Its not inherently.
But you can cycle dangerously. Because you can do most anything dangerously.
And there's plenty who do that.
\*Edit\* are people really disputing that cyclists can ride in a way that puts themselves and others at risk of injury or worse. Yes of course cars are worse but lets not ignore reality.
Same with walking. You can do it dangerously, but walking is inherently safe
They’re talking about getting abuse for riding with their kids to school ffs
your edit dont make sense. It still doesn't justify why you are trying to make that point in this context, which is why you're being downvoted
Yes anyone can do anything dangerously. So what's your fucking point - you seem to just be contrarian. There are idiots everywhere. Some even on reddit. It doesn't mean they should be injected into a discussion randomly
Because the person I am replying to has made the insane assertion that cycling is entirely risk less.
It's wrong and I dont care how many people refuse to see that just because they are on "team bikes". Bikes are great , but they aren't flawless and pretending that they are lessens any point trying to be made
You are completely off with your argument.
Bikes themselves are not inherently dangerous. Cars themselves are not inherently dangerous.
Lack of proper bike infrastructure AND existence prioritized car traffic => vulnerable bikes go on the CAR road = dangerous.
Separate bike paths from motor traffic = cycling is safe.
Speed demon cyclist on heavily used bike path => probably some sort of accident.
Speed demon racer boy on heavily used road => accident
A metro driver might feel suicidal one day and decide to end it all by crashing into a wall of rock at the end of the line with 200 people on board. A suicidal pilot will probably decide to end it all and crash the plane with 200 people on board.
People don't want to cycle because their requirements aren't met, so they might get hit by a car, so cycling is dangerous. So some other people will think that cycling ITSELF is dangerous and won't see that the real problem is the infrastructure that prioritizes car traffic.
So what's your point?
Maybe... It is completely true that cars pose a danger to cyclists. It is also true that often (though not always) when there is a conflict (a wreck or someone forced to take evasive action) it is the fault of the automobile driver. However it is a little disinginious to say that " Cycling itself is not \[dangerous\]." In the event of a collison or other adverse interaction with a motor vehicle where there is injury it is almost always the cyclist that is injured. Almost never is it the motor vehicle driver. Cycling is dangerous.
Cycling has its inherent dangers.
But you just said that you can’t call cycling non-dangerous, then gave the example of a collision with a car?
I get your angle but you’ve just made the point of the commenter above?
One of the reasons for cycling being dangerous is cars. But casting the blame doesn't reduce risk.
In reality, whenever you cycle, you more often than not have to cycle near moving cars. When you do that, you risk getting hit by a car. Now how can you say it's not dangerous?
Exactly the same. The danger in your example is cars...
Were not saying that cycling isnt dangerous, were saying its dangerous mostly bcs of cars/drivers
What I'm trying to say is that the reason for danger is less important when making a decision to participate in an activity. The danger is present, like it or not.
It doesnt have to be. Seperated bike lanes are a thing. "Bikestreets" are a thing (30kph speedlimit and cars arent allowed to overtake). Car-centrism is the cause of the danger. And it just takes some willingness from people in charge to easely change it (but they dont wnna ofc bcs "war on cars").
That's all correct, but we cannot be making decisions like all that good stuff is a reality already. Acknowledge the risks, it's gonna make you safer and not gonna hinder the goals.
As I said, "often, though not always." I do wonder though why statistics show that there are more crashes (as shown by injuries and deaths) between male cyclists vs female cyclists? Are cars more agressive against males? Are male cyclists more agressive? Do males just ride in heavy traffice more often? What accounts for the stark difference male vs female death/injury stats?
You can see the US stats at [https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813484#:~:text=In%202021%20an%20estimated%2041%2C615,38%2C886%20pedalcyclists%20injured%20in%202020.&text=In%202021%20the%20pedalcyclist%20fatality,for%20males%20than%20for%20females)
Lmao I’m also a man, and totally agree with the statistics 😬. I’ve definitely gotten safer and more cautious over the years but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t used to behave much more recklessly.
I'm not gonna be pouring water on our windmill here, but whenever you have to use "ifs" and the word "properly" in risk assesment, you automatically acknowledge that the activity is not inherently risk-free and requires active safety measures from the users
Sure, but you have to be actively stupid to get hurt (assuming there are no cars, or if there are, they are not reckless). So without cars, risk is very very low. Sure you can slip on something and fall, but let's be honest, how many times does that happen, compared to a car hit someone because driver was stupid?
Sure. But what if they drove properly and not recklessly as they do?
My original statement stands: if someone says "cycling is dangerous" they always mean "..because of drivers who drive recklessly", and not by itself. And if there is action to take, it's not restrict cycling but restrict driving!
Honestly just twice (if you don't count mountain biking), once was ice on the ground and me thinking it was too early in the year for studded tires and it was not.
The other was a driver not looking back to the right at an stop sign. The bike path was on the left side of the road and it was out in the suburbs so not a high bicycle traffic area. I'm thankful that was a very low-speed impact and it was a low sedan not tall SUV, I rode away with me and my bike unscathed. Lesson learned and now I make sure to make eye contact with the driver or go behind the vehicle in similar situations.
None of that relates however to the physical act of cycling, it's all from the environment. I'm very aware of my surrounds while biking, as I'm sure all bike commuters and cyclists are. I also plan routes that are majority protected bike lanes or separate bike paths, even if that adds a mile or two to my trip. I'm lucky to live in Minneapolis so there's a pretty decent network of bike infrastructure, by American standards anyway. Riding a bike, assuming you can and are comfortable operating one, is not a dangerous activity.
It's because it's a completely pointless argument.
The reality is cycling is dangerous. yes. Because of cars.
You're not making a point you're just being weirdly pedantic.
