How to get more women on bikes? Better biking infrastructure
May 1, 2023 8:48 PM Subscribe
How to get more women on bikes? Better biking infrastructure, designed by women. Men outnumber women by two-to-one on bikes in Australia. It’s time more women were involved in planning new bike paths and protected lanes to feel safer on the road.
When trying to buy one, for instance, women described being treated as “just a girlie with a bike”, often leaving shops with a bike insufficient for their needs.
My wife bought her bike before I met her, but she got conned into paying way too much for something that was totally unsuitable for her. She knew nothing about bikes, but loved the look of the one she saw and was told it was perfect for her. From the super-skinny horribly uncomfortable seat to the Presta tyre valves and the ridiculous price for a heavy bike when she could have paid half as much for twice the bike, any ethical salesperson would have steered her away and into something much better suited to her.
posted by dg at 10:58 PM on May 1, 2023 [2 favorites]
My wife bought her bike before I met her, but she got conned into paying way too much for something that was totally unsuitable for her. She knew nothing about bikes, but loved the look of the one she saw and was told it was perfect for her. From the super-skinny horribly uncomfortable seat to the Presta tyre valves and the ridiculous price for a heavy bike when she could have paid half as much for twice the bike, any ethical salesperson would have steered her away and into something much better suited to her.
posted by dg at 10:58 PM on May 1, 2023 [2 favorites]
I'm not sure about discouraging male bikers from riding — but educating males on aggressive riding (and why one should not do so when sharing the road) would be a massive help I think. I used to race bicycles and there's a place for that: a race track. But on bike paths and elsewhere, cyclist should be courteous to other cyclists and pedestrians. Just chill, man.
posted by UN at 12:08 AM on May 2, 2023 [15 favorites]
posted by UN at 12:08 AM on May 2, 2023 [15 favorites]
Coming from the perspective of an Australian woman who is now resident in a cycling friendly Austrian city I have feelings and opinions about this.
I should probably make my debut FPP with this lecture but social practice theory and how the material has to be comsidered alongside meaning and ability is so relevant for an issue such as cycling and who does it.
it is about bike specific infrastructure design for sure but also a wholesale cultural attitude to cycling that is required and a broader recognition of how cycling practices intersect with other infrastructure and practices that are less obviously bike related. Housing density is so tightly bound with this as it has implications on distances to destination but also a sense of safety when riding at night.
Here it is transport and recreation and sport and in Australia bikes are still primarily conceived of as Sport and recreation with bikes as transport still a niche.
My kid and I just took the train back from a day trip in Melk yesterday and I was reminded how seamless the bike to train experience is (and stroller friendly too). I shared an elevator with an electric bike user, an older woman who was probably in her 70s and she just appeared joyful after what I imagine was a social ride wirh friends that had also involved lunch at a guesthouse in easy cycle path proximity.
posted by pipstar at 2:43 AM on May 2, 2023 [14 favorites]
I should probably make my debut FPP with this lecture but social practice theory and how the material has to be comsidered alongside meaning and ability is so relevant for an issue such as cycling and who does it.
it is about bike specific infrastructure design for sure but also a wholesale cultural attitude to cycling that is required and a broader recognition of how cycling practices intersect with other infrastructure and practices that are less obviously bike related. Housing density is so tightly bound with this as it has implications on distances to destination but also a sense of safety when riding at night.
Here it is transport and recreation and sport and in Australia bikes are still primarily conceived of as Sport and recreation with bikes as transport still a niche.
My kid and I just took the train back from a day trip in Melk yesterday and I was reminded how seamless the bike to train experience is (and stroller friendly too). I shared an elevator with an electric bike user, an older woman who was probably in her 70s and she just appeared joyful after what I imagine was a social ride wirh friends that had also involved lunch at a guesthouse in easy cycle path proximity.
posted by pipstar at 2:43 AM on May 2, 2023 [14 favorites]
I keep hoping someone in my community will organize a Fancy Women Bike Ride that I (a man) can support.
(Note: I was wary of even posting that link as I am not able to tell how friendly in practice that event might be to trans folx but I hope that individual event organizers would be inclusive.)
posted by gauche at 5:20 AM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
(Note: I was wary of even posting that link as I am not able to tell how friendly in practice that event might be to trans folx but I hope that individual event organizers would be inclusive.)
posted by gauche at 5:20 AM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
Where I live in Australia, cycling is primarily seen as either a kid's activity for parks or an adult hobby for wealthy white color men. It's not seen as a transportation option. Most of those who use it as one fall into the second category above, and are simply willing to engage in their sport as part of a high-risk daily commute.
Bike infrastructure is poorly separated from non-bike traffic. The network of bike lanes is painfully incomplete.
You want women on bikes here? Work on making it an option to get around that doesn't involve significant personal safety risk as well as work on changing the idea that it's just another "rich bloke sport". If the first changed, the second might follow. But without improving the first not much is going to happen.
Yes the cultural gender barrier is a problem. Gender role stereotypes and gendered clique separation is very strong here. And I've encountered so very many men who are quite happy that there are "men's spheres" and "women's spheres". And what a fucking drag it is.
Tbh, I think many of the men who ride bikes here take pride in the risk involved.
posted by allium cepa at 5:55 AM on May 2, 2023 [3 favorites]
Bike infrastructure is poorly separated from non-bike traffic. The network of bike lanes is painfully incomplete.
You want women on bikes here? Work on making it an option to get around that doesn't involve significant personal safety risk as well as work on changing the idea that it's just another "rich bloke sport". If the first changed, the second might follow. But without improving the first not much is going to happen.
Yes the cultural gender barrier is a problem. Gender role stereotypes and gendered clique separation is very strong here. And I've encountered so very many men who are quite happy that there are "men's spheres" and "women's spheres". And what a fucking drag it is.
Tbh, I think many of the men who ride bikes here take pride in the risk involved.
posted by allium cepa at 5:55 AM on May 2, 2023 [3 favorites]
Mod note: Several comments removed due to a derail about whether walking is better than cycling or because of name calling. Let's avoid all that and move on with the subject of the post, thanks.
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:03 AM on May 2, 2023
posted by Brandon Blatcher (staff) at 6:03 AM on May 2, 2023
I know some women in Australia who cycle with their kids in tow as transport, but it's because they're deeply committed to reducing their carbon footprint. And they mention how unfriendly the infrastructure is to cyclists towing kids in a trailer.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 6:16 AM on May 2, 2023 [4 favorites]
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 6:16 AM on May 2, 2023 [4 favorites]
*grumble* make that "white collar men".
Should have previewed.
