Show of hands - who cycles in lycra?

[AndrewBurns]

You are seriously misreading what people are saying here (and BTW the "I don't give a freak about anyone else" attitude reads very poorly). No-one wants you to wear a tweed suit for your 35km commute. Of course cycling-specific clothing and a change at work is the choice for this ride. However for the 5 km ride to the railway station, do you really need the Omega Pharma Lotto team kit?

Of course I understand that for short or slow rides there's no reason to wear lycra and indeed I don't but not everybody in this discussion is I feel being reasonable. In DavidS's post on the one hand he calls people like me lycra snobs but on the other hand tells us we need to 'cut the attitude', seems like we're fighting against ourselves a lot... He also argues that for cyclists to be regarded as legitimate road users they need to be seen wearing every-day clothes but I argue that for me to do so and use my bicycle as transportation is in a lot of cases impossible without being deliberately uncomfortable.

It's an attitude that a lot of cyclists have that's very unhelpful and I think stems from a victim mentality similar to people who shy away from claiming a lane or riding out from the left even when doing so is vital to their safety. Some people feel that other cyclists choosing to wear lycra makes them stand out from other road-users which they fear will make them targets as well and so they try to tell all of us what we should or shouldn't be wearing.

[RonK]

Bullseye Andrew.

[il padrone]

In DavidS's post on the one hand he calls people like me lycra snobs but on the other hand tells us we need to 'cut the attitude'

Agree, poor choice of phrase. You will not hear me saying such things as, I think I've said elsewhere, I frequently do wear lycra. Just not for my commute.

He also argues that for cyclists to be regarded as legitimate road users they need to be seen wearing every-day clothes

You are missing a few points in that line of thought - see below. We are all road-users, but many motorists deep-down do not accept cyclists on the road. Just listen to Mr Mervyn Hull's comments on ABC. Some things he says sound just like my dad We do need a shift in public attitudes to cyclists as road users.

1. For cyclists to be accepted as road-users we need more people riding bikes aka the 'safety in numbers' principle.
2. However in Australia one thing that works against the average Joe riding a bike is the perception that cyclists ride wearing lycra (if you don't believe this just read some of the comments related to cycling articles in the Feral Hun).
3. Lycra is not essential to the use of bicycles for transport for many 'utility' purposes - short trips to shops, friends, station, pub etc. Kids riding to school even! More people wearing ordinary clothes for shorter trips will help the newbies/prospective riders feel less 'odd'.
4. Thus, in some cases, wearing non cycle-specific clothes is a good thing.

Some people feel that other cyclists choosing to wear lycra makes them stand out from other road-users which they fear will make them targets as well and so they try to tell all of us what we should or shouldn't be wearing.

There is an element of truth in this. Because of the negative PR (for various reasons) that the lycra-clad cyclist has gained, I do think that drivers are less obnoxious to someone riding in street clothing. On my commute (10kms in the suburbs on main roads) I get virtually no flak from drivers. I wear a casual or business shirt and casual shorts or trousers that are actually cycle-oriented but look like normal trousers. I think that if I wore lycra gear I may get a bit more grief. How much? I don't know and not going to find out as I have no shower or change-room at work.

[KenGS]

1. For cyclists to be accepted as road-users we need more people riding bikes aka the 'safety in numbers' principle.
2. However in Australia one thing that works against the average Joe riding a bike is the perception that cyclists ride wearing lycra (if you don't believe this just read some of the comments related to cycling articles in the Feral Hun).
3. Lycra is not essential to the use of bicycles for transport for many 'utility' purposes - short trips to shops, friends, station, pub etc. Kids riding to school even! More people wearing ordinary clothes for shorter trips will help the newbies/prospective riders feel less 'odd'.
4. Thus, in some cases, wearing non cycle-specific clothes is a good thing.

We could add between (1) and (2) that that utility cycling has the greatest potential for growth as seen in places like The Netherlands and Denmark. We must be getting close to saturation point for recreational cycling. To get that growth, cycling for utility purposes has to be accessible and perceived to be accessible

[Mulger bill]

The point is that cycling needs to be seen as a normal everyday form of transport. In order for this to happen we need visible cyclists on the road wearing everyday clothes.