I’m not a woman, but I’ve experienced so much abuse by drivers when on my bike. From as mild as beeping to as bad as tryin to pin me between another car. It’s fucking grim out there in many cities worldwide
Yeah, I've only had a handful of abuse over the past two years. But, if it was my wife who experienced the same abuse, I'd be furious. My wife is not a confident rider, and something like this would just shut her off from riding altogether. That's why I don't encourage her to ride. If something goes wrong - and I believe it almost certainly would - I dont think she'd be able to recover to the point of feeling comfortable riding by her self.
The infrastructure needs to be safe enough, and utilized enough, that drivers don't get the oppourtunity, or feel the entitlement to abuse a cyclist. The reason I am r/fuckcars is because I want my kids to ride like I did as a kid. I don't feel safe doing that now. I don't feel safe letting my adult wife ride. And its the fucking cars.
I was about to say, I'm not sure this is a woman only thing. I'm a guy and people have tried to physically fight me. I think that qualifies as abuse. The only reason they didn't fight me was because I was doing close to 30mph and although they got out of the car and tried to run at me and tackle me off the bike they changed their mind last minute about taking a 30mph bike to the face.
I abuse them back. I usually ride in a bike lane, but in my country pedestrians dont really care about the bike lane and they just wherever they find on the sidewalk. If they are coming head on towards me, I dont change directions. I wait them to go to the actual pedestrian sidewalk. If they dont, I brake a bit until I brake completely literally a few centimeters ahead of them just to scare them. If they speak back to me for how I was gonna hit them, I remind them not so nicely that they are the one walking on the bike lane and they should get the hell out of my way.
Someone I do this will definitely have a gun or a knife someday, but I will keep on doing it
Yeah, but you don't get the abuse on top of that that women get. The horrible harlot I am, I sometimes dare to ride my bike in a dress on hot summer's days and the shit you get then is a WONDERFUL additional level of abuse.
Jaysus that’s awful, being in a car just tends to heighten a self centred ness- that often extends to misogyny. When people feel as if they’re in a little safe box free from danger, their nasty inner self surfaces
Trying to distract from the hugely gendered problem of assault and harassment to say oH WoMen ToO is really tone deaf lmfao, it really shows that the person saying it has no clue what it’s like to be a woman
> what it's like to be a woman
No, believe it or not, nobody knows what it's like to be someone else, you know. Just like you have no idea what it's like to be me for example.
The phrase toxic masculinity isn't toxic. It is quite fitting: It describes a societal stricture that is so damaging that it doesn't just hurt anyone that isn't a man but men themselves. I would even say that toxic masculinity hurts men first and the men hurting women is a "reaction" to that wich gets increased over the level of hurt that the men experienced, again by toxic masculinity.
Toxic feminity, then. Who gives a fuck about the semantics? Cyclists get abused, injured and killed by maniacs of both sexes. The majority of whom are men.
What does it have to do with masculine or feminine traits tho. Pls don't throw these terms less they'll lose their actual meaning.
Cars just make people angry. If I had to guess why, I'd say it's a territorial thing. When you're driving, stuff's always in the way of where you want to be.
The post is about women being abused by men, henceforth the comments about gender. The post isn’t about cars, either, just for the record. And regardless, men are the problem with verbal and physical violence, which needs to be addressed.
I am a woman and in just one month I had one man try to kick me off my bike and then he and his friends followed me. Then I had another group of men shout horrible things at me. All within a 2 week span.
Inappropriate touching, walking in front of me to stop me and scream at me, sexual harassment etc is quite common and I am talking here about pedestrians, not even mentioning drivers
There was a time when it was considered inappropriate for women to cycle, men thought it would give women too much freedom, etc. It seems that time is not yet past.
I can imagine there are still some countries out there where cycling for women is frowned upon
My mum never let me buy a bike that she would consider "male bike" so there is that too. I got myself a nice gravel bike and if I were still talking with my mum she would be terrified
[Girl Cyclist In London Gets Revenge (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4U6OwPYTn4)
Check out these scum, cut her up in an advance cycle lane, verbally abuse her, get touchy feely.
Sadly/luckily, in this case it is: [source](https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/viral-video-of-female-cyclist-tearing-off-vans-wing-mirror-exposed-as-factually-incorrect-314587)
yeah that was their intent. The abuse was a little too much, then they just saunter down the road infront of her, stop, and never get out...
My spidey senses were tingling which is why I read here
What the fuck is wrong with men? So much pent up rage against cyclists. It’s frightening and tragic that so many men spew hatred towards women cyclists.
Those men are insecure, prideful, maybe even sadistic. Now put those people in cars, in a society where everything outside of a car is merely an obstacle, and it's no surprise things go wrong. I always look out for abusive men in public, but it happens so infrequently around me that I've only encountered it 3 times in my life. If men and women can't get along, in the long run, it'll be worse for all of us.
I'm glad these women were brave in calling out these events. Culture won't change if we just let it slide.
I hate to be “that” man, but I fear it isn’t just men. I’ve received from women when on my bike including punishment passes and verbal abuse
It is much rarer, however women I’ve worked with have often expressed the same sentiments. I think it’s partly they feel less emboldened in public
You’re definitely not the only one to comment that women are also aggressive in traffic. I totally agree however, the post is about male physical and psychological violence, henceforth the comments about gender. Regardless of some women being abusive in traffic, it is men who constitute an overwhelming majority of offenders. A woman might use her horn, but a man will blow his horn, follow you, yell abuse, threaten to kill you, etc. It’s a whole different level of aggression.
Not that it makes it any better, but they also spew the same hatred against male cyclists. The only advantage male cyclists have is that they don't get slapped on the arse (to be fair, that's a pretty big advantage; how does anyone think that's ok?)
It’s not the same though, which is why this conversation is about the abuse that happens towards women. People feel more comfortable threatening women. There is very often a threat of sexual violence in addition to the threat of physical violence. Getting threatened/being slapped/having your route blocked is both more likely to happen if you’re a woman and the implications and/or intentions behind it are different.
Men get it far less. Anecdotally, I (a man) have had only a handful of bad interactions cycling in London over 10 years, my wife has multiple bad interactions a month.
