Motorists attitude towards cyclists

[darkelf921]

Bare with me here for a sec

We all know campaigns require a change in motorists' attitude toward cyclists for the campaign to succeed. Well tonight I think I saw the for the first time a flaw in this plan.

I was having dinner with family. They all know I am a mad keen cyclist. One of the people at the table, early on in the evening asked how my ride in the BRTCC fund raiser had gone. After a few wines, at the end of the evening she decided to ask me the following:

"Do you not find cyclists arrogant when they ride two abreast? They should just stick to single file."

At first I thought she was joking. Then I was stunned. As this came out of nowhere, I did not contain myself and allowed emotion to overrun my argument. After a number of things I said and her just saying "I just can't believe the arrogance and you don't pay rego..." I kind of lost it.

I told her I find it arrogant someone couldn't be bothered to get off their arse and stop killing the planet with their one tonne piece of metal which was destroying the planet while cyclists are out their saving the planet and saving the health system.

Yep, I had totally lost it and was babbling cr@p now.

The point of this is, this woman is careful on the roads and will try to give room to cyclists, as long as they cycle the way she wants them to cycle, in single file only. You dare to ride two abreast and she thinks the cyclists are thumbing their noses at her and being arrogant.

How can you "educate" or even reason with someone like this? I also reminded her I owned and paid rego for two cars so does that mean I have twice the rights she has on the road? The table scattered and quickly dispersed.

[Marx]

Cars go 2 abreast on roads, no one says anything about that.

I wouldn't use the 'saving the planet' thing to support riding bikes - most are airfreighted, & for those of us Aussies who ride euro brands, those frames & components have probably gone twice around the globe before you grace it's saddle with your chinese made knicks bought from the UK on-line store.

[darkelf921]

Cars go 2 abreast on roads, no one says anything about that.

I wouldn't use the 'saving the planet' thing to support riding bikes - most are airfreighted, & for those of us Aussies who ride euro brands, those frames & components have probably gone twice around the globe before you grace it's saddle with your chinese made knicks bought from the UK on-line store.

As I said, I had lost the plot and was babbling I have no idea where saving the planet garbage came from, it just popped into my head. At that point I knew I couldn't argue any further

[Mulger bill]

Two bikes are as wide as one car which she'd have to change lanes to overtake legally anyway. They also don't speed up to block her pass.

Next!

[briztoon]

In cycling friendly nations such as France, it's considered rude of cyclists to ride two abreast if it impedes or causes a motorist to have to change lanes or wait to pass safely. It expected that cyclists will ride in one line when traffic is around, even on multi lane roads. When the roads as clear, two abreast is acceptable.

It's about respect going both ways. Don't inconvenience motorists, and motorists will give you all the space and time in the world. They don't expect you to stop and let them pass. I had a car (and a line up behind it) sit on my wheel for 10km because it was unsafe to over take me even though I was riding as far over as I could. No one beeped me, or the riders in front as they passed. We did the right thing as far as social etiquette required us to do, everyone just lived with it.

Just because it's legal here doesn't always make it socially acceptable. At times riding two abreast is socially disrespectful.

Oh, today I witnessed my first red light runner. Red light on Ipswich Road at Annerley Junction to allow for pedestrians to cross. Guy was city type bike, i.e. not a road bike, and he was dressed for work/shopping/whatever, not in nicks. He slowly road through the red light between pedestrians, while a bloke on a road bike waited at the red light. One pedestrian yelled at the red light runner.

[Gordonhooker]

I don't know about the we don't pay rego, but I believe she has a point to a certain extent. This is one I see from time to time along Wynnum Road between Morningside and East Brisbane. 2 riders abreast cars slowly make their way safely around them, traffic has to stop at a red light. The cyclists go into single file and ride past the cars that did wait and pass thoughtfully (within a metre of the stopped cars mind you), once through the lights the cyclist go back to 2 abreast the same drivers have to go through the same exercise. Now that is arrogant I know I wouldn't do it, I look at this way... Just because something is legal it does not necessarily mean it is courteous.