@chariot - the infrastructure is very unfriendly to cyclists towing kids in trailers. I'd be terrified to try that where I live.
I occasionally watch videos on cycling in the Netherlands and wish some of that perspective would make it over here. Because biking is fantastic for short/medium distances. The climate suits it much of the year. It'd be transformative in so many positive ways. But I don't have much hope. We can't even get solidly behind public transport, much less people-powered.
posted by allium cepa at 7:19 AM on May 2, 2023
Should have previewed.
@chariot - the infrastructure is very unfriendly to cyclists towing kids in trailers. I'd be terrified to try that where I live.
I occasionally watch videos on cycling in the Netherlands and wish some of that perspective would make it over here. Because biking is fantastic for short/medium distances. The climate suits it much of the year. It'd be transformative in so many positive ways. But I don't have much hope. We can't even get solidly behind public transport, much less people-powered.
posted by allium cepa at 7:19 AM on May 2, 2023
They have done basic studies in the US between men and women cyclists - women generally prefer slightly more lighting, no blind corners (generally this means straighter paths and less vegetation at corners especially) and a slightly wider path for passing and for children to ride side by side.
Most of the biking infrastructure in the US doesn't meet any of these.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:41 AM on May 2, 2023 [5 favorites]
Most of the biking infrastructure in the US doesn't meet any of these.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:41 AM on May 2, 2023 [5 favorites]
It seems to me that when we talk about better infrastructure to support women biking, we mean less, more expensive infrastructure.
The types of infrastructure the article mentions (better lane separation, better lighting, better routing), which are the types of infrastructure usually talked about in this context, are a lot more expensive than lane paint. If you have X dollars for bike stuff, and you build this kind of infrastructure, you'll have to build less of it.
And I'm 1000% on board with that. Just-lane-paint is lousy, dangerous bike infrastructure, and higher-quality, more-expensive infrastructure helps everyone and gets more of everyone riding, not just women.
I do think we should be honest, though, that what we're talking about here is building much better infrastructure but less of it. That's an argument, and it's one we should be having openly and winning.
posted by gurple at 7:43 AM on May 2, 2023 [3 favorites]
The types of infrastructure the article mentions (better lane separation, better lighting, better routing), which are the types of infrastructure usually talked about in this context, are a lot more expensive than lane paint. If you have X dollars for bike stuff, and you build this kind of infrastructure, you'll have to build less of it.
And I'm 1000% on board with that. Just-lane-paint is lousy, dangerous bike infrastructure, and higher-quality, more-expensive infrastructure helps everyone and gets more of everyone riding, not just women.
I do think we should be honest, though, that what we're talking about here is building much better infrastructure but less of it. That's an argument, and it's one we should be having openly and winning.
posted by gurple at 7:43 AM on May 2, 2023 [3 favorites]
I do think we should be honest, though, that what we're talking about here is building much better infrastructure but less of it. That's an argument, and it's one we should be having openly and winning.
I mean, yes, that's generally what it means in practice, but compared to roads and compared to most other public expenditures, biking infrastructure is amazingly cheap on a per sq ft basis and has longer maintenance cycles. For example, instead of building a 2nd turn lane at a single intersection, you could build almost half a mile of bike path.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:48 AM on May 2, 2023 [15 favorites]
I mean, yes, that's generally what it means in practice, but compared to roads and compared to most other public expenditures, biking infrastructure is amazingly cheap on a per sq ft basis and has longer maintenance cycles. For example, instead of building a 2nd turn lane at a single intersection, you could build almost half a mile of bike path.
posted by The_Vegetables at 7:48 AM on May 2, 2023 [15 favorites]
I do think we should be honest, though, that what we're talking about here is building much better infrastructure but less of it. That's an argument, and it's one we should be having openly and winning.
Considering that Australia, Europe, the UK, Canada, and the US all need to reduce our carbon emissions to meet targets,
you could make an argument for dedicating carbon-reduction funding to cycle path infrastructure in order to get cars off the road.
I'd love to see an analysis of how much carbon you save from spending $100,000 on dedicated cycle paths vs $100,000 on solar panels.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 8:14 AM on May 2, 2023 [3 favorites]
Considering that Australia, Europe, the UK, Canada, and the US all need to reduce our carbon emissions to meet targets,
you could make an argument for dedicating carbon-reduction funding to cycle path infrastructure in order to get cars off the road.
I'd love to see an analysis of how much carbon you save from spending $100,000 on dedicated cycle paths vs $100,000 on solar panels.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 8:14 AM on May 2, 2023 [3 favorites]
I'd love to see an analysis of how much carbon you save from spending $100,000 on dedicated cycle paths vs $100,000 on solar panels.
Here that's infinite more, since we get almost all our power from hydro. But from local experience, spending the money is difficult, it's not about the cost to invest in bike paths, but how much lanes/parking you remove to make those bike paths. Local business owners scream really loud because they think they'll lose business, commuters scream it'll increase their commute, local residents usually are split on whether they own a car or not.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 8:41 AM on May 2, 2023 [3 favorites]
Here that's infinite more, since we get almost all our power from hydro. But from local experience, spending the money is difficult, it's not about the cost to invest in bike paths, but how much lanes/parking you remove to make those bike paths. Local business owners scream really loud because they think they'll lose business, commuters scream it'll increase their commute, local residents usually are split on whether they own a car or not.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 8:41 AM on May 2, 2023 [3 favorites]
I do think we should be honest, though, that what we're talking about here is building much better infrastructure but less of it.
The exact thing can be said about car infrastructure; if we pave roads instead of having them as gravel, or if we build multilane roads instead of two lane roads, or if we build interchanges instead of intersections, we're building more expensive infrastructure that is better for the users of it. And yet, if what we've gotten with this system is less car infrastructure, I can't imagine to see the system with worse roads, but many more.
The reason we shouldn't build paint-only lanes is because it's insufficient infrastructure, the same reason we shouldn't build car bridges that can't handle the weight of heavy trucks, or buildings that can't withstand reasonable climate impacts in their area. We could build so many more houses if we didn't require their roofs to stay standing under a heavy snowfall! But we don't, because it's malpractice.
Unsafe bike infrastructure shouldn't be on the table; so there's no tradeoff to be had. The point is that we need to build an amount of bike infrastructure that is appropriate and sufficient. And that involves not taking the scraps of money that are leftover for cycling as a ceiling, but treating cycling as a basic mode of transportation. The standard design of every road should include a safe place to cycle and a safe place on either side to walk. And every road that doesn't include that, or that isn't upgraded to that when it gets lifecycle maintenance, should require special consideration.
posted by Superilla at 8:44 AM on May 2, 2023 [15 favorites]
The exact thing can be said about car infrastructure; if we pave roads instead of having them as gravel, or if we build multilane roads instead of two lane roads, or if we build interchanges instead of intersections, we're building more expensive infrastructure that is better for the users of it. And yet, if what we've gotten with this system is less car infrastructure, I can't imagine to see the system with worse roads, but many more.