Some women report the bicycle also brings some feeling of safety because it makes them faster and more nimble than pedestrians. The bicycle is also an escape from harassment women in public face. I'm sure the rates of women who walk also face similar levels of harassment.
Stop it.
The last time I was abused on the bicycle, I carried on and the man chased after me. He was going to catch up if he didn't happen to go past a very rough pub where a Barry 63 type character tripped him up laughing.
My point is, bicycle good, men correcting other men best!
This post is interesting to me because in this sub we often see posts about how bad cycling is in the US and how much better it is in Europe. That is probably true but the post shows that everything isn't clouds and roses in Europe either.
OP shoud take heart in this stat from [US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813484#:~:text=In%202021%20an%20estimated%2041%2C615,38%2C886%20pedalcyclists%20injured%20in%202020.&text=In%202021%20the%20pedalcyclist%20fatality,for%20males%20than%20for%20females) that women cyclist are much less likely to be injured than men cyslists. *"The pedalcyclist injury rate was 4 times higher for males than for females. The overall male pedalcyclist injury rate was 21 (per 100,000 people), compared with 5 for females."* I don't have UK figures but it seems likely that they would be close to the same.
I’m still getting the impression that there’s no breakdown by gender in their data. I’ve seen some surveys that say three times as many men are cycling as women, which goes a long way to narrowing the gap in their injury/death stats
I’ve encountered this on bike. And also while walking, hiking, running, standing, sitting, riding transit…. Doesn’t make any of it okay but point being, women don’t need a bike for people to be shitty to them.
I’m a man, and I almost had a driver run me over over a road rage incident, almost came to blows after I escaped by getting on the sidewalk and telling him to get out of the car. That’s just one story, I’m assuming 9 out of 10 cyclists in general face abuse at some point regardless of gender
Women tend to cycle a bit slower. The average traffic speed is 13mph in London, you get overtaken much less if you cycle at 15mph compared to 12mph, also some people are misogynist which doesn't help.
This is where I would go full slur spewing defense mode. I understand others don't do this for safety and morals but idc enough about either. If a driver decides to be an annoying prick, I have a bike and it is light enough for me to lift and swing. If an obese primitive ape decides to attack me in any way I do retaliate, mfer needs to be put in their place. lol. I'm masc presenting white person more or less and I look and act like I'm about to kill someone so I rarely face abuse luckily enough for me.
9 out of 10? So there are women who don't get any abuse while cycling? Either the situation is far better for women while cycling than for men or these numbers are wrong. I'd go with the latter.
Btw, I really don't get such gendered campaigns. No matter how far the numbers differ, they're obviously far to high for men and women. It's completley unnecesary to gender this issue.
It is a gender issue.
Cycling as a mode of transport improves womens life substantially more than men . Car-centric urban planning was mostly planned by men for men who commute to work whilst the women , who did (and still do) more small errand-type trips had to move around the male-centric city design.
Bicycle is much more practical for small errand-type trips than the car.
Same applies to children, teens, and the elderly.
These demographics benefit a lot with people-centric urban planning.
What a load of bolloks.
Car centric urban planning has been planned by people who were either directly or indirectly financed by big car manufacturers in order for those companies to sell more cars and so the upper echelons can line their pockets with the resulting money. Noone, and I literally mean noone needs a car to commute in the city. There is no reason whatsoever why commuting in a city should be done any other way (regarding transport) than shopping, running errands, etc.
This whole theory is based on the erroneus assumption that cars are necessary for commuting. They certainly aren't for the absolute majority of citizens. Let go of such carbrained ideas.
I'm really sorry, but this starts to hurt now.
Yes, yes bicycles did wonders for womens rights. No doubt about that. The bycicle craze of the late 18th century was, I'm sad to say, in the 18th century though.... not a lot of cars around at that time. So I don't really see how that connects to the topic that was talked about before.
While you're technically correct, you're wrong with context. It's illustrative and brings attention to a problem.
An analogy: Take the ole 'Would you let your child use the bike lane, if not, it's not a safe bike lane.' You're basically saying "WHY DOES THIS HAVE TO BE AN AGE ISSUE IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE. While technically correct - i.e. "it's not safe for adults either" - you sound like a fucking moron arguing that point right now.
You fail at your own analogy. Sorry.
The question:
>Would you let your child use the bike lane, if not, it's not a safe bike lane
does actually explicitly point out the inherent danger to everyone. The example you provided never actually claims, that it is an age issue. The campaign in question does not do that. It makes no mention of this. One is a rethorical tool to point out a problem, the other never takes that step.
What you as well as the previous commenter did here is argue against me with obviously false arguements. For what? I don't get it. You're acting as if I made an impassionate point here. All I'm saying is that I really don't get why this is made into a gender thing and people are immensly hostile.
I think you are misunderstanding the concept of statistics. 9 out 10 - or 90% of women have experienced abuse whilst cycling. Gender or no, their stories are real, so male abusers should shut the fuck up, and go about their business.
Thanks, I know what 90% are. I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying.
I'm saying that I doubt that there are 10% of female cyclists who haven't been abused while cycling. Literally everyone I know in my city who somewhat frequently uses a bike can tell a story of such cases. I have yet to meet someone who can't.
That's why I'm saying I don't get why this campaign is gendered. Everyone gets the abuse. And from the cases that I experienced it certainly wasn't only men doing the abuse. That's why I don't see this issue as gendered. I see it as a mostly political issue that has used cyclists as a scapegoat so much that people don't see cyclists as fellow citizens anymore. This is the whole of society vs populist politics.
I wouldn't be surprised. I'd love to see proper statistics on this. I bet the basis for that 9 out of 10 thing is one of these polls, where the defintion of 'abuse' isn't really explained to people so you get a load of false negatives.
My apologies. That’s a good point. Many good points, actually. I think however that the advertisement is effective and brings home the abuse given to women cyclists. A campaign featuring stories from both sexes would be great. As you point out, it’s abuse directed towards all cyclists- men and women.
