First of all, let me apologize to the list for responding to the last post. I know I shouldn't have done it, but I couldn't resist the temptation. I'll try to restrain myself next time...honest!
It's impossible to have a rational discussion with Eric, because, like Thuy, his preconceptions are more real and true to him, than anything he could learn by actually observing the world. Anyone who is willing to open his or her eyes in Madison would know that it's not an elite activity here. Almost everybody in Madison owns a bike, and we come in all ages, body shapes, and levels of fitness. Last week a fantastic array of thousands of people came out for Ride the Drive. I guess they were all elitists. Today, I took a short ride along the lake path, and had to slow down for all the elite families on the path, with their elite kids on the elite bikes they bought from elite big box stores. In right-wing culture-war discourse, an "elitist" is anyone who disagrees with you, and has slightly different consumer preferences, even if he or she has no political power and not much money. Using Grey Poupon mustard makes you an elitist, even though it can be found on the shelves of every supermarket in America. Bike riding is elitist, too, even if you ride a bike you put together at Freewheel, and even if you can't afford a car. Anyway, as we all know, everybody in Madison is an elitist, including the homeless people. Except the Republicans, of course. I apologize again for taking up bandwidth for this futile discussion, and I won't do it again. If I don't respond to Eric's next response, it won't be because I don't have an answer. Eric Westhagen wrote: > Dear Mitchell, > > I am not familiar with Thuy Pham-Remmele. But a simple answer to your > hypothetical would be a survey of bicycle riders in the "already > friendliest bicycle city in America--Madison." That would result in a > percentage of the population riding--even most modestly like you > describe. As for people able to control their riding--tell that to the > Ripon Surgeon MD who died on a road near Ripon after his assistant said > he had been complaining all week of "chest pains."-----And he was a > doctor. So, as for people keeping their biking in relation to their > fitness----? I don't advocate putting barriers in the way to riding, I > am questioning the numbers of riders;--most totally unfit know their > situation and don't even wish to "coast along to work"--as you suggest, > Mitchell. Bike riders are an elite. > > EW > Mitchell Nussbaum wrote: What does "truly fit to ride bicycles" mean? > If you're racing to the top of L'Alpe d'Huez, you need a finely-tuned > aerobically-efficient body, as well as an expensive bike. If you're > biking to work or class or the grocery store, the standards are much > lower. I would suggest that the vast majority of Americans are > sufficiently fit to use their bikes for daily transportation, if they > choose to do so. And if they do ride their bikes at a reasonable speed, > with a reasonable level of effort, they're less likely to need those > ambulances than if they drive everywhere. The infrastructure that bike > advocates seek is not for the "bicycling elite" -- they can generally > take care of themselves on ordinary streets and roads -- but for the > ordinary bikers, who are unwilling to go head-to-head with motor traffic. > It's unfortunate that Eric, who does apparently ride a bike pretty > regularly, is spouting the same line as Thuy Pham-Remmele, who seems to > have an unconditional hatred of bicycling in all its forms, but I've come > to expect that sort of thing. Eric Westhagen wrote: > Dear Matt, What percentage of Americans are truly fit to ride bicycles > regularly?  Won't that be likely to drop even lower as the > average American weight rises even more.  And above the weight, > who are fit cardiovascularly to get off on a road with a few hills and > miles from home?  It is one thing to exercise where one can stop > if over stressed.  Sure many on this list are probably on bikes > and say they are neither pictures of fitness or have the teenage weight > they once had.  But you had better increase the ambulance squads > if going out biking is pressed on the general public.  Matt, you > are simply pressing for more infrastructure for the bicycle elite once > again.  But you are correct probably in assuming that motorists > might associate with motorists and, in fact might be jealous of fit > bicyclists whizzing along and wish they could be of that small group. EW > Matt Logan wrote: As someone who moved to Madison and more or less > stuck to the rules (except for a couple years of critical mass), the > largest benefit will be to the safety of bicyclists. Beyond that, I am > highly skeptical. I have come to realize that the public perception of > bicyclists is largely driven by the simple fact that drivers will excuse > the behavior of other drivers, but will criticize identical behavior from > bicyclists. The real solution to the perception problem is not better > bicyclists, but better bicycling infrastructure that attracts more > drivers onto bicycles more frequently. When more drivers are bicyclists > too, they tend to see things from a different perspective. > _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org > _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org _______________________________________________ Bikies mailing list [email protected] http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
