Advocacy & Safety - The Face of Critical Mass

http://donsorsa.smugmug.com/gallery/761502

My mind has been changed....

Can you post some pics of the blocked traffic?

Can you post some pics of the blocked traffic?
Sure! how about these?
you might notice a curious lack of bikes...they do fine blocking themselves, it seems... ;)

Sure! how about these?
you might notice a curious lack of bikes...they do fine blocking themselves, it seems... ;)

Were they all arrested?

Actually, I believe this is the face of Critical Mass.........as the dirty hippies section rolls by.

http://donsorsa.smugmug.com/gallery/761502/2/33635287

Were they all arrested?
Some day, tovarisch. Some day.

My mind has been changed....
Yeah, mine as well...I'm beginning to see the communal benefit of riding with hippies that have plastic milk crates lashed to their racks and stickers on their bikes that read, "I do drunk chicks". :D

For a bunch of people supposedly dedicated to the high-and-mighty cause of promoting safe and peaceful bicycling, there sure are a lot of people without helmets. What a pathetic line of BS.

- Warren

For a bunch of people supposedly dedicated to the high-and-mighty cause of promoting safe and peaceful bicycling, there sure are a lot of people without helmets. What a pathetic line of BS.
This thread is like reading the results of a Rosarch Test given to BF "advocates". The advocates see what they want to see.

I see the lack of comments from the BF advocates about the narrow age and race makeup of the alleged advocate-participants. What city's bicycling population are these pictured "advocates" supposed to represent? I see on picture #85 the Chicago City flag. Photo #109 and 110 are definitely Chicago. Somehow I don't think this crowd is representative of the population (cycling or non-cycling) of the City of Chicago. Maybe the University of Chicago and a few alumni.

Good photography.

I especially liked the young woman "in disguise" with the fake mustache.

For a bunch of people supposedly dedicated to the high-and-mighty cause of promoting safe and peaceful bicycling, there sure are a lot of people without helmets. What a pathetic line of BS.

- Warren

Oh get off your high horse. You are miffed because these "nuveux" cyclists do not meet your "standards." There are a lot of people out there who will never belong to any bicycle club, any advocacy group, or even show up on any training ride.

They are called the poor, urban negro black colored African-Americans who can't afford cars and really do depend on bicycles for their lives. And, you know what? They outnumber the membership of all the bicycle clubs in America.

You can't see them. They are invisible, because the media really don't care about them. But, every now and then, if you look at enough hurrican photos, they are there.

Cool, thanks.

Oh get off your high horse. You are miffed because these "nuveux" cyclists do not meet your "standards." There are a lot of people out there who will never belong to any bicycle club, any advocacy group, or even show up on any training ride.

They are called the poor, urban negro black colored African-Americans who can't afford cars and really do depend on bicycles for their lives. And, you know what? They outnumber the membership of all the bicycle clubs in America.

You can't see them. They are invisible, because the media really don't care about them. But, every now and then, if you look at enough hurrican photos, they are there.

OK, I think I kind of almost agree with you on this one. Even a $30 helmet can seem a great expense when you worry about where the next meal is coming from. Over here it is day laborers from Mexico, Ccentral, and South America and they don't wear helmets either but they mostly stick to sidewalks. Before anyone flames me, I am well aware you can crack your head open on a sidewalk and your sister's, brothers, Cousins, cousin once fell on a sidewalk and spread his brains across half the city. The question we really need to ask is if THEY (the ones riding on the sidewalk) see it this way and why not? Too bad helmets aren't durable enough to be found in usable condition in the garbage, or garage sales like bikes are.

For a bunch of people supposedly dedicated to the high-and-mighty cause of promoting safe and peaceful bicycling, there sure are a lot of people without helmets. What a pathetic line of BS.

- Warren

A helmet is going to prevent you from getting run over by a motor car? Give me a break. Helmets don't make cycling safer, they just help prevent or lessen head injuries. Maybe drivers should wear them too.

Cool photographs. Lots of great faces in there.

Sure! how about these?
you might notice a curious lack of bikes...they do fine blocking themselves, it seems... ;)

:roflmao:

Oh get off your high horse. You are miffed because these "nuveux" cyclists do not meet your "standards." There are a lot of people out there who will never belong to any bicycle club, any advocacy group, or even show up on any training ride.

Then it sounds to me like these "nuveux" cyclists (whatever the hell you're trying to say) aren't doing jack for bicycle advocacy.