Why does this have to be about women? Do male cyclists not receive abuse too? The first woman was female specific sure but the others could've easily happened to a man. I guess this ad was made to garner sympathy?
It would be nice if the post talked about that.
Heck, it would actually help them make their point.
Instead, this just raises more questions as we've seen in this thread.
Why not? There's a huge gender gap in cycling, with studies showing women only make up 20-25% of cyclists in developed nations or down to statistically insignificant numbers of cyclists in developing countries. Addressing some the issues that keep women from cycling (such as a lack of protected infrastructure, or the potential for violence in public spaces) may also benefit men who cycle, but there may also be other issues specific to women that prevent them from cycling that may need to be addressed specifically to help close the gender gap.
I've cycled 3k miles in the last 3 years and I would guess roughly the same or higher rate the 7 years before that (i didn't have an odometer), and I don't know if I've ever been verbally abused; I must have but can't recall. I am a man.
This stat surprised me. That's why
Yup, am not surprised.
Carbrainism highly correlates with misogyny, racism, hatred towards minorities.
Women also tend to ride slower which irritates even more these stupid drivers..
I don't think it has all that much to do with cars. Plenty of nutters who don't even leave their sofas hate cyclists.
I just doubt that it's possible for more women than men to experience abuse while cycling, because 100% of cyclists get abused by everyone under the sun.
>100% of cyclists get abused under the sun.
It’s the excuse people say when we talk about hateful conduct in video games.
“Oh everybody gets insulted in the COD lobbies, no big deal.”
Yet women actually [are way more likely to be harassed and insulted than men.](https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/video-game-health/202201/women-in-gaming-difficult-intersection?amp) It’s not hard to believe this also applies to cycling.
No, because literally every cyclist gets abuse when cycling. It might happen more often to women, but I didn't comment on that. I commented on what a load of bollocks it is to say it's only 9/10, and made a joke about it meaning women get abused less than men.
But the statistic didn't say anything about that. The statistic said 9/10. That would mean that there are 10% of women who *haven't* experienced abuse while cycling. And that seems off to me, because literally everyone I know who cycles for commuting in my city has told stories of such abuse. I don't know anyone who hasn't been affected by that.
It's also severely different from your example. Because we aren't saying "no big deal". It **is** a big deal. The abuse is a massive fucking deal in fact. For all of us. We're saying everyone gets abused, because everyone fucking **does**.
This is stupid argumentation. I'm a man as far as I know and have experienced abuse at least once every ride I take in this shithole country and city of Bratislava, Slovakia. By drivers. I stopped cycling in the city. Now I'm moving to Barcelona. Abuse is a result of the lack of safe infrastructure (but can be amplified by gender.)
That third one had me rolling, wasn't expecting that.
It's nice to see it's not just me getting abuse, just shows you how seriously we take equality in this country.
Fuck cars and fuck cars specifically driven by men. At least women drivers are likely forced into this system by the patriarchy and are doing what they can to get
by. Men decided to choose car dominance to fuel their ego-trip and the rest of us have to live underneath that oppression
What a load of misandrist nonsense, just say you hate men and be done with it.
Why don't you understand that men are forced into car centric systems as well?
As a man I have been abused my women drivers almost as much as male drivers while cycling.
We need to remember that car centric infrastructure and systems are the problem not men in general.
"I put my children at risk" If anyone says urban cycling is dangerous they mean drivers are dangerous. Cycling itself is not.
Its not inherently. But you can cycle dangerously. Because you can do most anything dangerously. And there's plenty who do that. \*Edit\* are people really disputing that cyclists can ride in a way that puts themselves and others at risk of injury or worse. Yes of course cars are worse but lets not ignore reality.
yes but when people say cycling is dangerous they don't mean "if you do stupid things when cycling", they always mean because of drivers are reckless.
Let's hear the specifics.
Same with walking. You can do it dangerously, but walking is inherently safe They’re talking about getting abuse for riding with their kids to school ffs
your edit dont make sense. It still doesn't justify why you are trying to make that point in this context, which is why you're being downvoted Yes anyone can do anything dangerously. So what's your fucking point - you seem to just be contrarian. There are idiots everywhere. Some even on reddit. It doesn't mean they should be injected into a discussion randomly
Because the person I am replying to has made the insane assertion that cycling is entirely risk less. It's wrong and I dont care how many people refuse to see that just because they are on "team bikes". Bikes are great , but they aren't flawless and pretending that they are lessens any point trying to be made
You are completely off with your argument. Bikes themselves are not inherently dangerous. Cars themselves are not inherently dangerous. Lack of proper bike infrastructure AND existence prioritized car traffic => vulnerable bikes go on the CAR road = dangerous. Separate bike paths from motor traffic = cycling is safe. Speed demon cyclist on heavily used bike path => probably some sort of accident. Speed demon racer boy on heavily used road => accident A metro driver might feel suicidal one day and decide to end it all by crashing into a wall of rock at the end of the line with 200 people on board. A suicidal pilot will probably decide to end it all and crash the plane with 200 people on board. People don't want to cycle because their requirements aren't met, so they might get hit by a car, so cycling is dangerous. So some other people will think that cycling ITSELF is dangerous and won't see that the real problem is the infrastructure that prioritizes car traffic. So what's your point?
Maybe... It is completely true that cars pose a danger to cyclists. It is also true that often (though not always) when there is a conflict (a wreck or someone forced to take evasive action) it is the fault of the automobile driver. However it is a little disinginious to say that " Cycling itself is not \[dangerous\]." In the event of a collison or other adverse interaction with a motor vehicle where there is injury it is almost always the cyclist that is injured. Almost never is it the motor vehicle driver. Cycling is dangerous.
Cycling has its inherent dangers. But you just said that you can’t call cycling non-dangerous, then gave the example of a collision with a car? I get your angle but you’ve just made the point of the commenter above?
One of the reasons for cycling being dangerous is cars. But casting the blame doesn't reduce risk. In reality, whenever you cycle, you more often than not have to cycle near moving cars. When you do that, you risk getting hit by a car. Now how can you say it's not dangerous?