The reason we shouldn't build paint-only lanes is because it's insufficient infrastructure, the same reason we shouldn't build car bridges that can't handle the weight of heavy trucks, or buildings that can't withstand reasonable climate impacts in their area. We could build so many more houses if we didn't require their roofs to stay standing under a heavy snowfall! But we don't, because it's malpractice.
Unsafe bike infrastructure shouldn't be on the table; so there's no tradeoff to be had. The point is that we need to build an amount of bike infrastructure that is appropriate and sufficient. And that involves not taking the scraps of money that are leftover for cycling as a ceiling, but treating cycling as a basic mode of transportation. The standard design of every road should include a safe place to cycle and a safe place on either side to walk. And every road that doesn't include that, or that isn't upgraded to that when it gets lifecycle maintenance, should require special consideration.
posted by Superilla at 8:44 AM on May 2, 2023 [15 favorites]
Our local bike ride share estimates saved CO2 emissions at around 50-ish grams of CO2 saved per kilometer. On street bike paths with bollards are hard to estimate, but for 100K you should get at least a km if you don't need to do anything crazy on that street to prepare it. So that's 50g CO2 per rider.
1 kWh of electricity in Massachusetts is about 383g of CO2. 18,250 USD is the average price of a 5 kW panel in Boston, so that's 25kW of solar panels for 100K USD. Giving about 75kWh per day, that's 28725g of CO2.
So you need 287 riders/day on that to be equivalent if I didn't screw something up and that's not really taking into account the emission for building the panels.
Most of those numbers I pulled from google searches, so I might have gotten bogus info on the panels.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 9:13 AM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
1 kWh of electricity in Massachusetts is about 383g of CO2. 18,250 USD is the average price of a 5 kW panel in Boston, so that's 25kW of solar panels for 100K USD. Giving about 75kWh per day, that's 28725g of CO2.
So you need 287 riders/day on that to be equivalent if I didn't screw something up and that's not really taking into account the emission for building the panels.
Most of those numbers I pulled from google searches, so I might have gotten bogus info on the panels.
posted by WaterAndPixels at 9:13 AM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
And by the way, I don’t think we should use this simple calculation as a justification or not for bike paths, they have more benefits than simply CO2 emissions reduction (even if it’s part of it).
posted by WaterAndPixels at 9:19 AM on May 2, 2023
posted by WaterAndPixels at 9:19 AM on May 2, 2023
And by the way, I don’t think we should use this simple calculation as a justification or not for bike paths, they have more benefits than simply CO2 emissions reduction (even if it’s part of it).
I agree that bike paths are more than just C02 emission reductions,
my point was that if you can justify spending $X on bike paths for safety/transport reasons
AND bike paths are cost effective C02 reduction options
then the money you can justify spending on bike paths is
$X from the transport/safety bucket
PLUS an additional $Y from the carbon emissions reduction bucket.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 9:30 AM on May 2, 2023
I agree that bike paths are more than just C02 emission reductions,
my point was that if you can justify spending $X on bike paths for safety/transport reasons
AND bike paths are cost effective C02 reduction options
then the money you can justify spending on bike paths is
$X from the transport/safety bucket
PLUS an additional $Y from the carbon emissions reduction bucket.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 9:30 AM on May 2, 2023
There is no real reason that better quality bike lanes should mean we get less of them. What a disappointingly defeatist way to think about something as fungible as money! We spend tens to hundreds of millions of dollars to add a lane to a couple miles of highway or redesign a highway interchange, only for induced demand to mean it won't even reduce congestion for more than a few years at BEST. And we already don't budget enough for maintenance of existing roads and bridges.
So we as a society could (not saying we will, but we easily could) decide to spend less on expanding highways and use that money for really high quality bike and pedestrian infrastructure, and it would go so far. Cycling would be safer and thus become more popular and in many cases car traffic would decrease or remain the same, and businesses would see more, not fewer customers. No increase in taxes or funding needed, just spending it on different and arguably smarter things. As EVs become more popular we're gonna have to rethink our transportation revenue structure anyway, because fuel taxes alone already don't cover it and that's only going to get worse (plus heavier EVs do more damage to roads).
I'm not saying that's easy to do - the way our transportation is funded, especially federal dollars, is fairly prescriptive right now. And that's ignoring the very real problem that every inch of bike lane or pedestrian upgrade gets debated to death in community meetings full of a small subset of the population, while car infrastructure rarely has to jump through those hoops. But I hate the idea that we just shrug our shoulders at the paltry amount of money we spend on active transportation infrastructure and accessibility and accept that it's an unchangeable maximum forever and ever.
By designing for the most vulnerable - women, seniors, people with kids, people with disabilities or other mobility challenges, people who cannot afford to drive a car - we make infrastructure better for everyone. Today I almost got creamed on my bike by a dump truck crossing a bike lane to get to the right turn lane. I've been bike commuting for more than 15 years so I'm pretty confident but it's no surprise that when women are less risk-taking than men, they feel less comfortable sharing roads with cars when the infrastructure is so unsafe. (Women are also more rule-abiding which (according to at least one study I've read about) makes them MORE likely to get hit because much to drivers' chagrin, sometimes jumping ahead at a red light is the safer option than waiting for the green and getting right-hooked. Another thing better infrastructure can change by making it clearer to all road users who is supposed to do what.)
posted by misskaz at 9:47 AM on May 2, 2023 [9 favorites]
So we as a society could (not saying we will, but we easily could) decide to spend less on expanding highways and use that money for really high quality bike and pedestrian infrastructure, and it would go so far. Cycling would be safer and thus become more popular and in many cases car traffic would decrease or remain the same, and businesses would see more, not fewer customers. No increase in taxes or funding needed, just spending it on different and arguably smarter things. As EVs become more popular we're gonna have to rethink our transportation revenue structure anyway, because fuel taxes alone already don't cover it and that's only going to get worse (plus heavier EVs do more damage to roads).
I'm not saying that's easy to do - the way our transportation is funded, especially federal dollars, is fairly prescriptive right now. And that's ignoring the very real problem that every inch of bike lane or pedestrian upgrade gets debated to death in community meetings full of a small subset of the population, while car infrastructure rarely has to jump through those hoops. But I hate the idea that we just shrug our shoulders at the paltry amount of money we spend on active transportation infrastructure and accessibility and accept that it's an unchangeable maximum forever and ever.
