Fuck Cars
A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!
Rules
1. Be Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.
4. Stay on topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do not repost content that has already been posted in this community.
Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.
Posting Guidelines
In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
view the rest of the comments
It's not all his fault.
Cycling in the US was bad before he showed up too.
And if you're forced to ride on roads without any cycling infrastructure, his way is the best option. Best option, other than not doing that at all.
But why he thinks building good cycling infrastructure is a bad thing I'll never understand. That's just nuts.
“And if you’re forced to ride on roads without any cycling infrastructure, his way is the best option. Best option, other than not doing that at all.”
I agree with everything else you said, but that is crazy. If something dangerous is happening you have no where to escape to. Ride on the edge & escape to off the roadway. I have had to do that often
See my other replies on this rebuttal.
I have, I am replying to this comment.
On a road with no bike infrastructure his option is only the best one if you are a physically capable and assertive cyclist, in a place where drivers aren't dangerously hostile toward cyclists, and also aren't hostile toward whatever race, gender presentation, clothing, and any other thing you happen to be doing.
So no, most of the time the best option with no infrastructure is still to just stick to the side of the road and not die. Forrester's system really only works for assertive, athletic, racially privileged men in places where motorists are somehow held to account, and even then it doesn't save you from that last driver you ever interact with: The one with their face buried in their phone.
Yes. When deciding on any option, it first needs to be an option. As in, something you can actually do.
But what you said about riding on the side of the road and trying to not die, is most of his system. A lot of roads don't have any shoulder to ride on, so you're just as far right in the lane as you can be.
Quite the opposite, Forrester insisted that cyclists should ride in the center of the lane, with cars. The central idea of his Vehicular Cycling was that cyclists should be using the road in exactly the same way as drivers.
That is just stupid as BLANK! Even with perfect drivers, something mechanical could cause a dangerous situation & no escape available. Really what protrayed in the video is perfectly/dream land.
I took the course in the 90s.
The rule is, you keep to the right side of the lane you need to use.
So unless you're making a left, or not using the right turn lane, you keep to the right side of the right-most lane. Which is something like 98% of the time.
Maybe I'm confusing his system with Take The Lane defensive cycling.
There are specific circumstances for that. Something like a narrow one lane, one way alley. When there isn't enough space for cars to pass you safely, then "Taking the Lane" so to not even suggest it's an option is the best plan. But that's only as a last resort for short distances.
I imagine his thinking went something like this: "If they build cycling infrastructure, it would attract casual cyclists. But I'd be zooming past them at several times their speed, which would be considered dangerous, so speed limits would be implemented and I wouldn't be able to use public infrastructure as a practice track anymore."
It doesn’t matter how assertive and athletic a person is. They still go squish when they impact 2 tons of metal at 40 mph.
Forrester is a fucking idiot who has no business discussing traffic.
In the video there’s a quote from Forrester saying the Dutch traffic engineers literally didn’t understand what he was saying so obviously they’re idiots; it’s more like they were trying to figure out where the handlers for this nice but intellectually disabled person were.
Yeah. So do pedestrians. Have you seen the stats in the US? People need to get around, whether it is safe or not.
When there are lots of cyclists on the road, it makes all cyclists (indeed, all road users) safer. Eventually it forces drivers to see roads a shared space for everyone, whether or not they agree with that politically.
There's no reason speed limits on streets people walk and bike on need to be so high. There's no reason motorists should be allowed to operate what's basically heavy machinery in public. There are reasons it is not safe that have nothing to do with the inherent safety of cycling.
Nothing of what you said makes sense of Forrester’s opposition to building dedicated cycling infrastructure - and pedestrian infrastructure.
Many cyclists doesn’t change their squishiness.
We cannot reasonably roll back the dominance of the car with an attitude of “just ride your bike in the road”. That only leads to resentment, opposition, and dead people.
I think you meant to reply to my comment. Yes they do all go squish eventually, really it's not a great idea for anyone. I used to be one of these young athletic assertive riders and it's not sustainable. It's just that only athletic and assertive riders would even be comfortable attempting it, or ever feel that it's adequate for their needs (And they'd be wrong, it's not good enough for anyone, even athletic assertive cyclists are better off with a paved, grade-separated cycleway).
I did but then I read the rest of your comment which is my point - all it takes is one text.
Besides who can ride at 30mph in American cities with the ruts and potholes on one of those carbon fiber bikes with $200 skinny tires?
I used to 😅 but I've also had my share of near-death experiences doing so. And even back then I would have preferred seperate facilities. Anyway sorry for comment hounding.