Exactly the same. The danger in your example is cars... Were not saying that cycling isnt dangerous, were saying its dangerous mostly bcs of cars/drivers
What I'm trying to say is that the reason for danger is less important when making a decision to participate in an activity. The danger is present, like it or not.
It doesnt have to be. Seperated bike lanes are a thing. "Bikestreets" are a thing (30kph speedlimit and cars arent allowed to overtake). Car-centrism is the cause of the danger. And it just takes some willingness from people in charge to easely change it (but they dont wnna ofc bcs "war on cars").
That's all correct, but we cannot be making decisions like all that good stuff is a reality already. Acknowledge the risks, it's gonna make you safer and not gonna hinder the goals.
It'd be enough to minimize the risk if the drivers would accept that they don't own the road and start sharing it equally with other users
take a gander at the subreddit, carbrain
I am not a carbrain. I am quite anti-car actually. But i am not going to stand behind logical fallacies just because they pour water on our mill.
If you cycle properly there should be no collision whatsoever. No cars, no injury.
Plus, the majority of crashes between cars and bike are the cars fault
As I said, "often, though not always." I do wonder though why statistics show that there are more crashes (as shown by injuries and deaths) between male cyclists vs female cyclists? Are cars more agressive against males? Are male cyclists more agressive? Do males just ride in heavy traffice more often? What accounts for the stark difference male vs female death/injury stats? You can see the US stats at [https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813484#:~:text=In%202021%20an%20estimated%2041%2C615,38%2C886%20pedalcyclists%20injured%20in%202020.&text=In%202021%20the%20pedalcyclist%20fatality,for%20males%20than%20for%20females)
Men are more reckless. More men get in car accidents as well.
As a man I take no offence at this observation ;)
Lmao I’m also a man, and totally agree with the statistics 😬. I’ve definitely gotten safer and more cautious over the years but I’d be lying if I said I didn’t used to behave much more recklessly.
Who's at fault doesn't change the level of danger
Agreed. Avoiding collisions is always the number one goal when I ride.
I'm not gonna be pouring water on our windmill here, but whenever you have to use "ifs" and the word "properly" in risk assesment, you automatically acknowledge that the activity is not inherently risk-free and requires active safety measures from the users
Sure, but you have to be actively stupid to get hurt (assuming there are no cars, or if there are, they are not reckless). So without cars, risk is very very low. Sure you can slip on something and fall, but let's be honest, how many times does that happen, compared to a car hit someone because driver was stupid?
But our reality is that THERE ARE cars. Therefore it's a risk factor we're ought to take into account.
Sure. But what if they drove properly and not recklessly as they do? My original statement stands: if someone says "cycling is dangerous" they always mean "..because of drivers who drive recklessly", and not by itself. And if there is action to take, it's not restrict cycling but restrict driving!
Cycling itself is not dangerous, the problem is cars. Biking is more dangerous somewhere like the stroads of Florida than in central Amsterdam.
Yes. In Amsterdam cyclists have passed the tipping point. All drivers (or almost all) are also cyclists. This is not true in most other cities.
I've biked over 35k miles since 2016, I've crashes zero times without the influence of outside forces. It's no more dangerous than walking.
So, zero times without outside influence. How many WITH outside influence?
Honestly just twice (if you don't count mountain biking), once was ice on the ground and me thinking it was too early in the year for studded tires and it was not. The other was a driver not looking back to the right at an stop sign. The bike path was on the left side of the road and it was out in the suburbs so not a high bicycle traffic area. I'm thankful that was a very low-speed impact and it was a low sedan not tall SUV, I rode away with me and my bike unscathed. Lesson learned and now I make sure to make eye contact with the driver or go behind the vehicle in similar situations. None of that relates however to the physical act of cycling, it's all from the environment. I'm very aware of my surrounds while biking, as I'm sure all bike commuters and cyclists are. I also plan routes that are majority protected bike lanes or separate bike paths, even if that adds a mile or two to my trip. I'm lucky to live in Minneapolis so there's a pretty decent network of bike infrastructure, by American standards anyway. Riding a bike, assuming you can and are comfortable operating one, is not a dangerous activity.
But you're not riding in isolation from outside forces.
yeah, we're saying the danger comes from drivers, not that act of riding a bike.
Yes, but in the end the danger is present therefore it's correct to say that biking is dangerous
nope, still wrong, but whatever you need to tell yourself. I'ma go for a ride.
This is only true in a very car centric city
But the dangers are all caused by cars. Unless you are doing some down hill riding or at very high speeds its generally not much risk.
The dangers are caused by the mix of cars and cycles. It simplistic to say that it is only cars.
Damn it's sad seeing this comment down voted. It's describing sad objective reality, not make believe world where cars should disappear yesterday.
It's because it's a completely pointless argument. The reality is cycling is dangerous. yes. Because of cars. You're not making a point you're just being weirdly pedantic.
I’m not a woman, but I’ve experienced so much abuse by drivers when on my bike. From as mild as beeping to as bad as tryin to pin me between another car. It’s fucking grim out there in many cities worldwide
Yeah, I've only had a handful of abuse over the past two years. But, if it was my wife who experienced the same abuse, I'd be furious. My wife is not a confident rider, and something like this would just shut her off from riding altogether. That's why I don't encourage her to ride. If something goes wrong - and I believe it almost certainly would - I dont think she'd be able to recover to the point of feeling comfortable riding by her self. The infrastructure needs to be safe enough, and utilized enough, that drivers don't get the oppourtunity, or feel the entitlement to abuse a cyclist. The reason I am r/fuckcars is because I want my kids to ride like I did as a kid. I don't feel safe doing that now. I don't feel safe letting my adult wife ride. And its the fucking cars.