By designing for the most vulnerable - women, seniors, people with kids, people with disabilities or other mobility challenges, people who cannot afford to drive a car - we make infrastructure better for everyone. Today I almost got creamed on my bike by a dump truck crossing a bike lane to get to the right turn lane. I've been bike commuting for more than 15 years so I'm pretty confident but it's no surprise that when women are less risk-taking than men, they feel less comfortable sharing roads with cars when the infrastructure is so unsafe. (Women are also more rule-abiding which (according to at least one study I've read about) makes them MORE likely to get hit because much to drivers' chagrin, sometimes jumping ahead at a red light is the safer option than waiting for the green and getting right-hooked. Another thing better infrastructure can change by making it clearer to all road users who is supposed to do what.)
posted by misskaz at 9:47 AM on May 2, 2023 [9 favorites]
By designing for the most vulnerable - women, seniors, people with kids, people with disabilities or other mobility challenges, people who cannot afford to drive a car - we make infrastructure better for everyone.
I 100% agree, as I said above. I just don't also believe in magic money.
posted by gurple at 10:57 AM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
I 100% agree, as I said above. I just don't also believe in magic money.
posted by gurple at 10:57 AM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
Sorry, that was too... negative, I guess? I think it's critical to make the argument for more bike investment (which I think is where you're focusing), and it's also critical to be clear about what type of investment needs pursuing (the focus of the article).
I just don't think it's often acknowledged that, for a given amount of money spent, the type of investment and the amount of infrastructure built (in terms of lane-miles) are related. The article advocates for more expensive infrastructure, and so a focus on quality, at the expense of lane-miles, is appropriate and necessary.
posted by gurple at 11:05 AM on May 2, 2023 [2 favorites]
I just don't think it's often acknowledged that, for a given amount of money spent, the type of investment and the amount of infrastructure built (in terms of lane-miles) are related. The article advocates for more expensive infrastructure, and so a focus on quality, at the expense of lane-miles, is appropriate and necessary.
posted by gurple at 11:05 AM on May 2, 2023 [2 favorites]
In my town they initially made the mistake of getting aggressive bike-enthusiasts to plan the bike lane policy. These are the types of bikers who ride in the street at traffic speeds, and therefore avoid 'unnecessary bike lanes' and instead pushed for bike sensors in the middle of the car lane at street lights.
The city must have realized their mistake because since then it has been all about bike lanes, separated where possible--the type of bike lane you'd be comfortable having your kids and even grandparents riding on.
I lived and worked in The Netherlands for a summer, and when I got there the first thing I was told was to get a bike, so I did. I rode to work (at Philips) every day on my bike, along with everyone else, including the manufacturing workers and all the executives too. All the bike lanes were carefully separated and safe including at all intersections. (It helps that the Dutch are amazingly safe drivers). When riding to downtown Eindhoven, the bikes got their own pathways that went over/under the roads. The whole country was designed for safe bike riding and everyone rode bikes everywhere.
Of course it is a flat country with reasonable whether, but it is also flat and even more reasonable weather where I am now (in Silicon Valley, California) and although they are doing okay with bike paths by US standards, it is not even in the same category as to what was in The Netherlands.
Building better bike paths will help, but the culture needs changing too. It is kind of a chicken-and-egg problem.
One thing is for sure--the bike paths have to be designed for everyone in the family, not just biking enthusiasts. (I have noticed less of this 'macho biker', 'I ride in the street, not on paths' attitude now days, which helps).
posted by eye of newt at 12:16 PM on May 2, 2023 [7 favorites]
The city must have realized their mistake because since then it has been all about bike lanes, separated where possible--the type of bike lane you'd be comfortable having your kids and even grandparents riding on.
I lived and worked in The Netherlands for a summer, and when I got there the first thing I was told was to get a bike, so I did. I rode to work (at Philips) every day on my bike, along with everyone else, including the manufacturing workers and all the executives too. All the bike lanes were carefully separated and safe including at all intersections. (It helps that the Dutch are amazingly safe drivers). When riding to downtown Eindhoven, the bikes got their own pathways that went over/under the roads. The whole country was designed for safe bike riding and everyone rode bikes everywhere.
Of course it is a flat country with reasonable whether, but it is also flat and even more reasonable weather where I am now (in Silicon Valley, California) and although they are doing okay with bike paths by US standards, it is not even in the same category as to what was in The Netherlands.
Building better bike paths will help, but the culture needs changing too. It is kind of a chicken-and-egg problem.
One thing is for sure--the bike paths have to be designed for everyone in the family, not just biking enthusiasts. (I have noticed less of this 'macho biker', 'I ride in the street, not on paths' attitude now days, which helps).
posted by eye of newt at 12:16 PM on May 2, 2023 [7 favorites]
For California at least, transportation infrastructure funding isn't all separated into auto vs bike vs sidewalk. There are complete street grants that give grants to municipalities that encourage bike and pedestrian infrastructure. In practice this often means bike infrastructure gets skimped in favor of pedestrian and car infrastructure, but putting more of that money to bike infrastructure doesn't necessarily mean bike infrastructure gets skimped elsewhere.
The big problem I've seen locally is sharrows being put in, which have negative utility as far as I'm concerned and then everyone crows about how many miles of bike infrastructure has been put in (90% of which is sharrows).
I know there are differences on what people want based on their type of cycling (road, off-road, utility, etc...) and there are also huge differences in how some bike shops support men and women cyclists (I support my local women-owned and/or LGBTQ+/BIPOC friendly shops). I cycle commute with my wife, and we ride at the same pace, but driver hostility is way higher for her than for me. So her lived experience and stress as a cyclist is worse even when all other factors are pretty equal. In that sense I can see why separate infrastructure is even more crucial.
The other piece for anyone who wants utility cycling over road is that we need secure bike parking infrastructure (bike lockers) to make a shift to having more cyclist mode share.
One thing I see as a huge positive is the increase in e-bikes which I think is democratizing cycling immensely even where infrastructure is lacking. Increasing rider speed decreases both the number of car interactions (fewer cars passing) and the quality of car interactions (smaller delta-V between car and bike speed).
posted by BrotherCaine at 12:48 PM on May 2, 2023 [5 favorites]
The big problem I've seen locally is sharrows being put in, which have negative utility as far as I'm concerned and then everyone crows about how many miles of bike infrastructure has been put in (90% of which is sharrows).
