Re: Joys of riding bike on bikewalk
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
The term sidewalk is old fashioned and means nothing. It actually may
be discriminatory against cyclists. "Bikewalk" though means that both
pedestrians and cyclists are welcomed and it's the politically correct
term. Bike or Walk, whatever! And where are the pedestrians anyway? It
must be someone who's too old to ride a bike, in which case he/she may
be too old to cross the mean streets anyway. To be on the sidewalks --
pardon the old discriminatory language-- you must be able to run. And
what is a cyclist if not a pedestrian on wheels?
"Political correctness (adjectivally, politically correct; both forms
commonly abbreviated to PC) is a term which denotes language, ideas,
policies, and behavior seen as seeking to minimize social and
institutional offense in occupational, gender, racial, cultural,
sexual orientation, certain other religions, beliefs or ideologies,
disability, and age-related contexts, and doing so to an excessive
extent."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness
On Jun 10, 10:47 am, Frank Krygowski <frkry...@gmail.com> wrote:
> A video on the joys of bike lanes. (And on being ticketed for not
> using one.)
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8k00bEZJ0-E
It's not that I agree with it, but sometimes you gotta do what it
takes to survive.
One big issue I have against it is those drivers that ignore you
coming out of driveways or blocking the pedestrian x-ing at
intersections. Perhaps you should practice your BMX skills and jump
over the car.
The video says, "sidewalks are pedestrian deserts," which is true, but
sometimes you find one that won't move. The real challenge is when
both of you won't fit and must become a pedestrian yourself. Then you
start wondering if bicycling is worth it after all.
If you take it as "challenging path" though, you may start
experiencing the "joys of riding on sidewalk."
I'm back from one of those "joy rides"!
-------------------------------------------------------------
Ask for it by name:
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
>
> <comandante.ban...@yahoo.com> writes:
> > Believe it or not, I was shocked to learn that many cyclists strongly
> > oppose bike lanes. Must be the "lions" of the bicycle culture.
>
> Shocked? Bicycle "advocacy" (like most "advocacy") is full of this
> sort of stupid infighting....
>
> I imagine that people who "oppose bike lanes" actually do have a
> somewhat more nuanced position (er, except the stupid ones, of
> course), e.g., maybe they oppose half-hearted implementation of
> bike-lanes where the details end up making bicycling more dangerous.
> For instance, if the lanes are very fragmented, the requirement to
> constantly merge back and forth into traffic may end up making things
> more dangerous than simply riding in traffic the entire way...
>
> [I like bike lanes generally, especially when they're well-separated
> (trees!), but I suppose crappy bike lanes are just that...]
You just got the right wisdom. Bike lanes are not universal solutions
but are absolutely necessary in some areas. One big problem we got
around here is that we find the fragmented type that leaves you with
no consistent routes. I do oppose that they are mandatory and I think
two people should be able to ride abreast on the lane.
Some of these "freedom" advocates are elitist riders who go over 20mph
and want to include mundane practical cyclists in the same category.
We want people to feel safe to go to the market without the need of
winding and grinding sidewalks.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
> "His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher"
>
> > Some of these "freedom" advocates are elitist riders who go over 20mph
> > and want to include mundane practical cyclists in the same category.
>
> advocates I've encountered seem to be fairly serious bicyclists. I
> guess that's understandable (they care more than most people), but it's
> inevitably going to result in a somewhat skewed perspective.
>
> The main beneficiaries of a bike-friendly environment, on the other
> hand, are going to be casual users.
>
> -Miles
Thank you, thank you. They think we should brave the roads the way
they are... ;)
I rather think we need other strategies:
1- TAMING TRAFFIC (it's not safe for drivers, how can it safe for
cyclists?)
2- GIVE VALUE TO CYCLISTS (yes, we are often treated like monkeys)
3- BUILD BIKE FACILITIES (sometimes bike lanes, sometimes bike paths,
sometimes shared lanes)
We don't want to separate bike and cars by 3' and forget it... We need
bike facilities or cyclists TAKE THE LANE. Two people certainly MUST
take the lane.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
> Cyclists are MUCH more likely to be bums or deadbeats than are
> motorists. Most motorists have FAR more invested in their mode of
> transportation than do cyclists. Motorists, on the average, also
> pay far higher taxes, therefore are entitled to a privileged
> position on the roads.