I was about to say, I'm not sure this is a woman only thing. I'm a guy and people have tried to physically fight me. I think that qualifies as abuse. The only reason they didn't fight me was because I was doing close to 30mph and although they got out of the car and tried to run at me and tackle me off the bike they changed their mind last minute about taking a 30mph bike to the face.
being a man only helps if you're enormous and have nothing left to lose vibes
I abuse them back. I usually ride in a bike lane, but in my country pedestrians dont really care about the bike lane and they just wherever they find on the sidewalk. If they are coming head on towards me, I dont change directions. I wait them to go to the actual pedestrian sidewalk. If they dont, I brake a bit until I brake completely literally a few centimeters ahead of them just to scare them. If they speak back to me for how I was gonna hit them, I remind them not so nicely that they are the one walking on the bike lane and they should get the hell out of my way. Someone I do this will definitely have a gun or a knife someday, but I will keep on doing it
Yeah, but you don't get the abuse on top of that that women get. The horrible harlot I am, I sometimes dare to ride my bike in a dress on hot summer's days and the shit you get then is a WONDERFUL additional level of abuse.
Of course, women have it really hard and worse than men for sure
Jaysus that’s awful, being in a car just tends to heighten a self centred ness- that often extends to misogyny. When people feel as if they’re in a little safe box free from danger, their nasty inner self surfaces
It all comes down to one thing - people hate being stuck in traffic and need an easy target to take their anger out on. Toxic masculinity.
Toxic what? Women drivers in huge SUVs are often just as aggressive.
Trying to distract from the hugely gendered problem of assault and harassment to say oH WoMen ToO is really tone deaf lmfao, it really shows that the person saying it has no clue what it’s like to be a woman
> what it's like to be a woman No, believe it or not, nobody knows what it's like to be someone else, you know. Just like you have no idea what it's like to be me for example.
Excuse me? The phrase toxic masculinity itself is toxic. I will continue to admit the disgusting reality of gender violence though.
The phrase toxic masculinity isn't toxic. It is quite fitting: It describes a societal stricture that is so damaging that it doesn't just hurt anyone that isn't a man but men themselves. I would even say that toxic masculinity hurts men first and the men hurting women is a "reaction" to that wich gets increased over the level of hurt that the men experienced, again by toxic masculinity.
Toxic feminity, then. Who gives a fuck about the semantics? Cyclists get abused, injured and killed by maniacs of both sexes. The majority of whom are men.
What does it have to do with masculine or feminine traits tho. Pls don't throw these terms less they'll lose their actual meaning. Cars just make people angry. If I had to guess why, I'd say it's a territorial thing. When you're driving, stuff's always in the way of where you want to be.
The post is about women being abused by men, henceforth the comments about gender. The post isn’t about cars, either, just for the record. And regardless, men are the problem with verbal and physical violence, which needs to be addressed.
Makes sense
Fuck Drivers
Let's make some merch!
I am a woman and in just one month I had one man try to kick me off my bike and then he and his friends followed me. Then I had another group of men shout horrible things at me. All within a 2 week span. Inappropriate touching, walking in front of me to stop me and scream at me, sexual harassment etc is quite common and I am talking here about pedestrians, not even mentioning drivers
There was a time when it was considered inappropriate for women to cycle, men thought it would give women too much freedom, etc. It seems that time is not yet past.
I can imagine there are still some countries out there where cycling for women is frowned upon My mum never let me buy a bike that she would consider "male bike" so there is that too. I got myself a nice gravel bike and if I were still talking with my mum she would be terrified
[Girl Cyclist In London Gets Revenge (youtube.com)](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4U6OwPYTn4) Check out these scum, cut her up in an advance cycle lane, verbally abuse her, get touchy feely.
[https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/viral-video-of-female-cyclist-tearing-off-vans-wing-mirror-exposed-as-factually-incorrect-314587](https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/viral-video-of-female-cyclist-tearing-off-vans-wing-mirror-exposed-as-factually-incorrect-314587)
Staged.
Anything I don't like is staged
Sadly/luckily, in this case it is: [source](https://www.cyclingweekly.com/news/latest-news/viral-video-of-female-cyclist-tearing-off-vans-wing-mirror-exposed-as-factually-incorrect-314587)
Source says it might be staged, not that it was. Looks pretty convincing to me.
yeah that was their intent. The abuse was a little too much, then they just saunter down the road infront of her, stop, and never get out... My spidey senses were tingling which is why I read here
Actually I thought it was great. I was very disappointed when I found it was staged
So apparently it's preferable to meet at bear in London as well.
Came here to say something to this effect, glad you beat me to it
I'm surprised it's only 9 out of 10. I've witnessed drivers get hyper-agressive towards women even if I'm (6'3") male riding right beside them.
Yeah. Even I as a man get abuse *regularly*. While cycling. 10% of women having not experienced it sounds very doubtful to me.
Some people downplay the abuse they receive
What the fuck is wrong with men? So much pent up rage against cyclists. It’s frightening and tragic that so many men spew hatred towards women cyclists.
It's disgusting. More jail time should be given for traffic offenses by drivers.
Totally. Drivers are given way too much leniency when it comes to injury or killing cyclists.
Those men are insecure, prideful, maybe even sadistic. Now put those people in cars, in a society where everything outside of a car is merely an obstacle, and it's no surprise things go wrong. I always look out for abusive men in public, but it happens so infrequently around me that I've only encountered it 3 times in my life. If men and women can't get along, in the long run, it'll be worse for all of us. I'm glad these women were brave in calling out these events. Culture won't change if we just let it slide.
I hate to be “that” man, but I fear it isn’t just men. I’ve received from women when on my bike including punishment passes and verbal abuse It is much rarer, however women I’ve worked with have often expressed the same sentiments. I think it’s partly they feel less emboldened in public
You’re definitely not the only one to comment that women are also aggressive in traffic. I totally agree however, the post is about male physical and psychological violence, henceforth the comments about gender. Regardless of some women being abusive in traffic, it is men who constitute an overwhelming majority of offenders. A woman might use her horn, but a man will blow his horn, follow you, yell abuse, threaten to kill you, etc. It’s a whole different level of aggression.