I know there are differences on what people want based on their type of cycling (road, off-road, utility, etc...) and there are also huge differences in how some bike shops support men and women cyclists (I support my local women-owned and/or LGBTQ+/BIPOC friendly shops). I cycle commute with my wife, and we ride at the same pace, but driver hostility is way higher for her than for me. So her lived experience and stress as a cyclist is worse even when all other factors are pretty equal. In that sense I can see why separate infrastructure is even more crucial.
The other piece for anyone who wants utility cycling over road is that we need secure bike parking infrastructure (bike lockers) to make a shift to having more cyclist mode share.
One thing I see as a huge positive is the increase in e-bikes which I think is democratizing cycling immensely even where infrastructure is lacking. Increasing rider speed decreases both the number of car interactions (fewer cars passing) and the quality of car interactions (smaller delta-V between car and bike speed).
posted by BrotherCaine at 12:48 PM on May 2, 2023 [5 favorites]
Shit man, Chicago planned to add a whopping 10 new miles of bike lanes (and upgrading 15mi) in 2022 and I'm pretty sure fell short; I can't imagine how we can even build fewer than that. More funding for bike lanes HAS to be on the table.
posted by misskaz at 1:01 PM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by misskaz at 1:01 PM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
And, by the way, more funding is already on the table. The Safe Streets and Roads for All grant program from the bipartisan infrastructure bill is there for communities to apply (now through July 10) and offers $5 Billion over 5 years for bike and ped infrastructure.
posted by misskaz at 1:36 PM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by misskaz at 1:36 PM on May 2, 2023 [1 favorite]
I will note that from an article about cycling in Australia, this has somehow once again turned into a thread about cycling in the USA. I was going to skip commenting because no Australian cycling knowledge; I'm from New Zealand, but I at least have a shared cultural heritage with Australia so I don't feel bad about commenting here after all.
Nodded along with this whole article. My city has similar weather to Melbourne, and while weather is a bit discouraging, cars are the most discouraging. We have increasing amounts of cycle paths, but most of them stop dead at intersections, so if you want to turn right basically ever you get the unsavory options of a) hopping off and being a pedestrian to use the pedestrian crossing or b) cutting across two lanes of moving car traffic to use the lights like a car or c) doing something illegal.
There are exactly three sets of regular traffic lights with a push button for cyclists to demand a light phase, and all three of them are great.
posted by ngaiotonga at 2:14 PM on May 2, 2023 [5 favorites]
Nodded along with this whole article. My city has similar weather to Melbourne, and while weather is a bit discouraging, cars are the most discouraging. We have increasing amounts of cycle paths, but most of them stop dead at intersections, so if you want to turn right basically ever you get the unsavory options of a) hopping off and being a pedestrian to use the pedestrian crossing or b) cutting across two lanes of moving car traffic to use the lights like a car or c) doing something illegal.
There are exactly three sets of regular traffic lights with a push button for cyclists to demand a light phase, and all three of them are great.
posted by ngaiotonga at 2:14 PM on May 2, 2023 [5 favorites]
driver hostility is way higher for her than for me
Huh. I did not know this was a thing. Puts a yelling incident the other day from a driver (apparently cis female) at me (cis female) into some perspective. I've gotten mildly pranked by jerk drivers ("your tire is flat!") too.
Anyway, on the topic of appropriate bikes, I've run into a lot of hardcore-(almost-always-cis-male)-cyclist disdain for step-through/mixte/bakfiets frame designs, as opposed to diamond frames. "Not as strong" is the usual canard, but there will often be a lot of faff about frame flex.
I want to feed those people my tough-as-nails custom steel step-through, some days. Except I adore this bike and will ride it -- yes, usually in a skirt or dress! -- until I no longer can.
posted by humbug at 3:37 PM on May 2, 2023 [4 favorites]
Huh. I did not know this was a thing. Puts a yelling incident the other day from a driver (apparently cis female) at me (cis female) into some perspective. I've gotten mildly pranked by jerk drivers ("your tire is flat!") too.
Anyway, on the topic of appropriate bikes, I've run into a lot of hardcore-(almost-always-cis-male)-cyclist disdain for step-through/mixte/bakfiets frame designs, as opposed to diamond frames. "Not as strong" is the usual canard, but there will often be a lot of faff about frame flex.
I want to feed those people my tough-as-nails custom steel step-through, some days. Except I adore this bike and will ride it -- yes, usually in a skirt or dress! -- until I no longer can.
posted by humbug at 3:37 PM on May 2, 2023 [4 favorites]
I used to organize critical masses in the states, I knew we had done our job right when moms could come with their daughters
posted by eustatic at 6:01 PM on May 2, 2023 [5 favorites]
posted by eustatic at 6:01 PM on May 2, 2023 [5 favorites]
Humbug, I've broken a conventional steel frame, but I'm a "Clydesdale" in cycling terms who rides with almost 300 pounds adding up panniers, gear, bike and my weight. I think it is reprehensible to recommend people ride frames that aren't what they want and need. Nothing wrong with a well built step through frame. My Brompton is basically a step through and the whole bike flexes and creaks when I accelerate even if I'm not out of the saddle, but so what? It holds together and I'm able to hit 20+ mph which is faster than I need to go to get anywhere.
posted by BrotherCaine at 7:47 PM on May 2, 2023 [2 favorites]
posted by BrotherCaine at 7:47 PM on May 2, 2023 [2 favorites]
Thanks for this post. The article is a summary of a research study focusing on riders in Greater Melbourne, Australia:
Lauren Pearson, Sandy Reeder, Belinda Gabbe, Ben Beck, "What a girl wants: A mixed-methods study of gender differences in the barriers to and enablers of riding a bike in Australia," Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2023.03.010. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136984782300061X).
I can access the full study PDF and you can email me if you want a copy.
Some interesting bits:
"Shared barriers [to riding] between women and men had different explanations for why they were a problem." Which feels promising, to me, because it means we can often make our advocacy more inclusive on the initiatives that will benefit all riders, by mentioning "here's why this will help you" reasons that will resonate more with different groups.
"International literature also suffers from a focus on people already riding, rather than those who are not currently riding but may be interested in riding. Previous research has identified populations with large groups of ‘near-market’ bicyclists, showing substantial potential for increased participation..." I think this phrase "near-market" may be of interest to those of you who want to do more research or advocacy in this area.
In Australia, the term "bike riding" is perceived as more inclusive than "cycling" as the latter is associated with competitive sport and with 'a culture of “middle aged men in lycra” or “MAMILs”'; the researchers promoted a '“Getting Around Victoria Survey”. A title without the use of terms “bike riding” or “cycling” was used to reduce the potential for selection bias.' Useful example in case you're going to do a similar survey!
