Monday, November 11, 2013

Shafted Again.


Can we ever get a break?

Apparently not.

Just three weeks after Delia Ephron unleashed the stupid with her New York Times op-ed about how we shouldn't have bike share because the color blue doesn't look good in rom-coms, that same august periodical has published another opinion piece that is, on the surface, a work of bicycle advocacy.

However, probe deeper, and it is something far more insidious even than that Ephron crap.

Here it is:

Ostensibly this piece is about how drivers who kill cyclists don't get in trouble and how this needs to change.  All very good, right?  Who could argue with that?  (Well, besides the police, and the auto industry, and the auto insurance industry, and the oil industry, and the tabloids, and your local lawmakers, and...)  Well, the first warning sign is the stupid knuckle tattoo illustration evoking the evoking the darkest days of the insipid fixie trend circa 2007.  Then, the writer opens with this:

SAN FRANCISCO — EVERYBODY who knows me knows that I love cycling and that I’m also completely freaked out by it. I got into the sport for middle-aged reasons: fat; creaky knees; the delusional vanity of tight shorts. Registering for a triathlon, I took my first ride in decades. Wind in my hair, smile on my face, I decided instantly that I would bike everywhere like all those beautiful hipster kids on fixies. Within minutes, however, I watched an S.U.V. hit another cyclist, and then I got my own front wheel stuck in a streetcar track, sending me to the pavement.

Anybody who is "freaked out" by cycling--in San Francisco no less--should probably not be writing about it.  Being freaked out by cycling in San Francisco is like being freaked out by sushi in Japan, or by thongs in Rio de Janeiro.

Then he goes on:

You don’t have to be a lefty pinko cycling activist to find something weird about that. But try a Google search for “cyclist + accident” and you will find countless similar stories: on Nov. 2, for example, on the two-lane coastal highway near Santa Cruz, Calif., a northbound driver lost control and veered clear across southbound traffic, killing Joshua Alper, a 40-year-old librarian cycling in the southbound bike lane. As usual: no charges, no citation. Most online comments fall into two camps: cyclists outraged at inattentive drivers and wondering why cops don’t care; drivers furious at cyclists for clogging roads and flouting traffic laws.

Awful, of course.  His conclusion?

My own view is that everybody’s a little right and that we’re at a scary cultural crossroads on the whole car/bike thing.

"Everybody's a little right?"  You should be starting to get a little bit uncomfortable at this point.  Drivers are "a little right" to be "furious at cyclists for clogging roads?"  Do me a favor: tonight, at the peak of the evening rush, please head out to the BQE or the LIE or the 405 or your favorite local clogged automotive artery and find me the cyclists who are responsible for that particular clusterfuck.  In fact, find me any situation (outside of annual charity rides or actual protests such as Critical Mass, which are statistically insignificant) in which cyclists are delaying motorists by more than a handful of seconds.  Even the hated Sunday group rides that cause suburban motorists to lose their shit because a bunch of Freds are taking up the road really don't cause them any appreciable delay.  All it means is that a driver has to go 20mph instead of 30mph for a minute or two--but of course every second counts when you're headed to the shopping center for those bagels.

Meanwhile, all it takes is a fender-bender between two drivers to snarl traffic for hours.  Delays, police, ambulances, insurance claims--all because one asshole put a tiny dent in some other asshole's Hyundai.  Can you imagine if they closed 5th Avenue for half the day because a couple of pedestrians brushed shoulders and one of them spilled some Starbucks on his tie?  It's really no different.

Then he softens you up with a little more pro-bike stuff.  You forget that momentary bit of discomfort, but just when he lulls you into a state of smugness he hits you with this:

Nor does it help that many cyclists do ignore traffic laws. Every time I drive my car through San Francisco, I see cyclists running stop signs like immortal, entitled fools. So I understand the impulse to see cyclists as recreational risk takers who deserve their fate.

I am so sick of this crap where people can't say anything pro-bike in a mainstream publication without first beating the crap out of cyclists.  You "understand the impulse to see cyclists as recreational risk takers who deserve their fate?"  You just described watching an SUV run into a cyclist!  What kind of insensitive putz could possibly think anybody deserves that, or "understand" anybody who does?

Well, he doesn't.  Or not exactly.  He does seem to understand that the way things are is ridiculous, and that cyclists aren't usually at fault when they get hurt, and that traffic enforcement in this country is hopelessly skewed:

But studies performed in Arizona, Minnesota and Hawaii suggest that drivers are at fault in more than half of cycling fatalities. And there is something undeniably screwy about a justice system that makes it de facto legal to kill people, even when it is clearly your fault, as long you’re driving a car and the victim is on a bike and you’re not obviously drunk and don’t flee the scene. When two cars crash, everybody agrees that one of the two drivers may well be to blame; cops consider it their job to gather evidence toward that determination. But when a car hits a bike, it’s like there’s a collective cultural impulse to say, “Oh, well, accidents happen.” If your 13-year-old daughter bikes to school tomorrow inside a freshly painted bike lane, and a driver runs a stop sign and kills her and then says to the cop, “Gee, I so totally did not mean to do that,” that will most likely be good enough.