[BastardSheep]

I don't know about the we don't pay rego, but I believe she has a point to a certain extent. This is one I see from time to time along Wynnum Road between Morningside and East Brisbane. 2 riders abreast cars slowly make their way safely around them, traffic has to stop at a red light. The cyclists go into single file and ride past the cars that did wait and pass thoughtfully (within a metre of the stopped cars mind you), once through the lights the cyclist go back to 2 abreast the same drivers have to go through the same exercise. Now that is arrogant I know I wouldn't do it, I look at this way... Just because something is legal it does not necessarily mean it is courteous.

That's pretty much exactly why I almost always (I can't think of a situation where I haven't, but I'd prefer to still say "almost") wait in my position in a line of traffic rather than filtering up to the front. To me though it's one of those "each to their own" type things. Keeping my position in line feels safer to me as I'm not in the slightest bit fast so there's a 99% chance they'll have to pass me again. To me doing so multiple times increases annoyance and chances of a revenge shave, so for my own safety I feel it's better I just wait my turn.

[Gordonhooker]

I don't know about the we don't pay rego, but I believe she has a point to a certain extent. This is one I see from time to time along Wynnum Road between Morningside and East Brisbane. 2 riders abreast cars slowly make their way safely around them, traffic has to stop at a red light. The cyclists go into single file and ride past the cars that did wait and pass thoughtfully (within a metre of the stopped cars mind you), once through the lights the cyclist go back to 2 abreast the same drivers have to go through the same exercise. Now that is arrogant I know I wouldn't do it, I look at this way... Just because something is legal it does not necessarily mean it is courteous.

That's pretty much exactly why I almost always (I can't think of a situation where I haven't, but I'd prefer to still say "almost") wait in my position in a line of traffic rather than filtering up to the front. To me though it's one of those "each to their own" type things. Keeping my position in line feels safer to me as I'm not in the slightest bit fast so there's a 99% chance they'll have to pass me again. To me doing so multiple times increases annoyance and chances of a revenge shave, so for my own safety I feel it's better I just wait my turn.

My thinking exactly, I also ride a motor cycle and I always keep my place in traffic rather then filtering.

[casual_cyclist]

How can you "educate" or even reason with someone like this? I also reminded her I owned and paid rego for two cars so does that mean I have twice the rights she has on the road?

I have no idea how you can combat ignorance, rudeness and a fundamental lack of knowledge of the law. My guess is that a massive marketing campaign on tv, radio, newspapers and social media by governments, bicycling groups and motoring organisations might help. But this would have to be ongoing after the initial spend and would most likely prove to be unaffordable

Personally, I don't find riders cycling two abreast on the road to be arrogant. When driving, the most annoying thing for me is other motorists who insist on driving at 40 km/h in a 60 km/h zone on a single lane road where there is no opportunity to overtake. Personally, I find that very rude and arrogant and I wish they would travel closer to the speed limit.

When cycling, I hate watching pedestrians and cyclists launch into moving traffic (as in crossing a road into the path of vehicles travelling along the road). It doesn't "annoy" me as such but it is sickening to watch and I have had to look away more than once in case the driver can't stop in time.

[briztoon]

When driving, the most annoying thing for me is other motorists who insist on driving at 40 km/h in a 60 km/h zone on a single lane road where there is no opportunity to overtake. Personally, I find that very rude and arrogant and I wish they would travel closer to the speed limit.

Annoying yes. Arrogant, what...? My father is just in to his 70's and for what ever reason has started driving slower in the last couple of years. It drives me nuts, but it's not arrogance on his behalf.

[ColinOldnCranky]

I wouldn't use the 'saving the planet' thing to support riding bikes - most are airfreighted, & for those of us Aussies who ride euro brands, those frames & components have probably gone twice around the globe before you grace it's saddle with your chinese made knicks bought from the UK on-line store.