They are called the poor, urban negro black colored African-Americans who can't afford cars and really do depend on bicycles for their lives. And, you know what? They outnumber the membership of all the bicycle clubs in America.


WHAT?! I saw TWO black dudes on all eight pages of photos. One was riding a custom novelty bike that surely wasn't a hand-me-down from his great-grandfather the sharecropper, and the other was wearing matching athletic apparel.

Are you really trying to tell me that the reason critical mass riders don't wear helmets is because they're all oppressed African-Americans who can't afford them? I'm talking about the well-nourished, chubby-cheeked white girls riding around on nice road bikes, without helmets, in a ride supposedly aimed at improving bicycle safety.



You can't see them. They are invisible, because the media really don't care about them. But, every now and then, if you look at enough hurrican photos, they are there.


Apparently your very own comrade photo-journalist also totally missed this important and dominant segment of the critical mass ride: the poor, black, oppressed... vehicular cyclist. Damn, it must have been really hard to get eight pages of photographs of all white people when there were so damn many poor oppressed black people everywhere.

And what's up with the hurricane photo comment? Whenever anyone tries to lure you into debate, you just throw out a shotgun pattern of unrelated inflammatory bull****, hoping that no one will notice that you just dodged the question.

I'll ask it again: Why are there so many chubby-cheeked white people riding without helmets in a ride supposedly intending to improve bicycle safety?

- Warren

I'll ask it again: Why are there so many chubby-cheeked white people riding without helmets in a ride supposedly intending to improve bicycle safety?

- Warren

Because helmets are hot:

http://pic.templetons.com/brad/photo/bm02/scenes/img_0378.jpg

"Because helmets are hot?"

Do you actually have an answer? Can you at least stay true to form and start throwing out references to Uncle Tom and the Selma March? Maybe the concentration camps of WWII? I'm sure you can fabricate some connection between chubby white girls not wearing helmets on a Chicago critical mass bike ride and Auschwitz, can't you? Or, are you getting soft?

- Warren

Chubby white girls bicycling naked in public is cause for a charge of outraging public decency, with intent to commit acts of lewdness. A felony in most states requiring registration as a sex offender. With such a heinous, socially unacceptable label, the sex offender might as well be sent to gas chambers.

Why are public displays of women's nipples criminal and men's are not?

Are you mentally ********, or what?

I'm talking about the chubby white girls in the pictures on smugmug that you posted in the original post in this thread. You know, the ones this thread is about. The poor, oppressed, urban, black-colored negros who are actually white, chubby, affluent vehicular cyclists. They're on a bike ride that you personally see as the loftiest purpose in mankind's universe, diligently claim as supporting bicycle advocacy, and they aren't wearing helmets. Why?

- Warren

They are called the poor, urban negro black colored African-Americans who can't afford cars and really do depend on bicycles for their lives. And, you know what? They outnumber the membership of all the bicycle clubs in America.


Now that's just plain rubbish. How un-high-horse of you to stand up for the impoverished "colored African-Americans".


You can't see them. They are invisible, because the media really don't care about them. But, every now and then, if you look at enough hurrican photos, they are there.
Well if your theory is correct, then we should see a hellofa lot of bikes emerge once the waters have subsided.

Let's leave race out of this and all other threads, shall we? Someone who pulls the race card is just desperately grasping at the threads of a cop-out. Besides, the term "colored" just reeks of 50's-ish ignorance.

It's always safe to bet that when someone starts-out their rebuttal with "get off your high-horse", chances are it's an involuntary response invoked by the inability to say anything relevant.

I'll ask it again: Why are there so many chubby-cheeked white people riding without helmets in a ride supposedly intending to improve bicycle safety?

I'll answer with a very simple question for you: Why the F. should they? - because YOU think they offer some significant risk reduction?

Well here's the skinny -these cyclists do not answer to you or any other members of the safety nanny gendarmes; and obviously don't share your opinion about the value of helmets. Is that a good enough answer for you? If not, T.S.

Additional response - what's your problem with chubby white girls? I'm rather fond of women of any color, chubby or not, so the heck with you.

Are you mentally ********, or what?

I'm talking about the chubby white girls in the pictures on smugmug that you posted in the original post in this thread. You know, the ones this thread is about. The poor, oppressed, urban, black-colored negros who are actually white, chubby, affluent vehicular cyclists. They're on a bike ride that you personally see as the loftiest purpose in mankind's universe, diligently claim as supporting bicycle advocacy, and they aren't wearing helmets. Why?