"a higher proportion of women reported not having enough storage on a bike to be a barrier to them riding a bike." I wonder whether something like free pannier giveaways would be useful?
The surveys and interviews were in late 2021 and early 2022, so it's worth noting the pandemic factor, e.g., “I had found that there was an organisation that used to run maintenance courses and special ones for women as well, but they weren’t running them during the pandemic, so I never managed to get to do one of those…I would love to do a course like that if there was one in [name of suburb]..."
I thought this was an interesting phrasing: 'Women described feeling as if they needed “space to fall”, where they described concern about injury if they fell off their bike and onto incoming motor vehicle traffic, or onto a busy path used by faster bike riders.....Exclusively women reported concerns about falling off their bike and into oncoming motor vehicle traffic, and highlighted the need for ‘space to fall’, a finding not previously reported in published literature.'
Women were more concerned about wind as a safety issue than men were, e.g., '“If days are really windy, honestly, that’s the day that I won’t ride. Like that’s what scares me the most because the bike lanes are so tiny.
I’m scared that if a gust of wind blows me over, I’ll just get, you know, rammed into a car or something like that” (45–54-year-old woman)'
"..... women’s perception of safety. A common response to this is installation of further lighting to enhance perceived safety, however there is evidence that this is not sufficient. Instead, the quality of lighting, and the materials the lighting reflects from influence women’s perceived safety in an area..." [citations elided, boldface mine]
"While there were 11 responses collected in the quantitative phase from people who identify as either non-binary or gender diverse, robust analyses were unable to be conducted between gender stratifications. This is important as non-binary and/or gender diverse people have unique experiences of transport, where they may take less direct routes, and use more expensive travel alternative to mitigate potential personal safety issues."
I was wondering whether helmets would come up at all. Just a few mentions: "Previous research in Australia has identified a lack of high-quality cycle paths, lack of connectivity between paths and mandatory helmet regulation as preventing individuals from participating in bike riding (Fishman, Washington, & Haworth, 2012; Heesch, Sahlqvist, & Garrard, 2012). This research was, however, conducted in groups who already ride a bike, or was specific to shared-bike systems." and, in "Proportion of women and men who reported barriers to riding a bike for transport", the item "Having to wear a helmet" was reported by 7.7% of women and 6.8% of men.
posted by brainwane at 10:34 AM on May 3, 2023 [6 favorites]
Lauren Pearson, Sandy Reeder, Belinda Gabbe, Ben Beck, "What a girl wants: A mixed-methods study of gender differences in the barriers to and enablers of riding a bike in Australia," Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2023.03.010. (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S136984782300061X).
I can access the full study PDF and you can email me if you want a copy.
Some interesting bits:
"Shared barriers [to riding] between women and men had different explanations for why they were a problem." Which feels promising, to me, because it means we can often make our advocacy more inclusive on the initiatives that will benefit all riders, by mentioning "here's why this will help you" reasons that will resonate more with different groups.
"International literature also suffers from a focus on people already riding, rather than those who are not currently riding but may be interested in riding. Previous research has identified populations with large groups of ‘near-market’ bicyclists, showing substantial potential for increased participation..." I think this phrase "near-market" may be of interest to those of you who want to do more research or advocacy in this area.
In Australia, the term "bike riding" is perceived as more inclusive than "cycling" as the latter is associated with competitive sport and with 'a culture of “middle aged men in lycra” or “MAMILs”'; the researchers promoted a '“Getting Around Victoria Survey”. A title without the use of terms “bike riding” or “cycling” was used to reduce the potential for selection bias.' Useful example in case you're going to do a similar survey!
"a higher proportion of women reported not having enough storage on a bike to be a barrier to them riding a bike." I wonder whether something like free pannier giveaways would be useful?
The surveys and interviews were in late 2021 and early 2022, so it's worth noting the pandemic factor, e.g., “I had found that there was an organisation that used to run maintenance courses and special ones for women as well, but they weren’t running them during the pandemic, so I never managed to get to do one of those…I would love to do a course like that if there was one in [name of suburb]..."
I thought this was an interesting phrasing: 'Women described feeling as if they needed “space to fall”, where they described concern about injury if they fell off their bike and onto incoming motor vehicle traffic, or onto a busy path used by faster bike riders.....Exclusively women reported concerns about falling off their bike and into oncoming motor vehicle traffic, and highlighted the need for ‘space to fall’, a finding not previously reported in published literature.'
Women were more concerned about wind as a safety issue than men were, e.g., '“If days are really windy, honestly, that’s the day that I won’t ride. Like that’s what scares me the most because the bike lanes are so tiny.
I’m scared that if a gust of wind blows me over, I’ll just get, you know, rammed into a car or something like that” (45–54-year-old woman)'
"..... women’s perception of safety. A common response to this is installation of further lighting to enhance perceived safety, however there is evidence that this is not sufficient. Instead, the quality of lighting, and the materials the lighting reflects from influence women’s perceived safety in an area..." [citations elided, boldface mine]
"While there were 11 responses collected in the quantitative phase from people who identify as either non-binary or gender diverse, robust analyses were unable to be conducted between gender stratifications. This is important as non-binary and/or gender diverse people have unique experiences of transport, where they may take less direct routes, and use more expensive travel alternative to mitigate potential personal safety issues."
I was wondering whether helmets would come up at all. Just a few mentions: "Previous research in Australia has identified a lack of high-quality cycle paths, lack of connectivity between paths and mandatory helmet regulation as preventing individuals from participating in bike riding (Fishman, Washington, & Haworth, 2012; Heesch, Sahlqvist, & Garrard, 2012). This research was, however, conducted in groups who already ride a bike, or was specific to shared-bike systems." and, in "Proportion of women and men who reported barriers to riding a bike for transport", the item "Having to wear a helmet" was reported by 7.7% of women and 6.8% of men.
posted by brainwane at 10:34 AM on May 3, 2023 [6 favorites]
Yeah, it was an interesting study, although they did a large survey of 700 people, then a small set of qualitative interviews and seemed to rely mostly on the interviews for their conclusions. It's unfortunate that most of the differences they did dig up were based on talking to 20 women and 20 men, rather than being validated by the 700.