Agreed.

It'd be hard for a non-cyclist to not laugh at such a claim when they would be aware of so many riding expensive bikes that are overserviced and expensive hi-tech parts swapped in and out with abandon despite allegedly superior materials and manufacturing tolerances. Especially when they would be of the opinion that middle-of-the-road bikes used to manage over long periods of time with little attention, little extra materials and little in breakages.

Besides, I very much doubt that ecological issues feature very commonly in the reasoning of new ridersr. Even if it so.

[Gordonhooker]

I wouldn't use the 'saving the planet' thing to support riding bikes - most are airfreighted, & for those of us Aussies who ride euro brands, those frames & components have probably gone twice around the globe before you grace it's saddle with your chinese made knicks bought from the UK on-line store.

Agreed.

It'd be hard for a non-cyclist to not laugh at such a claim when they would be aware of so many riding expensive bikes that are overserviced and expensive hi-tech parts swapped in and out with abandon despite allegedly superior materials and manufacturing tolerances. Especially when they would be of the opinion that middle-of-the-road bikes used to manage over long periods of time with little attention, little extra materials and little in breakages.

Besides, I very much doubt that ecological issues feature very commonly in the reasoning of new ridersr. Even if it so.

Now that response is pure GOLD.... it is laughable really when you see what does go on...

When I was kid (in my 60's now) we would get parts from the tip and the only thing we ever paid money for was tyres and tubes (once they the tube had been repaired one too many times).

Recently I wanted a heavy hack bike just for riding to the shops etc so I found a $50 mountain bike on gumtree, replaced the back wheel with a coaster brake wheel, stripped everything else off it, and replaced the double chain ring with a single chain ring. It works for me and makes my legs work a lot harder then when riding the good bike.

[outnabike]

.[/quote] Gordonhooker No that response is pure GOLD.... it is laughable really when you see what does go on...

When I was kid (in my 60's now) we would get parts from the tip and the only thing we ever paid money for was tyres and tubes (once they the tube had been repaired one too many times). [/quote]


Hi Gordonhooker,
May I just say that you were closer to a better class of tip. My tip find never had tyres, it was a small bike, and tyres would have been rare I suppose. I was around 8 and rode the already rode to destruction hardware to the point of oblivion.

I reckon, re the OP, that if you want to have an argument with folk who don't like cyclists, you can get one any time you like, and you getting upset will be the Coup de grâce for the "protagonist, motorist, fellow human."
What darkelf921 described, is the simple parroting of news paper opinion and standard concepts of ignorance. The truth is you can ride single file and have a neon flashing suite on, and still be blindly hated as you are perceived as being in "their" way. You have impeded a motorists head way and deserve nothing but contempt.

I reckon only by the experience of actually swapping places with a cyclist, would others know what it is like to ride on the roads.

[Gordonhooker]

.

Gordonhooker No that response is pure GOLD.... it is laughable really when you see what does go on...

When I was kid (in my 60's now) we would get parts from the tip and the only thing we ever paid money for was tyres and tubes (once they the tube had been repaired one too many times). [/quote]


Hi Gordonhooker,
May I just say that you were closer to a better class of tip. My tip find never had tyres, it was a small bike, and tyres would have been rare I suppose. I was around 8 and rode the already rode to destruction hardware to the point of oblivion.

I reckon, re the OP, that if you want to have an argument with folk who don't like cyclists, you can get one any time you like, and you getting upset will be the Coup de grâce for the "protagonist, motorist, fellow human."
What darkelf921 described, is the simple parroting of news paper opinion and standard concepts of ignorance. The truth is you can ride single file and have a neon flashing suite on, and still be blindly hated as you are perceived as being in "their" way. You have impeded a motorists head way and deserve nothing but contempt.