And yet, here's the conclusion he draws:

So here’s my proposal: Every time you get on a bike, from this moment forward, obey the letter of the law in every traffic exchange everywhere to help drivers (and police officers) view cyclists as predictable users of the road who deserve respect. 

You know what?  Fuck that.  The writer does make some good and sensible observations in this piece, but this little "proposal" obviates every single one of them.  It's impossible, and in fact downright stupid, to "obey the letter of the law" on your bicycle when you find yourself in a situation where the streets and the laws are designed specifically for cars, which describes most of the United States.  Moreover, it's gone way, way past the point where cyclists should need to prove to the very people who are fucking us (that's drivers and police officers) that we "deserve respect."  We deserve respect for being human, and it ends there.  Yet we're supposed to be good little boy scouts and girl scouts--even when it's more dangerous for us to do so--to prove we're deserving of not being killed?  That's just stupid and insulting.

This op-ed reads like a homophobe defending gay marriage, but saying that homosexuals should "act less faggy" in order to earn the respect of straight people.

I know what you're thinking.  You're thinking, "Hey, why jump all over this guy?  His fundamental point is that the fact drivers are allowed to kill cyclists is wrong and that this needs to change."  Sorry, I don't care.  When you're in kindergarten and you make a fucked-up drawing of a person that looks like a Chlamydia bacterium you get praise for your effort.  However, at a certain point people begin to expect more of you.  That's why they made you "show your work" in math class.  Any asshole can guess or copy the right answer, but the important part is understanding why it's the right answer.  The guy who wrote this op-ed knows the right answer, but he doesn't understand why, and a grown-up writing in the New York Times does not deserve an "A" for "effort" when that effort is fifty percent bullshit.

And as far as obeying the law on your bicycle, here's my approach, and it's based on both respect and common sense:

--When I'm in little fantasy bubble realms like gentrified Brooklyn where there's an actual infrastructure designed to incorporate cars and bicycles and pedestrians, and where it actually makes sense to follow the law because the people who laid out the infrastructure actually realizes that cars and bikes are completely different, I'm more than happy to be a good little boy scout;

--When I'm in Midtown or some other place where I'm "sharing the road" (that's cute) and thousands of two-ton 350 horsepower motor vehicles are bearing down on me because they're driven by people whose only priority is getting to the Midtown Tunnel or the 59th Street bridge as quickly as possible, you can be damn well sure I'll do whatever the hell I need to do in order to get a head start on these homicidal mutherfuckers, and that includes running the light if I deem it safer to do so;

--When I'm in the city, I do not ride on the sidewalk.  However, if I'm in some suburban or exurban area on one of those heavy traffic routes with no shoulder that feeds into an Interstate, and there's a sidewalk, and nobody has actually walked on that sidewalk since 1963 because they're all in their cars speeding to the mall, and I feel like I need to use the sidewalk to cross that Interstate, you're goddamn right I'm going to do it no matter what the law says.  I'm going to "obey the letter of the law" in that situation to prove I "deserve respect?"  Fuck that.

In other words, I'll use bicycle infrastructure responsibly if you give it to me, but screw you if you think I'm going to pretend it's there when it's not.  And if you think I don't "deserve" the infrastructure I don't have, then you're in denial of both physics and common human decency.  The writer of this op-ed, like most Americans, has been brainwashed into believing that "drivers and cyclists share the same rights and responsibilities," as if these vehicles are even remotely the same.  Cars and bikes aren't even apples and oranges; they're 20-foot tall genetically-modified elephant/shark hybrids and oranges.  Sure, technically you can eat both of them, but the similarities end there.  But the reason people are willing to buy into the "drivers and cyclists share the same rights and responsibilities" bullshit is that it's all part of the American take on "equality," which is that it's perfectly fine to hold somebody down and fuck them, even if you've got 100 pounds on them, because technically they're free to fuck you back.  (But of course if they do actually manage to fuck you back, you charge them with rape.)

Anyway, tomorrow I'll return to less onerous matters, such as my trip to Philadelphia, and in the meantime if you need me I'll be at the store:

Motorists: earning your respect one collision at a time.


«Oldest   ‹Older   201 – 213 of 213
Pablo Skils said...

The British government did not get its breakthrough Good Friday Agreement with the IRA until PM John Major agreed they did not need to disarm the entire IRA before entering talks.

Similar deal with cyclists. If cyclists follow the law to its letter, the government will say: "things are as they should be, why change anything?"

The Idaho stop law was passed not by cyclists being obedient little consumers. The Idaho stop law was passed because too many cyclists were fighting their tickets in court and the judges saw this as unnecessary use of court time.

Unknown said...

"[T]he very people who are fucking us...[include] police officers...."


Rickey said...

Check this, this is really very useful

Driving school Melbourne

marcos said...