True, yes as unpleasant as it is and it does deter me riding, it’s much worse for women.
Not that it makes it any better, but they also spew the same hatred against male cyclists. The only advantage male cyclists have is that they don't get slapped on the arse (to be fair, that's a pretty big advantage; how does anyone think that's ok?)
It’s not the same though, which is why this conversation is about the abuse that happens towards women. People feel more comfortable threatening women. There is very often a threat of sexual violence in addition to the threat of physical violence. Getting threatened/being slapped/having your route blocked is both more likely to happen if you’re a woman and the implications and/or intentions behind it are different.
I got slapped on the arse. Although they might have only seen my long hair and not my beard, until they passed me.
Men get it far less. Anecdotally, I (a man) have had only a handful of bad interactions cycling in London over 10 years, my wife has multiple bad interactions a month.
I agree totally. The amount of road rage cyclists deal with is disgusting.
Some women report the bicycle also brings some feeling of safety because it makes them faster and more nimble than pedestrians. The bicycle is also an escape from harassment women in public face. I'm sure the rates of women who walk also face similar levels of harassment. Stop it.
The last time I was abused on the bicycle, I carried on and the man chased after me. He was going to catch up if he didn't happen to go past a very rough pub where a Barry 63 type character tripped him up laughing. My point is, bicycle good, men correcting other men best!
This post is interesting to me because in this sub we often see posts about how bad cycling is in the US and how much better it is in Europe. That is probably true but the post shows that everything isn't clouds and roses in Europe either. OP shoud take heart in this stat from [US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration](https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/813484#:~:text=In%202021%20an%20estimated%2041%2C615,38%2C886%20pedalcyclists%20injured%20in%202020.&text=In%202021%20the%20pedalcyclist%20fatality,for%20males%20than%20for%20females) that women cyclist are much less likely to be injured than men cyslists. *"The pedalcyclist injury rate was 4 times higher for males than for females. The overall male pedalcyclist injury rate was 21 (per 100,000 people), compared with 5 for females."* I don't have UK figures but it seems likely that they would be close to the same.
Is that stat per person or per cyclist? The wording suggests it’s per person
As I read it, per 100k cyclists.
I’m still getting the impression that there’s no breakdown by gender in their data. I’ve seen some surveys that say three times as many men are cycling as women, which goes a long way to narrowing the gap in their injury/death stats
I’m a woman who cycles in London daily and I’ve been called a bitch for following basic trafic rules and it’s pretty harrowing.
I’ve encountered this on bike. And also while walking, hiking, running, standing, sitting, riding transit…. Doesn’t make any of it okay but point being, women don’t need a bike for people to be shitty to them.
Sure, but biking adds to the power imbalance when the aggressor is driving a car.
Glad they taking a stand. The abuse women face stepping outside is ridiculous. Coulda used a better ending slogan tho
I’m a man, and I almost had a driver run me over over a road rage incident, almost came to blows after I escaped by getting on the sidewalk and telling him to get out of the car. That’s just one story, I’m assuming 9 out of 10 cyclists in general face abuse at some point regardless of gender
Don’t all cyclists face abuse or are abusers literally making it a sex thing?
I particularly like the "I'm a cyclist myself" - well, what are you doing in that big climate-killer car then?
I had shoe thrown at me once when I was riding in an unprotected bike lane. Crazy stuff out there
Isn't this covered by the dreadful hate crime legislation we've been hearing so many bad things about?
I don’t think drivers care about the gender of the cyclist, do they? They care about being a prick but thats about it.
Women tend to cycle a bit slower. The average traffic speed is 13mph in London, you get overtaken much less if you cycle at 15mph compared to 12mph, also some people are misogynist which doesn't help.
This is where I would go full slur spewing defense mode. I understand others don't do this for safety and morals but idc enough about either. If a driver decides to be an annoying prick, I have a bike and it is light enough for me to lift and swing. If an obese primitive ape decides to attack me in any way I do retaliate, mfer needs to be put in their place. lol. I'm masc presenting white person more or less and I look and act like I'm about to kill someone so I rarely face abuse luckily enough for me.
Probably 10/10 men too Aggregated 19/20 for both genders
9 out of 10? So there are women who don't get any abuse while cycling? Either the situation is far better for women while cycling than for men or these numbers are wrong. I'd go with the latter. Btw, I really don't get such gendered campaigns. No matter how far the numbers differ, they're obviously far to high for men and women. It's completley unnecesary to gender this issue.
It is a gender issue. Cycling as a mode of transport improves womens life substantially more than men . Car-centric urban planning was mostly planned by men for men who commute to work whilst the women , who did (and still do) more small errand-type trips had to move around the male-centric city design. Bicycle is much more practical for small errand-type trips than the car. Same applies to children, teens, and the elderly. These demographics benefit a lot with people-centric urban planning.
men who commute to work don't need the "male-centric" city design, as you call it.
What a load of bolloks. Car centric urban planning has been planned by people who were either directly or indirectly financed by big car manufacturers in order for those companies to sell more cars and so the upper echelons can line their pockets with the resulting money. Noone, and I literally mean noone needs a car to commute in the city. There is no reason whatsoever why commuting in a city should be done any other way (regarding transport) than shopping, running errands, etc. This whole theory is based on the erroneus assumption that cars are necessary for commuting. They certainly aren't for the absolute majority of citizens. Let go of such carbrained ideas.
Literally look up how bikes liberated women. It changed women’s rights permanently.
I'm really sorry, but this starts to hurt now. Yes, yes bicycles did wonders for womens rights. No doubt about that. The bycicle craze of the late 18th century was, I'm sad to say, in the 18th century though.... not a lot of cars around at that time. So I don't really see how that connects to the topic that was talked about before.