Why? I couldn't care less if cycling is seen as transport...to me cycling is recreation.

And this sort of attitude with its reinforcement of the whole tribal bias crap goes a long way to ensuring that we'll always be third class. Too much infighting ensures that we never present a united front. An attack on one group that is not defended by all is an attack on all.

I've never Uni'd, toured, 'bented, seriously BMX'd or ridden a TT bike but I WILL defend them against all comers as I WILL defend and promote all my velosiblings legitimate bioengined activities as being part of and good for the cause.

It aint WHAT you ride that counts. THAT you ride is vital.

[g-boaf]

The point is that cycling needs to be seen as a normal everyday form of transport. In order for this to happen we need visible cyclists on the road wearing everyday clothes.

Why? I couldn't care less if cycling is seen as transport...to me cycling is recreation.

And this sort of attitude with its reinforcement of the whole tribal bias crap goes a long way to ensuring that we'll always be third class. Too much infighting ensures that we never present a united front. An attack on one group that is not defended by all is an attack on all.

I've never Uni'd, toured, 'bented, seriously BMX'd or ridden a TT bike but I WILL defend them against all comers as I WILL defend and promote all my velosiblings legitimate bioengined activities as being part of and good for the cause.

It aint WHAT you ride that counts. THAT you ride is vital.

Amen to that! Cyclists can't even agree and get along without insults and fights on here. In light of that, how do we start bending the ear of local councils and politicians (to quote from another topic here on a previous M4 fatality)?


I might ride a road bike and wear lycra, but that's as far as it goes. I have nothing against other riders. If you are on a bicycle - then you are a friend, not a foe. We are all part of the same tribe and it is time we put aside this infighting and tribal warfare.

[The Walrus]

Jesus guys...Say What happened to the chat about Lycra?

I personally love the shirts but the shorts leave too little to the imagination. On men that is...is that sexist?

[il padrone]

I don't believe that this thread was ever intended to be just a "chat about lycra", but someone trying to prove a point

[Mulger bill]

I don't believe that this thread was ever intended to be just a "chat about lycra", but someone trying to prove a point

+1

[human909]

To reiterate what has already been said. Nobody here is against Lycra.

But a couple things need to be recognised:

-I think we all recognise that cycling Lycra is almost always more comfortable than regular clothes for cycling, particularly long distances. I also think we all recognise that people are allowed to choose to wear whatever the hell they like! (though within reason after some of the photos here! )

-The biggest improvement towards safe cycling is to have more people cycling. Not just is this a safety in numbers thing but when a car driver's, mother, sister and/or friends cycle then the car driver will be more considerate of cyclists.

-Wearing cycling Lycra as opposed to regular clothes is more likely to make you and cyclists stand out as an "OTHER". Standing out as an other isn't helpful towards endearing yourself towards the average motorist. I felt this similar effect on Saturday night on the way home from MSO. After encountering a few distasteful "Melbourne Victory" supporters suddenly EVERYBODY wearing "Melbourne Victory" colours were painted with that brush.

-The biggest growth opportunity in cycling are from utility riders, NOT recreational riders. There is no coincidence that in the biggest cycling suburbs in Australia that it is RARE to see Lycra.

(I am now proud of the fact that in my suburb 25% of trips are made via bicycle. The greatest in Australia.)


Now while you and I may recognise all this that is not to say that it is necessary to ditch the Lycra. Personally, I use Lycra when I see then need, I don't don Lycra as my default cycling attire.

[wizdofaus]

Because of the negative PR (for various reasons) that the lycra-clad cyclist has gained, I do think that drivers are less obnoxious to someone riding in street clothing.