I heard that argument before. But it runs counter to the DEMOCRATIC
IDEAL.
Actually if you applied it, PEDESTRIANS would have no sidewalks.
That's a heavy drain for a nation. ;)
Hey, they are often nowhere to be found in the suburbs!
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
> In article <it0mae$or...@speranza.aioe.org>,
>
> "Sharx3335" <sharx...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > Cyclists are MUCH more likely to be bums or deadbeats than are
> > motorists. Most motorists have FAR more invested in their mode of
> > transportation than do cyclists. Motorists, on the average, also
> > pay far higher taxes, therefore are entitled to a privileged
> > position on the roads.
>
> 50's schwinn then it most likely is a bum. However, if it's a nice and
> new $2000 plus carbon fiber frame bike then most likely it belongs to a
> liberal tree hugger and those you can just go ahead and ignore because
> they already are rich and deserve to pay higher taxes than the bum on
> the Schwinn.
> --
You are wrong about that. If they had a 50's Schwinn --I own a
replica-- they would have money in hand. They seem to prefer Huffies
either bought at Walmart or "HOT."
You can tell a survivor from a dignified cyclist immediately...
This is a dignified cyclist:
http://www.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/10_29/amsterdam_biker.jpg
This is a survivor:
http://www.bicycletouringpro.com/photos/various/perceived-homeless.jpg
But many people can't tell the difference in America.
His Highness the TibetanMonkey, the Beach Cruiser Philosopher
> "Sharx3335" <sharx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:it41i2$7cb$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Jeff Strickland" <crwlrj...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:it3mtc$mgn$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> >> "Sharx3335" <sharx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>news:it3kg4$bs4$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
>
> >>> "Jeff Strickland" <crwlrj...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >>>news:it3jg3$44k$1...@dont-email.me...
>
> >>>> "Sharx3335" <sharx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >>>>news:it0mae$or4$1...@speranza.aioe.org...
> >>>>> Cyclists are MUCH more likely to be bums or deadbeats than are
> >>>>> motorists. Most motorists have FAR more invested in their mode of
> >>>>> transportation than do cyclists. Motorists, on the average, also pay
> >>>>> far higher taxes, therefore are entitled to a privileged position on
> >>>>> the roads.
>
> >>>> because I am not, but I'd like to see some support for the crap that
> >>>> you are spewing.
>
> >>>> As a bike rider, I own several cars and a house, so I'm pretty sure I
> >>>> pay as many taxes as the next guy, and perhaps more, while riding my
> >>>> bike on the sidewalk.
>
> >>>> I'm not supporting MonkeyShit as much as I'm challenging you. You are
> >>>> more full of shit than a Christmas Turkey.
>
> >>> I don't claim that 100% fall into one category or the other--just, ON
> >>> THE AVERAGE, the AVERAGE car driver has a LOT MORE attachment to the
> >>> economic/tax base than does the AVERAGE cyclist. Just sayin'!.
>
> >> So, show me some data on the averages. I think you are wrong. You are so
> >> wrong that there are no words to describe how wrong you are. Well,
> >> JoeShitForBrains is a good word to use, I suppose. Or, TibetanMonkeyCrap.
>
> >> My guess is that the average cyclist uses a car to get his bike to where
> >> he wants to ride it.
>
> > Up here, in the frozen North, one would have to be a masochist to use
> > cycling as their *prime* method of transportation.
>
> I can't shake the desire to compare that statement to a contribution of
> having a pastrami sandwich for lunch in the middle of a discussion on the
> fabulous weather we're having.
>
> You threw out a seeming random comment that bike riders are some kind of
> lowlife, to which I countered that I ride a bike and own three cars and a
> house with a pool -- removing me from the pool of lowlifes that you assert
> are the primary bike owners.
>
> Now you support your random comment with a baseless assertion. I'm not sure
> that intelligent adults do that sort of thing...
I got some of the most dignified bikes, some of the best looks
around... ;)
and still they push me around.
They automatically --and conveniently-- classify you as a "monkey."