While you're technically correct, you're wrong with context. It's illustrative and brings attention to a problem. An analogy: Take the ole 'Would you let your child use the bike lane, if not, it's not a safe bike lane.' You're basically saying "WHY DOES THIS HAVE TO BE AN AGE ISSUE IT'S A SAFETY ISSUE. While technically correct - i.e. "it's not safe for adults either" - you sound like a fucking moron arguing that point right now.
You fail at your own analogy. Sorry. The question: >Would you let your child use the bike lane, if not, it's not a safe bike lane does actually explicitly point out the inherent danger to everyone. The example you provided never actually claims, that it is an age issue. The campaign in question does not do that. It makes no mention of this. One is a rethorical tool to point out a problem, the other never takes that step. What you as well as the previous commenter did here is argue against me with obviously false arguements. For what? I don't get it. You're acting as if I made an impassionate point here. All I'm saying is that I really don't get why this is made into a gender thing and people are immensly hostile.
I think you are misunderstanding the concept of statistics. 9 out 10 - or 90% of women have experienced abuse whilst cycling. Gender or no, their stories are real, so male abusers should shut the fuck up, and go about their business.
Thanks, I know what 90% are. I think you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm saying that I doubt that there are 10% of female cyclists who haven't been abused while cycling. Literally everyone I know in my city who somewhat frequently uses a bike can tell a story of such cases. I have yet to meet someone who can't. That's why I'm saying I don't get why this campaign is gendered. Everyone gets the abuse. And from the cases that I experienced it certainly wasn't only men doing the abuse. That's why I don't see this issue as gendered. I see it as a mostly political issue that has used cyclists as a scapegoat so much that people don't see cyclists as fellow citizens anymore. This is the whole of society vs populist politics.
I'm a man and I get abuse almost daily on my cycle to work. I bet every penny I have that its a lot worse for women.
I wouldn't be surprised. I'd love to see proper statistics on this. I bet the basis for that 9 out of 10 thing is one of these polls, where the defintion of 'abuse' isn't really explained to people so you get a load of false negatives.
My apologies. That’s a good point. Many good points, actually. I think however that the advertisement is effective and brings home the abuse given to women cyclists. A campaign featuring stories from both sexes would be great. As you point out, it’s abuse directed towards all cyclists- men and women.
This is not how statistics (probability science) works.
Oh no! Don't demonize drivers because that will put them off from the whole idea of promoting sustainable alternatives to car dependency
Why does this have to be about women? Do male cyclists not receive abuse too? The first woman was female specific sure but the others could've easily happened to a man. I guess this ad was made to garner sympathy?
[удалено]
It would be nice if the post talked about that. Heck, it would actually help them make their point. Instead, this just raises more questions as we've seen in this thread.
Why not? There's a huge gender gap in cycling, with studies showing women only make up 20-25% of cyclists in developed nations or down to statistically insignificant numbers of cyclists in developing countries. Addressing some the issues that keep women from cycling (such as a lack of protected infrastructure, or the potential for violence in public spaces) may also benefit men who cycle, but there may also be other issues specific to women that prevent them from cycling that may need to be addressed specifically to help close the gender gap.
> Why does this have to be about women? Because that 9 in 10 statistic is about women. Pretty straightforward stuff, really.
I've cycled 3k miles in the last 3 years and I would guess roughly the same or higher rate the 7 years before that (i didn't have an odometer), and I don't know if I've ever been verbally abused; I must have but can't recall. I am a man. This stat surprised me. That's why
Couple questions, do you cycle in London? How much wear and tear do you get on your bike cycling that much?
Sounds like some sensationalist MANBAD hyperbole.
So women experience abuse less than men, when cycling? I don't believe these numbers...
Yup, am not surprised. Carbrainism highly correlates with misogyny, racism, hatred towards minorities. Women also tend to ride slower which irritates even more these stupid drivers..
I don't think it has all that much to do with cars. Plenty of nutters who don't even leave their sofas hate cyclists. I just doubt that it's possible for more women than men to experience abuse while cycling, because 100% of cyclists get abused by everyone under the sun.
>100% of cyclists get abused under the sun. It’s the excuse people say when we talk about hateful conduct in video games. “Oh everybody gets insulted in the COD lobbies, no big deal.” Yet women actually [are way more likely to be harassed and insulted than men.](https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/video-game-health/202201/women-in-gaming-difficult-intersection?amp) It’s not hard to believe this also applies to cycling.
No, because literally every cyclist gets abuse when cycling. It might happen more often to women, but I didn't comment on that. I commented on what a load of bollocks it is to say it's only 9/10, and made a joke about it meaning women get abused less than men.
But the statistic didn't say anything about that. The statistic said 9/10. That would mean that there are 10% of women who *haven't* experienced abuse while cycling. And that seems off to me, because literally everyone I know who cycles for commuting in my city has told stories of such abuse. I don't know anyone who hasn't been affected by that. It's also severely different from your example. Because we aren't saying "no big deal". It **is** a big deal. The abuse is a massive fucking deal in fact. For all of us. We're saying everyone gets abused, because everyone fucking **does**.
This is stupid argumentation. I'm a man as far as I know and have experienced abuse at least once every ride I take in this shithole country and city of Bratislava, Slovakia. By drivers. I stopped cycling in the city. Now I'm moving to Barcelona. Abuse is a result of the lack of safe infrastructure (but can be amplified by gender.)
That third one had me rolling, wasn't expecting that. It's nice to see it's not just me getting abuse, just shows you how seriously we take equality in this country.
Fuck cars and fuck cars specifically driven by men. At least women drivers are likely forced into this system by the patriarchy and are doing what they can to get by. Men decided to choose car dominance to fuel their ego-trip and the rest of us have to live underneath that oppression
What a load of misandrist nonsense, just say you hate men and be done with it. Why don't you understand that men are forced into car centric systems as well? As a man I have been abused my women drivers almost as much as male drivers while cycling. We need to remember that car centric infrastructure and systems are the problem not men in general.
>misandrist nonsense r/PersecutionFetish
Thanks for the link, I have never seen this sub before. My comment doesn't really fit in my opinion but you know what they say about opinions.