Vilification of lycra louts

[Shut Up Legs]

It seems even the Guardian isn't immune to casual anti-cyclist prejudice:
http://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...-hatred-what-have-people-got-against-cyclists

Their very first paragraph below the subject line of this article is very poorly worded, in my opinion. I guess they must be rubbing their hands with glee at all the clicks this article is getting, though, with almost 2000 comments posted on it. I haven't read any of them: I'd prefer to swim in a sewer.

 

[Berk on a Bike]

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...-hatred-what-have-people-got-against-cyclists

 

[Drago]

What the Hell are you doing reading Pravda?

 

[glasgowcyclist]

It seems even the Guardian isn't immune to casual anti-cyclist prejudice:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk

Their very first paragraph below the subject line of this article is very poorly worded, in my opinion. I guess they must be rubbing their hands with glee at all the clicks this article is getting, though, with almost 2000 comments posted on it. I haven't read any of them: I'd prefer to swim in a sewer.

If you're referring to this bit:

"Cycling is bigger than ever in the UK but it has provoked a poisonous backlash. Recent incidents involving tacks scattered on roads and neck-high wire strung across cycle paths have taken the vilification of Lycra louts to a whole new level"​

apparently the article's author didn't write that and has asked for it to be changed.

Apart from that it does debunk the common anti-cycling myths, it's just a pity so many people in the comments section have difficulty with comprehension.


GC

 

[Shut Up Legs]

http://www.theguardian.com/lifeands...-hatred-what-have-people-got-against-cyclists

Thanks, I posted the wrong link, but I knew one of you would find the article I was mentioning. I've updated the link.

 

[Milkfloat]

Seems like a very pro-cycling article to me and surprisingly not all the comments are Daily Mail'esque either.

 

[Nigel-YZ1]

This sentence says it all for me:
"But rather than adjusting their driving to the cyclist’s apparent vulnerability, the only real trigger for them to take proper care is a possible legal sanction."

 

[Lonestar]

It has got worse since the internet helps fan the flames.I have the same discussions day after day at work pointing out to the motorists that the "road tax" they pay is insufficient to pay for the maintenance and building of the roads and that the taxpayer also pays.Red light jumping always comes up conveniently forgetting about mobile phone use while driving.

 

[User169]

Chris Boardman comes over well

 

[sidevalve]

This sentence says it all for me:
"But rather than adjusting their driving to the cyclist’s apparent vulnerability, the only real trigger for them to take proper care is a possible legal sanction."

Just a point - the only thing that keeps anybody in line is legal sanction. Be they drivers cyclists or axe murderers

 

[KneesUp]

Regardless of what VED covers, I've never at all understood why some people assume that if you are on a bike you don't also own a car.

 

[classic33]

Just a point - the only thing that keeps anybody in line is legal sanction. Be they drivers cyclists or axe murderers

Got fewer close passes when carrying the axe!

 

[Shut Up Legs]

Seems like a very pro-cycling article to me and surprisingly not all the comments are Daily Mail'esque either.

I agree about the article. It was the initial paragraph that upset me, and as @User mentioned, the phrase "lycra louts" wasn't initially in quotes, which sounds to me like a classic clickbait.

 

[Milkfloat]

I agree about the article. It was the initial paragraph that upset me, and as @User mentioned, the phrase "lycra louts" wasn't initially in quotes, which sounds to me like a classic clickbait.

Click bait to get people to read that pro-cycling article sounds good to me. It is normally the opposite.

 

[Shut Up Legs]

Click bait to get people to read that pro-cycling article sounds good to me. It is normally the opposite.

I agree with that too. Unfortunately, a lot of morons can't get past the first paragraph in their hurry to post nasty anti-cyclist comments. They're in such a hurry to post comments that they don't even bother reading the article, or perhaps just skim it. I still think it was very poor form by the Guardian to use that phrase in the first paragraph (which was also the one visible on the main Guardian page).