- Warren

Because wether or not they are wearing helmets is irrelevant to wether or not it's legal for a large group of cyclists to gather and ride down public streets without fear of arrest. If there is a helmet law then that would be relevant, but you are just digging up some ad-hominin attack because you disagree with critical mass. Who gives a fart if they're white or chubby, talk about pointless. It looks like a fairly diverse spectrum of riders to me. I'm sure if you went to any other advocacy meeting from whatever town these pictures were taken (Chicago?) and it would be fairly representative of the cycling community. I think the point of such pictures is that these aren't a bunch of anarchists or hippies as so many anti-CM folks are quick to claim.

They're on a bike ride that you personally see as the loftiest purpose in mankind's universe, diligently claim as supporting bicycle advocacy, and they aren't wearing helmets. Why?

- Warren

Because helmets are hot.

Well here's the skinny -these cyclists do not answer to you or any other members of the safety nanny gendarmes; and obviously don't share your opinion about the value of helmets. Is that a good enough answer for you? If not, T.S.

I just find it humorous that a maurading group of cyclists, claiming their maurading is done in the name of cycling safety, don't even bother to wear gloves or helmets, two devices which reduce risk of injury in statistically significant ways.



Additional response - what's your problem with chubby white girls? I'm rather fond of women of any color, chubby or not, so the heck with you.

I don't have any problem with any kind of people. I just thought it was funny that barenakedbiker brought up oppressed black people not wearing helmets in a thread discussing pictures that happen to be nothing but chubby white people not wearnig helmets.

- Warren

but you are just digging up some ad-hominin attack because you disagree with critical mass.

I don't disagree with critical mass itself; people can do whatever the hell they want as far as I'm concerned. I'm sure it's a lot of fun, too, and I don't mind people having fun. What bothers me is people who insistently claim that critical mass is a cycling advocacy event, aimed at improving cycling safety by forcing motorists to stop marginalizing cyclists. That's all just a cover story, as their obvious disregard for basic safety equipment like gloves and helmets clearly indicates.

To those who speak the truth: "yeah, I do critical mass... because it's damn fun," I have nothing to say.

- Warren

What bothers me is people who insistently claim that critical mass is a cycling advocacy event, aimed at improving cycling safety by forcing motorists to stop marginalizing cyclists.
- Warren

Okaaaaaaaay....so, THIS is what's bothering you!

Okaaaaaaaay....so, THIS is what's bothering you!

Haven't I made myself clear in my dozens of posts on the topic? I strongly disagree with any critical mass rider who tries to justify him/herself by saying that they're working for my cycling rights, or my cycling safety. I have no interest in being connected to critical mass in any way, since I don't believe they do anything good for anyone. Notably, no quantitative progress has ever been made for cycling safety due to any critical mass ride.

If you think critical mass is fun, do it. If you think riding in critical mass makes you a martyr akin to Rosa Parks, or if you think riding in critical mass is really results in changes in the political or social community that improve attitudes towards cycling, you're an idiot with delusions of grandeur.

- Warren

I don't disagree with critical mass itself; people can do whatever the hell they want as far as I'm concerned. I'm sure it's a lot of fun, too, and I don't mind people having fun. What bothers me is people who insistently claim that critical mass is a cycling advocacy event, aimed at improving cycling safety by forcing motorists to stop marginalizing cyclists. That's all just a cover story, as their obvious disregard for basic safety equipment like gloves and helmets clearly indicates.

To those who speak the truth: "yeah, I do critical mass... because it's damn fun," I have nothing to say.

- Warren

I would like to know who has claimed that Critical Mass is a cycling advocacy event? Anyone can claim anything they want about the ride, that dosn't make it so. It's different things to different people. There is no official spokesperson.

As far as wearing a helmet on the ride, I myself allways wear a helmet, except on Critical Mass, because the ride IS so safe. Speeds are generaly slow. I'm riding my BikeE which is not prone to tossing the rider on his head.

It only forces motorists to stop marginalizing cyclists for two hours once a month in one location, but those two hours are golden.


From a SF CM website;
http://www.talkfastrideslow.org/faq/faq.html

What is Critical Mass?
Critical Mass is a grassroots bike event wherein bicyclists organize themselves and collectively occupy the streets in a fun, celebratory reclamation of public space.