I reckon only by the experience of actually swapping places with a cyclist, would others know what it is like to ride on the roads.[/quote]

Yes that did come out wrong didn't it? We got wheels, frames etc from the tip. We had to go to the local corner shop to buy the tyres and tubes.

Your last paragraph was right on....

[thearthurdog]

I think that riding two abreast in heavy traffic conditions can be a little silly and perhaps not the best idea. I know it's 'allowed' but if you can do something to assist the traffic flow and be 'seen' as being courteous, then why not?

I really worry about the public perception issues created by HUGE bunch rides as well. I know they are largely 'legal' in terms of cyclist behaviour, but I think we can all do our bit to ease relations on the road and I'm not sure that a 200+ bunch ride is a positive thing.

[ColinOldnCranky]

Welcome to our forum Gordonhooker. We need more of us to educate these pampered mid-life-crisis riders with the fat bank balances and fast lives on how it USED to be (and therefore how it SHOULD) be.


(Just kidding guys. Oh, how wonderful to go back the gold old years of diptheria, racism, the cold war and beating our kids. )

[darkelf921]

Okay, I agree there are many circumstances where sensibility dictates single file is required. I adhere to single file riding regularly when required.

The statement I reacted to was a simple scenario where the person making the statement believes cyclists should never ride two abreast (ever) and they should never be allowed to talk to each other while riding. Followed up by "you never see us motorists chatting to each other...".

Perhaps this additional information will put my original post into a little better perspective?

[casual_cyclist]

I had to drag the car out of the garage last night for my bimonthly trip to the petrol station and mixed it up with cars and cyclists. I have new annoyance, and it wasn't with the cyclists, it was with a fellow motorist. I was at the lights trying to turn right, fourth car back. The light went green and the front driver sat there, sat there and sat there. That's annoying! Front driver finally went but by the time I got to the lights they were well into the orange cycle. Gaaa! That stupid driver!!!!

Anyway, I turned left on the green then down the road left again. The road loops around and I caught another green. I ended up at the place I was going but faster. FOR THE WIN!!!!

[thearthurdog]

Okay, I agree there are many circumstances where sensibility dictates single file is required. I adhere to single file riding regularly when required.

The statement I reacted to was a simple scenario where the person making the statement believes cyclists should never ride two abreast (ever) and they should never be allowed to talk to each other while riding. Followed up by "you never see us motorists chatting to each other...".

Perhaps this additional information will put my original post into a little better perspective?

I don't disagree with you !

[ColinOldnCranky]

I think that riding two abreast in heavy traffic conditions can be a little silly and perhaps not the best idea. I know it's 'allowed' but if you can do something to assist the traffic flow and be 'seen' as being courteous, then why not?

I really worry about the public perception issues created by HUGE bunch rides as well. I know they are largely 'legal' in terms of cyclist behaviour, but I think we can all do our bit to ease relations on the road and I'm not sure that a 200+ bunch ride is a positive thing.

Group riders make it more difficult for the motorist that wants to be able to squeeze between cyclists on the left and cars in a lane to the right. (Let's call him Irresponsible Driver). If there are thirty riders on his route then the inherent danger in that manouvre will arise thirty times. However, except if he spills a rider, then Irresponsible Driver will feel OK and not feel too disadvantaged.

However, if a motorist (let's call him the Responsible Driver) is of the type that waits for a clear chance to pass unencumbered by passing drivers - ie does not do the squeeze maneuvre - then that motorist will have to duplicate that maneuvre thirty times if riders are dispersed.

On the other hand, if those thirty riders are in a bunch, then Responsible Driver only has to do the less convenient safer maneuvre once.

Group riding is better when considering Responsible Driver. Riders spread out into separate singles as so many demand is better for Irresponsible Driver but multiplies the dangerous transactions. It is a pity that so many only see group rides as the greater impediemnt to their ease of travel. A ittle extra sophistication in thinking is needed to see that is is so mostly because of the strategy that Irresponsible Driver uses to pass a cyclist.

