# Fear of Cycling



## Origamist (2 Mar 2009)

An interesting chapter entitled "Fear of Cycling" from _Cycling and Society_ By Paul Rosen, Peter Cox, David Horton

http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=...X&oi=book_result&resnum=1&ct=result#PPA138,M1


----------



## dellzeqq (2 Mar 2009)

Thankyou

page 145 is especially interesting. I think that the cyclist transgresses the boundary between body and road space in a way that is genuinely unsettling for many people. Any number of conversations with non-cyclists has convinced me that they see cyclists as a different breed, upsetting the conventions that guarantee their security. The cyclist's lack of physical protection frightens them in two ways - they're reminded of their own vulnerability, but there's also a worry that we've got some kind of super power that is in itself threatening.

It's a little like getting wet, which is seen as disruptive, or eccentric.

I don't know how we go about dealing with this - but I'm convinced that the irrational hatred that comes our way is rooted in fear.


----------



## tdr1nka (2 Mar 2009)

I agree that the fact some of us are, sometimes not exactly comfortable but confident 
in using the road is viewed with some suspicion and even outright hostility.

There are those that will ernestly believe that we are needlessly taking our lives into our own hands when we cycle and thus pose a risk to ourselves and others by being in someway irresponsible or selfish.

I find it slightly ironic that car driving parents will warn their kids and others away from cycling because of a perceived danger of traffic, but wouldn't openly address being a part of the problem itself.


----------



## Origamist (2 Mar 2009)

The roads are a fuzzy, liminal zone and psyclists are the transgressive outsiders and absent referents in the psychosocial streetscape.


----------



## summerdays (3 Mar 2009)

tdr1nka said:


> There are those that will ernestly believe that we are needlessly taking our lives into our own hands when we cycle and thus pose a risk to ourselves and others by being in someway irresponsible or selfish.
> 
> I find it slightly ironic that car driving parents will warn their kids and others away from cycling because of a perceived danger of traffic, but wouldn't openly address being a part of the problem itself.



My Mum's reaction to me coming off the bike last week was ... "you'll be stopping cycling now" err no! And yet she didn't contrast my injuries with her son in law's back in Dec whose leg is still in its metal cage and spent 6 weeks in hospital after a car accident. I think cyclists have a more realistic expectation of risk, and that car drivers ignore that risk to themselves let alone people outside their bubble.

I haven't read it all yet but that article is certainly interesting, for me it was that we spend our time telling our kids how to keep safe on the road rather than putting the onus on cars to respect us.


----------



## Lurker (3 Mar 2009)

summerdays said:


> .... I haven't read it all yet but that article is certainly interesting, for me it was that we spend our time telling our kids how to keep safe on the road rather than putting the onus on cars to respect us.



Bit harsh on /cars/, expecting them to respect us, is it not...?


----------



## summerdays (3 Mar 2009)

It was the way they phased it ... really made me see it another way .. that road safety education concentrates on instilling in children the fear of traffic on the road, rather than educating the motorised public. 

I really wish we had the system as in some countries in Europe where the blame lay with the motorist unless they could prove otherwise. Maybe it might change the way some people drive and believe that they have a right to be on the road in their car. 

I saw the usual idiots on the route to school today. We have to walk along a very narrow road - literally 2 cars wide with lots of commuter cars parked on both sides and on the pavement (trying to avoid paying for parking near by) - which causes really problems for flowing traffic. Usually they mount the pavement in an effort to get past each other. Really it would be funny each day watching the performance each day if I didn't have 3 children with me to keep safe. Now do I tell them to always give way to the cars or like today we made the car trying to reverse into us wait until we were safely by (thereby holding up another 3 or 4 cars on the rat run).


----------



## Tony (3 Mar 2009)

Another place referred to a narrow road, which led to a light-controlled junction, at which point there was a left-turn lane and a straight-ahead lane. The left filter does not start till just before the lights
A poster in this other place described how this "forced" drivers to mount the pavement so as to get down the inside of cars waiting to go straight ahead.
No mention need be made of the fact that many of those particular cars would be waiting to turn left, nor that the pavement driving down the inside of other vehicles ticked two of drivers' pet hates about cyclists.
The point is that there was an automatic excuse for lawbreaking and dangerous driving because of an assumption that nobody should have to wait---or rather, no driver.
And there it is in a nutshell. Cyclists transgress. Drivers are "forced"


----------



## byegad (3 Mar 2009)

The perception of danger is not only one expressed by none cyclists when speaking to a cyclist, but also some cyclists talking to recumbent riders. I think it is largely the result of a lack of understanding.