Can't say I've noticed any difference in how I've been treated really, but there's no question at all that lycra-clad cyclists in general are far better behaved on the roads (certainly as regards observing red lights) than street-clothed cyclists. They're also far less likely to hold up traffic, as if it's a busy hour, they're usually going faster than the average car speed, but more often than not they're out at 6AM in the morning when there's no traffic to hold up.
I suppose the main difference from a car drivers' perspective is that street-clothed cyclists rarely accumulate in sufficient numbers to appear as any sort of threat, so they're not seen as a part of a group of 'others' that needs to be negotiated with.

[human909]

Can't say I've noticed any difference in how I've been treated really

Nor would I say that I have personally noticed. But the occasions and locations that I ride in Lycra differ to such a degree that not valid comparison can be made. Certainly feral-Sun readers seems to detest Lycra more!

lycra-clad cyclists in general are far better behaved on the roads (certainly as regards observing red lights) than street-clothed cyclists.

I would be inclined to agree. But in reality the observing (or not) of red lights rare affects too many other road users. I personally have never seen a red light running cyclist cause trouble.

I suppose the main difference from a car drivers' perspective is that street-clothed cyclists rarely accumulate in sufficient numbers to appear as any sort of threat

Inner city they do every single morning and evening!

so they're not seen as a part of a group of 'others' that needs to be negotiated with.

When there is a large group of street clothes cyclist they are more likely to be seen as TRAFFIC!

[il padrone]

but there's no question at all that lycra-clad cyclists in general are far better behaved on the roads (certainly as regards observing red lights) than street-clothed cyclists.

Most certainly cannot agree with this statement. I see all sorts of people ignoring red lights, and quite often the club roadie commuter is every bit as blatant about it. My view would be that experienced enthusiast cyclists should have a greater sense of responsibility, but they don't.

Wonder how the Beach Rd 'Hell-ride' is going?

[wizdofaus]

I suppose the main difference from a car driver's perspective is that street-clothed cyclists rarely accumulate in sufficient numbers to appear as any sort of threat

Inner city they do every single morning and evening!

True, though they (we!) rarely stray out of the bike lanes/paths, and it's obvious in such times that it's other cars that need negotiating with rather than cyclists.

[wizdofaus]

but there's no question at all that lycra-clad cyclists in general are far better behaved on the roads (certainly as regards observing red lights) than street-clothed cyclists.

Most certainly cannot agree with this statement. I see all sorts of people ignoring red lights, and quite often the club roadie commuter is every bit as blatant about it

It happens, but I know my own behaviour has improved dramatically since I started doing bunch rides etc.

[Mrfenejeans]

There's no question at all that lycra-clad cyclists in general are far better behaved on the roads (certainly as regards observing red lights) than street-clothed cyclists.

This is very true where i live/ride because of the simple reason most Non-lycra clad cyclists rarely go on the road for any others means than to cross it.

They will drive their bikes to shared paths in order to go for a ride, and wouldn't dare do errands by bike because they are scared to ride on the 60-70-80km/h roads that would need to be taken to get to their destination. Those big metal petrol powered death machines on wheels are far scarier especially to a novice cyclist than a Lycra clad roadie.

[il padrone]

This is very true where i live/ride because of the simple reason most Non-lycra clad cyclists rarely go on the road for any others means than to cross it.

They will drive their bikes to shared paths in order to go for a ride, and wouldn't dare do errands by bike because they are scared to ride on the 60-70-80km/h roads that would need to be taken to get to their destination. Those big metal petrol powered death machines on wheels are far scarier especially to a novice cyclist than a Lycra clad roadie.

Very sad really. Unfortunately a result of the road culture of fear, speed, rights rather than obligations..... and the MHL as well - that we have allowed to fester and stink

[rpmspinman]

I find it interesting to read these replies. Correct me if I am wrong. I am trying to collect my thoughts with whats written with my limited mindset.

It seems as though the regular clothed riders do not feel the need to wear lycra out of convenience rather than necessity. That's fine, I can live with that.

