I see it popping up on cycling gear, mostly on the hipster type sites but it seems you can buy it by the roll easily enough.
http://www.ebay.co.uk/sch/i.html?_nkw=reflective+tape+black
Interesting discussion by the way. Difficult to know what the woman's motivation was or how difficult to see (or not!) you actually were.
Personally I'd prefer car headlights to be sidelights only in streetlit areas. One or two cars is fine but once you have a massive queue of dazzlers, it is difficult to see anything else at all IMO.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Well, I can confirm that adding a hi-vis reflective tabard to my normal cycling rig does nothing to stop a BT OpenReach van driver from looking me right in the eye and STILL pulling out in front of me. If that helps...
Posted 10 years ago # -
I do wonder if there's an assumption that a person on a bicycle must be young (for whatever definition of young)?
If you mean child like, simple, or not right in the head, then that's a fair summary of how a lot of folk think about adult cyclists. Many associate cycling with their childhoods and assume that anyone on two wheels over the age of 17 has either failed to grow up or has something wrong with them. I mean, normal responsible adults with sufficient means are supposed to drive, aren't they?
@sallyhinch, another case of "failed to look properly": in this instance, "looked but failed to see", or maybe "looked straight through"?
Posted 10 years ago # -
Fimm, you may not have noticed (!) but my Brompton has a fair bit of black retro-reflective on the frame (got some for my birthday :-)) Hopefully you can have a shufti at the next PY.
My personal feeling is that good lights and clean pedal reflectors are more than enough for any driver paying reasonable attention to see easily.As to the clothing, I'm a huge fan of scotchlite and similar and use quite a lot but I resent the commonplace suggestion that I should dress for a building site to ride a bicycle. Therefore I very seldom do. Imho any driver who claims that my dark clothing prevents them seeing clean bright lights is either not looking or lying....
That said, everyone else can and indeed should wear whatever they feel comfortable in!Posted 10 years ago # -
I'm quite fond of my bright pink jacket of see-me-ness :) Even have gloves to match.
Posted 10 years ago # -
@Crowriver - I got the impression he looked, saw, and decided to pull out anyway because waiting would have held him up. It wasn't particularly close, but I did have to brake and he wouldn't have done it to a car, even a car wearing hi-vis.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Got to agree with Smudge about the retro-reflective stuff - depends on colour of your bike obviously but the silver and black versions are extremely good. About 12 quid for an A4 sheet, I think.
Personal experience: prefer good lights and lots of reflective bits to wearing 'bright' clothing (which often isn't, conditions depending).
Posted 10 years ago # -
Smart dark jacket and trousers today, "Solidarity sister!" (Waves arm in air in vague salute, pulls arm back whilst wondering what a Brompton salute comprises of and wilting under the gaze of baffled train passengers)
Posted 10 years ago # -
I have one light on the handlebars and two lower down on the front fork. My front spokes all have thin silver reflectors running along their lengths so I reflect my own lights. It's effective....but a little Christmas-tree like!!
Posted 10 years ago # -
Don't particularly like my yellow jacket but if it saves me from being knocked down then that's what I'll be wearing this winter. I get a bit cross with cyclists who wear 'normal' clothes with no reflective bits and inadequate lights, particularly on dark and wet nights. They are extremely hard to see. I consider myself to be a careful driver but I know from my daily commute not everyone is.
Posted 10 years ago # -
I'd like to see legislation that anyone using a designated cycle path after dark should have lights and reflective clothing. That includes dogs.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Saw a dog with one of those LED Xmas lights collars on Restalrig path yesterday. Handy things: I could see the mutt from a good distance away.
@sallyhinch, ah one of those. Get so many drivers like that in Edinburgh. I sometimes wonder if many drivers underestimate cyclists' speed (or overestimate their own). The rest are just chancers or aggressive idiots.
Posted 10 years ago # -
<Returns salute @Smudge>
I'd be interested to see your reflectives on your Brompton - my feeling is that one downside of them is that the body of the bike is smaller and closer to the ground compared with a conventional bike, so the visible thing is mostly the rider rather than the bike.@AIMC but what about cyclists with adequate lights but dark and non-reflective clothing?
Posted 10 years ago # -
An (exceptionally timid) word of warning on reflectives.
Theoretically, anything actually on the bike should comply with the lighting legislation about white/yeloow forward, amber to the side and red to the rear. This applies to both lights and reflectives (so blue reflectives may not be used on anything that isn't a police vehicle, for example).
Rider clothing doesn't count, but if you're slapping tape on the rear of the bike that shines white then you're technically not playing by the rules.
Posted 10 years ago # -
"...whilst wondering what a Brompton salute comprises..."
Arms folded?
I assume the yellow-sideways rule makes an exception to rear-and-forward-facing pedal reflectors, seeing as they're technically mandatory?
I might make something to Velcro to the back of a hat for when I'm not wearing either helm or reflective-striped buff, so that there's always something marking the upper extent of the non-reflective mass above the lit-and-reflectived bicycle...
Posted 10 years ago # -
Another warning on reflectives. They don't work if the car headlights aren't actually shining on you!
For example when a car waits to pull out of a T junction onto the main road you are on, their headlights will not be shining on you!
Posted 10 years ago # -
@fimm it wouldn't have made any difference what you were wearing, what this person was actually saying was that you were on the road and in their way.
The evidence on Hi-viz and collision, is that it doesn't make a significant difference difference to the frequency of collision. But the motoring lobby finds it is a useful way of blaming the victim for being on the road and therefore in the way.
Posted 10 years ago # -
Kim - did you actually read fimm's post?
Posted 10 years ago # -
I think this is getting into h****t debate territory so I am staying firmly out of any analysis of what the lady did or did not infer by passing comment to Fimm.
I will however dare to ask what people might have inferred by my slowing down in my car and calling out of my window to a cyclist on Calder Road one night last winter that his "rear light is out".
I would note I could see him despite no hi-viz, I wasn't overly concerned that my driving was a danger to him (outside of any purely unforeseeable accidents in the true definition of the word), but if roles had've been reversed I would certainly have appreciated someone pointing it out.
Genuinely horrified to think I'd get some of these types of comments in response for doing what I perceived as a good deed and I don't see how Fimm described her experience as being much different.
Posted 10 years ago # -
The evidence on Hi-viz and collision, is that it doesn't make a significant difference difference to the frequency of collision.
Really? What evidence is that?
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