What's interesting to me is that although the work is focused and driven on trying to find ways that men and women are different, they are in fact very similar in their responses. The big difference in the survey was men rated physical separation from traffic with less importance than women -- but it was still by far the single biggest change that could be made and the single biggest factor. It's not that men and women wanted different things, just 1 in 10 men was less interested in separation. The differences came mostly in motivation -- men don't like bad weather because it's uncomfortable, women because it's unsafe -- which is less actionable; if you can solve a problem for someone, does it matter why they thought it was a problem?
To me, the biggest takeaway was that virtually everybody agreed that safe, separated cycling facilities are needed. The biggest difference between men and women (from the interviews, unfortunately not directly asked in the survey) was in the "gearhead" type mentality; the bike shop attitude / maintenance concerns of women, which is a real problem, but maybe a little harder for state intervention.
There were a couple of very minor notes that I think are useful from a government / design perspective. One was on safety, where men's needs were primarily good lighting for the path, while women brought up broader personal safety issues, including in underpasses and the like. Those facilities should be designed to provide a feeling of personal safety, but it's a good point to keep in mind.
And the second was around the design of separated facilities; the women had a number of concerns based around falling off the bike into traffic, holding up the people behind them, being blown off the bike, and so on. One cycle track here in Calgary has two five foot lanes, one on either side of the street. Another has a single 10 foot two-way track on one side of the street. From the perspective of getting a separated place to ride, they're the same thing, and from the perspective of taking a little space back from cars, they're the same thing. But the latter is a lot more comfortable to ride -- my wife in particular is a less-confident cyclist, and she really doesn't like the five foot lanes. That wider ten foot two-way lane provides more space for passing and potentially for falling.
The helmet thing is interesting; I suspect because it's been the law for so long it's not being thought of as an obstacle. As a Canadian, I would list "exposure to deadly snakes and invertebrates" as a barrier to cycling in Australia, but nobody mentioned it.
posted by Superilla at 2:09 PM on May 3, 2023
What's interesting to me is that although the work is focused and driven on trying to find ways that men and women are different, they are in fact very similar in their responses. The big difference in the survey was men rated physical separation from traffic with less importance than women -- but it was still by far the single biggest change that could be made and the single biggest factor. It's not that men and women wanted different things, just 1 in 10 men was less interested in separation. The differences came mostly in motivation -- men don't like bad weather because it's uncomfortable, women because it's unsafe -- which is less actionable; if you can solve a problem for someone, does it matter why they thought it was a problem?
To me, the biggest takeaway was that virtually everybody agreed that safe, separated cycling facilities are needed. The biggest difference between men and women (from the interviews, unfortunately not directly asked in the survey) was in the "gearhead" type mentality; the bike shop attitude / maintenance concerns of women, which is a real problem, but maybe a little harder for state intervention.
There were a couple of very minor notes that I think are useful from a government / design perspective. One was on safety, where men's needs were primarily good lighting for the path, while women brought up broader personal safety issues, including in underpasses and the like. Those facilities should be designed to provide a feeling of personal safety, but it's a good point to keep in mind.
And the second was around the design of separated facilities; the women had a number of concerns based around falling off the bike into traffic, holding up the people behind them, being blown off the bike, and so on. One cycle track here in Calgary has two five foot lanes, one on either side of the street. Another has a single 10 foot two-way track on one side of the street. From the perspective of getting a separated place to ride, they're the same thing, and from the perspective of taking a little space back from cars, they're the same thing. But the latter is a lot more comfortable to ride -- my wife in particular is a less-confident cyclist, and she really doesn't like the five foot lanes. That wider ten foot two-way lane provides more space for passing and potentially for falling.
The helmet thing is interesting; I suspect because it's been the law for so long it's not being thought of as an obstacle. As a Canadian, I would list "exposure to deadly snakes and invertebrates" as a barrier to cycling in Australia, but nobody mentioned it.
posted by Superilla at 2:09 PM on May 3, 2023
As a Canadian, I would list "exposure to deadly snakes and invertebrates" as a barrier to cycling in Australia, but nobody mentioned it.
The Australian cyclist has logged on. This is like being worried about the risk of bears while riding in downtown Vancouver.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 3:30 PM on May 3, 2023 [5 favorites]
The Australian cyclist has logged on. This is like being worried about the risk of bears while riding in downtown Vancouver.
posted by His thoughts were red thoughts at 3:30 PM on May 3, 2023 [5 favorites]
Clueless USAian question: How bad does the wind get in Australia? I'm a big person who rides fairly upright (ergo lots of surface area for wind to push on), and a crosswind has to be getting up toward 40mph (64kph, 35 knots) before I even have to steer a bit harder. I've never actually worried about being blown into traffic, and I ride in the bike lane beside a fairly major arterial at rush hour on the reg.
posted by humbug at 4:17 PM on May 3, 2023
posted by humbug at 4:17 PM on May 3, 2023
> The Australian cyclist has logged on. This is like being worried about the risk of bears while riding in downtown Vancouver.
I mean, yes and no. A lot of the trails out here (north-east Melbourne) are "creek trails", they follow the various small rivers and creeks, so there's always snakes around, but snakes are also pretty clever. I've seen several blue-tongue lizards on or by the trail, also an echidna and a wombat, but so far no confirmed snakes. Maybe I'm just never up early enough.
Magpies on the other hand ...
> Clueless USAian question: How bad does the wind get in Australia?
It's a whole continent, so it varies, but I think it's more about the fear than the actual chance of being blown out of your lane. On non-separated cycleways, the suction effect of trucks and the sudden on-off effect of the wind being suddenly blocked and unblocked can be pretty damn un-nerving though.
... oh yeah, per the original topic: yeah there are some infrastructure things which I, as a relatively chunky dude, just never think about which women tend to worry about a lot more. Dimly lit underpasses, trails through dank little urban forests or around the back of industrial areas, etc. Can't say I blame them.
posted by nickzoic at 7:09 PM on May 3, 2023 [6 favorites]
I mean, yes and no. A lot of the trails out here (north-east Melbourne) are "creek trails", they follow the various small rivers and creeks, so there's always snakes around, but snakes are also pretty clever. I've seen several blue-tongue lizards on or by the trail, also an echidna and a wombat, but so far no confirmed snakes. Maybe I'm just never up early enough.
Magpies on the other hand ...
> Clueless USAian question: How bad does the wind get in Australia?
It's a whole continent, so it varies, but I think it's more about the fear than the actual chance of being blown out of your lane. On non-separated cycleways, the suction effect of trucks and the sudden on-off effect of the wind being suddenly blocked and unblocked can be pretty damn un-nerving though.