I ride a bike every day in San Francisco at least five miles round trip on Market and SOMA. If you're not freaked out biking on these streets, then you're not paying attention.

So long as cyclists are treated as second class road citizens, being made to bear the full burdens of the the law while not enjoying all of the rights of a first class road user, then this is a civil rights problem.

Civil rights for Blacks, Women and LGBT meant that nobody should have their right to full economic participation limited by prejudices about their status that are reinforced by violence, abuse and threats. The civil rights movement was centered on ending segregation in transportation, Pullman cars, interstate bus service and local transit segregation. It also focused on how the state enforced civil rights violations by turning a blind eye to structural violence at worst or encouraging law enforcement to pile on the abuses.

As such, there needs to be a civil rights campaign based on the tag team work of the bicycling heirs to the MLKs and Malcolm Xs. The only way that the apologists like the SF Bike Coalition who are a pale shadow of MLK can make progress is for there to be Malcolm X's who force open the Overton Window to increase the range of possibilities.

Our right to conduct ourselves safely as peers with autos on the public ROW must be viewed as inalienable.

Anonymous said...

Supporting bike snobs argument, the op-ed author only finds fault with bicycle behavior when driving a car.

"Every time I drive my car through San Francisco, I see cyclists running stop signs like immortal, entitled fools."

belgian cyclist said...

Belgium cyclistVoice from Brussels...

"This [NYTimes] op-ed reads like a homophobe defending gay marriage, but saying that homosexuals should 'act less faggy' in order to earn the respect of straight people."

For me, by far the most thought challenging comment in a post I thoroughly enjoyed (even though I had to stop to make a sandwich in order to finish it).

Much appreciated....

Anonymous said...



Anonymous said...

My fiancé was killed on a motorcycle by a man who turned left into us. His penalty was a fine. email me at we should align bicyclists and motorcyclists because we share the same angst.

Anonymous said...

DISAGREE STRONGLY. You think you have any right as a cyclist to disobey traffic laws? You go ahead and do that, fine, but then when cars cut into the bike lane, and at that point we're all outlaws living in the wild west. So shut the EFF up because it's every man, woman and child for themselves.

Every time you break the law out there, you're making me look bad as a cyclist who does respect the laws of the road. That's not to say I agree with the laws. But if we want to be respected by cars (let's not forget who pays the road taxes that result in us having nice smooth asphalt to ride on), we need to be IMMACULATE, IMPECCABLE, FLAWLESS out there, to show that we are WORTHY of respect.

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

Don't be so bloody entitled. Of course all the cyclists on here agree with you, because they also feel it is their right to flagrantly break traffic laws. I AM SO SICK OF THIS DOUBLE STANDARD.


Shorts Hybrid said...

Except for failing to touch on the tastiness of hybrid Elephant/ Shark meat. ...

Agen Bola Online said...

I'm now not sure the place you are getting your information, but good topic. I must spend a while finding out more or understanding more. Thank you for fantastic information I used to be searching for this info for my mission.

blognya fariz said...

Menghilangkan Kutil di Daerah Vagina Silahkan Hubungi Kami dan Konsultasikan Masalah penyakit kutil kelamin yang anda derita, sehingga kami bisa menyimpulkan anda cocok menggunakan paket yang mana penyakit kutil kelamin yang anda derita rontok dalam waktu yang relatif singkat, tanpa harus operasi. , Obat untuk Mengobati Benjolan Kutil di Kelamin Wanita Tapi penelitian juga membuktikan bahwa jika virus ini ditekan maka pasien akan mengalami tanggapan kekebalan yang unik melalui penggunaan teknik DNA canggih. Dan sebenarnya bagaimana cara menanggulangi virus ini adalah tergantung dari sistem kekebalan tubuh penderita.
Menghilangkan Kutil Daerah Vagina Jika penyakit kelamin dibiarkan maka akan tumbuh seperti bonkol yang besar sekali, dapat tumbuh seperti kembang kol dan tidak menyebar. Karena kemiripan bentuknya, kutil kelamin pun sering disebut dengan jengger ayam. , Obat Herbal untuk Mengobati Benjolan Kutil di Kelamin Wanita Ada beberapa pilihan pengobatan yang tersedia untuk menyembuhkan penyakit ini, diantaranya adalah :
Obat Menghilangkan Kutil di Daerah Vagina Meskipun kutil kelamin hanya tumbuh di alat kelamin tetapi lebih mengganggu dibandingkan kutil di bagian tubuh lainnya. Jika tidak diobati kutil kelamin menimbulkan beban psikologis bagi penderitanya. , Obat untuk Mengobati Benjolan Kutil di Dekat Kelamin Wanita Metode pengobatan ini bekerja dengan menggunakan balok intens cahaya untuk membakar kutil kelamin. Pengobatan ini juga bisa sangat mahal dan kebanyakan dokter

youcancallmeAl said...

fuckin coward

«Oldest ‹Older   201 – 213 of 213   Newer› Newest»