Although for some reason I do get this 'feeling' that those who do prefer the tight stuff are being perhaps unfairly 'labeled' or 'judged' under a different light for this reason of actually wearing lycra in itself. It's considered almost taboo, inappropriate, silly and leaves nothing to the imagination. That perhaps the thought patterns of those who prefer not wear lycra to those who do, are considered 'over the top', 'inappropriate', 'show-boaters', 'eccentric', 'brazen' and out to 'prove a point'. Not the words used by anyone here, just the description I think I am concluding to after reading all these replies. I hope I am wrong.

As far as I am concerned, lycra was designed for a purpose. To offer greater comfort for the rider. It does this very well. So what if a person prefers it for his 6km commute to the train station?

I dont think anyone should be judged with their choice of attire. If some prefer to ride in a 3 piece suit, a banana man costume, or a pair of stubbies and a wife beater to do a 50km ride, fine by me. If another prefers to wear a racing skinsuit and sperm helmet to do a 5km commute, so be it. Who am I to judge? I just get on with what I do best, and mind my own business.

I think we all gotta be a little bit more accepting of others on bikes rather than labeling others for your dislike or distaste of their attire because you think its stupid or not socially accepted. So what?

maybe I see too many ill conceived assumptions of others, or perhaps I am doing the same. I dont know.

*puts flame suit on again*

[Mulger bill]

Certainly feral-Sun readers seems to detest Lycra more!

It's a handy catch-all pejorative for the uniminative. I've been called a lycra phag while tootling to work in a pair of Ranchsliders.

[warthog1]

I don't believe that this thread was ever intended to be just a "chat about lycra", but someone trying to prove a point

Perhaps it was, If so it was a point that needed to be made. Personally I am sick of reading negative bias from a particular poster, about Lycra and what it supposedly says about those who wear it.

[roller]

But a couple things need to be recognised:

-Wearing cycling Lycra as opposed to regular clothes is more likely to make you and cyclists stand out as an "OTHER". Standing out as an other isn't helpful towards endearing yourself towards the average motorist.

so on one hand, wearing lycra makes motorists hate you.

Can't say I've noticed any difference in how I've been treated really

Nor would I say that I have personally noticed. But the occasions and locations that I ride in Lycra differ to such a degree that not valid comparison can be made. Certainly feral-Sun readers seems to detest Lycra more!

on the other hand, wearing lycra doesn't change the way you're treated by motorists.



i'm so confused!

[rpmspinman]

I don't believe that this thread was ever intended to be just a "chat about lycra", but someone trying to prove a point

Perhaps it was, If so it was a point that needed to be made. Personally I am sick of reading negative bias from a particular poster, about Lycra and what it supposedly says about those who wear it.

+1. agree

[RonK]

But a couple things need to be recognised:

-Wearing cycling Lycra as opposed to regular clothes is more likely to make you and cyclists stand out as an "OTHER". Standing out as an other isn't helpful towards endearing yourself towards the average motorist.

so on one hand, wearing lycra makes motorists hate you.

Can't say I've noticed any difference in how I've been treated really

Nor would I say that I have personally noticed. But the occasions and locations that I ride in Lycra differ to such a degree that not valid comparison can be made. Certainly feral-Sun readers seems to detest Lycra more!

on the other hand, wearing lycra doesn't change the way you're treated by motorists.



i'm so confused!

Backpedalling - it's a familiar enough cycling term.

[il padrone]

I don't believe that this thread was ever intended to be just a "chat about lycra", but someone trying to prove a point

Perhaps it was, If so it was a point that needed to be made. Personally I am sick of reading negative bias from a particular poster, about Lycra and what it supposedly says about those who wear it.

If you see it that way you are misreading the issue completely

There have been as many pejoratives against non-lycra riders by certain (many) posters as there have been negative comments by human909, so please don't go down the 'accusation' path. Remember the continuous references to POBSOs, riders with 'beards and long socks'?? Let he who is without sin.....

[warthog1]

If you see it that way you are misreading the issue completely

That is rubbish and you know it Pete.
However I can't be bothered with the irritation that will result from having to go back and read his inane postings in order to give them more air time by quoting them here, as evidence to the contrary.
The fact that the thread exists, and has had so much traffic, would indicate that there are a fair number who are fed up with negative Lycra stereotyping also.