----------



## Lurker (3 Mar 2009)

Tony said:


> Another place referred to .... The point is that there was an automatic excuse for lawbreaking and dangerous driving because of an assumption that nobody should have to wait---or rather, no driver.
> And there it is in a nutshell. Cyclists transgress. Drivers are "forced"




Or, to put it another way, cyclists' behaviour is seen (by drivers) as dispositional, whilst drivers' behaviour is seen (by drivers) as situational. Much more on this in 'Drivers' perceptions of cyclists', TRL Report 549, 2002.


----------



## marinyork (3 Mar 2009)

Ah excellent Lurker. I've read that and been trying to refind that for sometime.


----------



## Origamist (4 Mar 2009)

If anyone wants TRL 549 - "Drivers' Perception of Cyclists", pm me as I have a pdf


----------



## jonesy (4 Mar 2009)

Lurker said:


> Or, to put it another way, cyclists' behaviour is seen (by drivers) as dispositional, whilst drivers' behaviour is seen (by drivers) as situational. Much more on this in 'Drivers' perceptions of cyclists', TRL Report 549, 2002.



http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/r...ty/report_drivers_perceptions_of_cyclists.htm


----------



## dellzeqq (4 Mar 2009)

It was rather that, in the opinion of the magistrate at the first trial, to delay the drivers by one second was unreasonable. The legality and wisdom of the overtaking manoeuvre was a matter that the defence at both trials didn't think it worthwhile pursuing. With good reason, particularly in the first case.


----------



## yello (4 Mar 2009)

dellzeqq said:


> page 145 is especially interesting. I think that the cyclist transgresses the boundary between body and road space in a way that is genuinely unsettling for many people.



Yes, and the literal and metaphorical use of 'marginal' is apt for the cyclist. When the cyclist takes a 'central' position in the motorists view, be it either a physical primary road position or a ideological/political stance, then they become a nuisance*.

Interestingly, page 146 seems to condone red light jumping (not wishing to start that debate!) as something to be seen within a context of a cyclist taking a "risk reduction strategy" that is not available to cars. I'd like to give that line some thought.

It's a damned interesting read and I'm tempted to buy the book.


----------



## theclaud (4 Mar 2009)

jonesy said:


> http://www.trl.co.uk/online_store/r...ty/report_drivers_perceptions_of_cyclists.htm



Useful. Thanks Jonesy.


----------



## tdr1nka (4 Mar 2009)

yello said:


> Yes, and the literal and metaphorical use of 'marginal' is apt for the cyclist. When the cyclist takes a 'central' position in the motorists view, be it either a physical primary road position or a ideological/political stance, then they become a nuisance*.




*Obstacle?


----------



## Origamist (6 Mar 2009)

dellzeqq said:


> Thankyou
> 
> page 145 is especially interesting. I think that the cyclist transgresses the boundary between body and road space in a way that is genuinely unsettling for many people. Any number of conversations with non-cyclists has convinced me that they see cyclists as a different breed, upsetting the conventions that guarantee their security. *The cyclist's lack of physical protection frightens them in two ways - they're reminded of their own vulnerability,* but there's also a worry that we've got some kind of super power that is in itself threatening.
> 
> ...



A bit on invulnerability theory here:

http://www.citycycling.co.uk/issue45/issue45page8.html


----------



## yello (7 Mar 2009)

I found that particularly difficult to follow. Not the arguments or issues, just the persons style of writing. Long sentences are difficult to process. And I still don't think I fully grasp 'invulnerability theory'!


----------



## Origamist (7 Mar 2009)

Yello, there's more info here http://www.ibiblio.org/rcip/invuln.html#assump re: victim blaming and perceptions of vulnerability/invulnerability.


----------



## Origamist (8 Oct 2009)

http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.com/

Fear of Cycling: Why Dave Horton is Wrong


----------



## Origamist (8 Oct 2009)

User1314 said:


> I have decided to stop reading Origamist's posts because I need to refer to a dictionary 24/7.
> 
> And I don't really want the use of subtextual cultural theory to read and analyse cycling. After all, if precapitalist narrative holds, we have to choose between dialectic desituationism and postmodernist narrative.
> 
> There.



Ahh, but I was partially taking the piss in that post...!


----------



## dellzeqq (9 Oct 2009)

Origamist said:


> http://crapwalthamforest.blogspot.com/
> 
> Fear of Cycling: Why Dave Horton is Wrong


the writer manages to convince me that Dave Horton is right.........


----------



## byegad (9 Oct 2009)

Origamist said:


> The roads are a fuzzy, liminal zone and psyclists are the transgressive outsiders and absent referents in the psychosocial streetscape.




INTERPRETER!


----------