It's not rocket science. The answer I do not have is how to change the mindset of motorists.

[outnabike]

I think that riding two abreast in heavy traffic conditions can be a little silly and perhaps not the best idea. I know it's 'allowed' but if you can do something to assist the traffic flow and be 'seen' as being courteous, then why not?

I really worry about the public perception issues created by HUGE bunch rides as well. I know they are largely 'legal' in terms of cyclist behaviour, but I think we can all do our bit to ease relations on the road and I'm not sure that a 200+ bunch ride is a positive thing.

Group riders make it more difficult for the motorist that wants to be able to squeeze between cyclists on the left and cars in a lane to the right. (Let's call him Irresponsible Driver). If there are thirty riders on his route then the inherent danger in that manouvre will arise thirty times. However, except if he spills a rider, then Irresponsible Driver will feel OK and not feel too disadvantaged.

However, if a motorist (let's call him the Responsible Driver) is of the type that waits for a clear chance to pass unencumbered by passing drivers - ie does not do the squeeze maneuvre - then that motorist will have to duplicate that maneuvre thirty times if riders are dispersed.

On the other hand, if those thirty riders are in a bunch, then Responsible Driver only has to do the less convenient safer maneuvre once.

Group riding is better when considering Responsible Driver. Riders spread out into separate singles as so many demand is better for Irresponsible Driver but multiplies the dangerous transactions. It is a pity that so many only see group rides as the greater impediemnt to their ease of travel. A ittle extra sophistication in thinking is needed to see that is is so mostly because of the strategy that Irresponsible Driver uses to pass a cyclist.

It's not rocket science. The answer I do not have is how to change the mindset of motorists.

Colin that is a well thought out answer.

[rkelsen]

I reckon, re the OP, that if you want to have an argument with folk who don't like cyclists, you can get one any time you like, and you getting upset will be the Coup de grâce for the "protagonist, motorist, fellow human."
What darkelf921 described, is the simple parroting of news paper opinion and standard concepts of ignorance. The truth is you can ride single file and have a neon flashing suite on, and still be blindly hated as you are perceived as being in "their" way. You have impeded a motorists head way and deserve nothing but contempt.

This is a very wise post.

Becoming upset does nothing to change people's opinion, and only serves to make you look more foolish. This is something I have learned first hand. I've been the butt of ridicule several times, after doing myself no favours...

What is the answer? Should you change the subject? Calmly start talking about the global increase in the incidence of Diabetes... or is passive aggression rude too?

The answer I do not have is how to change the mindset of motorists.

We probably need to accept that the mindset runs deep, and is not subject to change any time soon. Jumping up and down while popping a vein on your forehead isn't going to help.

[Gordonhooker]

Welcome to our forum Gordonhooker. We need more of us to educate these pampered mid-life-crisis riders with the fat bank balances and fast lives on how it USED to be (and therefore how it SHOULD) be.


(Just kidding guys. Oh, how wonderful to go back the gold old years of diptheria, racism, the cold war and beating our kids. )

And you try and tell the young people of today that ..... they won't believe you.

[Gordonhooker]

Okay, I agree there are many circumstances where sensibility dictates single file is required. I adhere to single file riding regularly when required.

The statement I reacted to was a simple scenario where the person making the statement believes cyclists should never ride two abreast (ever) and they should never be allowed to talk to each other while riding. Followed up by "you never see us motorists chatting to each other...".

Perhaps this additional information will put my original post into a little better perspective?

Yep it sure does, well for me anyway.

[leighthebee]

It's all about perception. A truck holds up traffic the same as cyclists to a certain extent, but there is no arm chair arguments as they serve a purpose of hauling goods from a to b etc. Most people arguing from ignorance stopped riding a bike when they were kids and don't understand it as a legitimate form of transport as they "evolved" to a car when they obtained their licence. They see no purpose to the bike as you should be in a car. It'll never change. Australia is too large, too hilly, too hot, too windy etc....