... oh yeah, per the original topic: yeah there are some infrastructure things which I, as a relatively chunky dude, just never think about which women tend to worry about a lot more. Dimly lit underpasses, trails through dank little urban forests or around the back of industrial areas, etc. Can't say I blame them.
posted by nickzoic at 7:09 PM on May 3, 2023 [6 favorites]
Magpies on the other hand ...
... are easily deterred by a few zip ties in the right place.
posted by dg at 8:31 PM on May 3, 2023
... are easily deterred by a few zip ties in the right place.
posted by dg at 8:31 PM on May 3, 2023
As a Canadian, I would list "exposure to deadly snakes and invertebrates" as a barrier to cycling in Australia, but nobody mentioned it
The only place in my suburb you will ever find snakes is a bird sanctuary next to the river, which is used for recreation but not commuting. And that's rare.
None of the commuter-cycle paths in my suburb EVER have snakes.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 9:30 PM on May 3, 2023
The only place in my suburb you will ever find snakes is a bird sanctuary next to the river, which is used for recreation but not commuting. And that's rare.
None of the commuter-cycle paths in my suburb EVER have snakes.
posted by chariot pulled by cassowaries at 9:30 PM on May 3, 2023
I've been bitten by a snake while riding my bike but I don't think that's a common experience.
Speaking for myself, I'm much more likely to make a trip by car instead of by bike if:
a) I'll have to ride on the road instead of bike paths for a significant part of the journey, or
b) I'll have to follow an unfamiliar network of bike paths. I have no sense of direction and most bike paths aren't signed the way roads are. If there's a route I'll need to travel regularly it's worth the time to figure out the route, but not for a single trip.
posted by aussie_powerlifter at 1:51 AM on May 4, 2023
Speaking for myself, I'm much more likely to make a trip by car instead of by bike if:
a) I'll have to ride on the road instead of bike paths for a significant part of the journey, or
b) I'll have to follow an unfamiliar network of bike paths. I have no sense of direction and most bike paths aren't signed the way roads are. If there's a route I'll need to travel regularly it's worth the time to figure out the route, but not for a single trip.
posted by aussie_powerlifter at 1:51 AM on May 4, 2023
If you're riding in a narrow lane and a semi or large box truck passes you closely, the draft can make if feel like you're getting sucked into the truck. If you are not a strong person, or not riding fast enough to counteract that, it can be terrifying. There have been deadly bike crashes here in Chicago (apologies for the US centric perspective) where, although it's not possible to say for sure, it appears that the victim experienced this or maybe had their handlebars clipped or maybe just got too nervous and wobbly and ended up falling under the truck. The fear of falling into traffic is a completely legitimate concern. There was an especially tragic situation last year (TW: child death) where a woman was biking with her child in a child bike seat and got squeezed between a ComEd truck blocking a bike lane and another large truck passing her and she went down and her child was killed.
One of the reasons I LOVE my cheap e-bike is I feel so much safer in situations where just a little extra power (going up a hill, around an obstacle in the bike lane, counteracting a sudden gust of wind) makes me feel 1000x safer. We absolutely need to build more, better, wider lanes but e-bikes are a game changer too.
posted by misskaz at 7:20 AM on May 4, 2023 [3 favorites]
One of the reasons I LOVE my cheap e-bike is I feel so much safer in situations where just a little extra power (going up a hill, around an obstacle in the bike lane, counteracting a sudden gust of wind) makes me feel 1000x safer. We absolutely need to build more, better, wider lanes but e-bikes are a game changer too.
posted by misskaz at 7:20 AM on May 4, 2023 [3 favorites]
Honestly, one of the biggest reasons I was depressed about moving from Munich back to Sydney six months ago was how much I’d enjoyed riding my bike in Germany. Munich had separated cycleways along pretty much all major roads, and drivers were generally cautious and gave cyclists the right of way. I remember not long after I got there, I was approaching a side street and started breaking, expecting the car travelling to my left to turn and cut me off. But he braked and waited for me to cross - something I’ve never experienced in Sydney. I realised that I’d come to expect aggression and outright hostility from Australian drivers, and I never saw that in Munich.
So now I’m back in Sydney and I’ve got a bike… but I feel SO MUCH LESS SAFE even though I’m now wearing my legally mandated helmet. (I had one in Munich but mostly didn’t bother as it was optional.) There are few separated cycleways, and they mostly don’t join up. The roads are in really crappy condition.
My favorite example of the city’s cycling hostility: when they pedestrianised George Street all the way down to the harbour, I got excited thinking I’d be able to ride my bike down it. But nope! Cycling forbidden, for some reason. HOW STUPID. Because of the trams? Seems like the Melburnians handle them just fine.
I really miss riding my bike. 😢
posted by web-goddess at 2:28 AM on May 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
So now I’m back in Sydney and I’ve got a bike… but I feel SO MUCH LESS SAFE even though I’m now wearing my legally mandated helmet. (I had one in Munich but mostly didn’t bother as it was optional.) There are few separated cycleways, and they mostly don’t join up. The roads are in really crappy condition.
My favorite example of the city’s cycling hostility: when they pedestrianised George Street all the way down to the harbour, I got excited thinking I’d be able to ride my bike down it. But nope! Cycling forbidden, for some reason. HOW STUPID. Because of the trams? Seems like the Melburnians handle them just fine.
I really miss riding my bike. 😢
posted by web-goddess at 2:28 AM on May 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
I don't think worries about being blown off your bike are irrational. I probably don't weigh much more than my bike, and on windy winter days I struggle to stop my bike from keeling over. This is less of a problem in the local park where a fall will result in a nasty pedestrian collision at most, but it definitely discouraged me from cycling to uni. The bike lane from dorms to campus was tiny and I was worried about becoming a bug splat on a car if something happened to push me out of it. I love the idea of eco-friendly, exercise-providing bike rides but it feels so unsafe in most places.
posted by wandering zinnia at 11:46 AM on May 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
posted by wandering zinnia at 11:46 AM on May 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
"Space to fall" is a great concept and idea for safety discussions, thank you all.
I do think women's concerns about safety are the safety issues.
I mean, as a dad on a bike i would ride a lot more with our kids if my wife felt better about our ride being more safe, if i had more "space to fall". We are a family unit.
posted by eustatic at 12:30 PM on May 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
I do think women's concerns about safety are the safety issues.
I mean, as a dad on a bike i would ride a lot more with our kids if my wife felt better about our ride being more safe, if i had more "space to fall". We are a family unit.
posted by eustatic at 12:30 PM on May 5, 2023 [1 favorite]
« Older The mind of neural networks | Inside Music’s Nostalgia-Industrial Complex Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
posted by specialk420 at 9:47 PM on May 1, 2023 [1 favorite]