There are many more historical documents under "stuff" there, but you will not see "cycling advocacy" as the prime directive. Read the history, it's good writing. You will notice that some of the names of people involved in the original rides are now, or have been on the staff of SFBC.

PM me if you would like to have some beers in SF on the 30th. I'll buy. I generally take the afternoon off and enjoy the waterfront before the ride.

Haven't I made myself clear in my dozens of posts on the topic?

- Warren

No. It was difficult to figure out what you are saying through all your rantings, ravings, and name-calling.

We just need Serge in here to comment on their lack of vehicular cycling knowledge to complete the trifecta: CM, VC, and helmets. It seems like the last 20 or 30 threads on this forum has degenerated into circular debates about one of these three subjects. This one is unique. It manages to pull the helmet debate inside the critical mass debate. No small feat...

If CM is not related to cycling advocacy or safety, why is it always discussed in the Advocacy & Safety forum? Why can't we make a new forum, entitled "Barenakedbiker's Victim Complex," or perhaps "Barenakedbiker's Mental ************," where we can discuss CM in a suitably pointless context?

- Warren

. Helmets don't make cycling safer, they just help prevent or lessen head injuries.
??

I'm confused. What are we supposed to see here? All I saw was a link to a bunch of pictures of people's faces. What does this have to do with cycling advocacy or safety?

If CM is not related to cycling advocacy or safety, why is it always discussed in the Advocacy & Safety forum?
It is mentioned for the same reason that the other favorite issues of the Know-It-Alls keep getting regurgitated (i.e. Helmet hysteria and VC/antibike lane proselytization) It is an obsession of the Nitwits who never tire of bringing up/repeating their dogma.

CM certainly serves no positive advocacy purpose relative to bicycling; then neither do helmet and anti-bike lane hysteria. Brian is right, we need Chief Nitwit to complete the Trifecta (maybe even the the Super Perfecta) of Pointless Babble.

I'm confused. What are we supposed to see here? All I saw was a link to a bunch of pictures of people's faces. What does this have to do with cycling advocacy or safety?
Take a look at the last few pages of pictures. Its of folks riding all over the road like they are in some parade. You'd think they could ride 3 abreast and keep a lane open for faster traffic. By the way it sure would be fun to ride with these folks!

Like this one: http://donsorsa.smugmug.com/photos/33637249-M.jpg

Al

It is mentioned for the same reason that the other favorite issues of the Know-It-Alls keep getting regurgitated (i.e. Helmet hysteria and VC/antibike lane proselytization) It is an obsession of the Nitwits who never tire of bringing up/repeating their dogma.

CM certainly serves no positive advocacy purpose relative to bicycling; then neither do helmet and anti-bike lane hysteria. Brian is right, we need Chief Nitwit to complete the Trifecta (maybe even the the Super Perfecta) of Pointless Babble.
What discussion of cycling, if any, do you find useful? And if all of these threads are so horrible, why are you here? You don't offer any useful or positive alternatives. All you do is throw insults.

Your posts are so consistently cranky and unconstructive that they are almost a self-parody.

What discussion of cycling, if any, do you find useful? And if all of these threads are so horrible, why are you here? You don't offer any useful or positive alternatives. All you do is throw insults.

Your posts are so consistently cranky and unconstructive that they are almost a self-parody.
A long time ago I used to think TLTBs posts were unhelpful. But I respect them (not all), they often bring a unique or at least non-jump-on-the-band-wagon view of things. There have even been the occasional useful post.

For example I think one of the reasons ILTB can be critical of 'VC is the only way' attitudes is because s/he rides on near highway like roads with dense traffic and has probably accurately sensed that riding in the center of the lane would make him a fool, probably a dead fool.

Al

Al,
I respect people who don't "jump on the bandwagon." What I don't respect are people who shout insults from the peanut gallery without offering their own solutions. That's just cowardly.

Al,
I respect people who don't "jump on the bandwagon." What I don't respect are people who shout insults from the peanut gallery without offering their own solutions. That's just cowardly.
Some of recent ones from ILTB are just insults, agreed, but the 'overall' is not as bad. Maybe some of the more recent bad are just really bad attempts at humor as other that are funny are not constructive either.

Al

??


To my mind, making cycling safer is done by making conditions better for cycling and less likely to cause a crash. A helmet is only useful IF you crash.

We just need Serge in here to comment on their lack of vehicular cycling knowledge to complete the trifecta: CM, VC, and helmets. It seems like the last 20 or 30 threads on this forum has degenerated into circular debates about one of these three subjects. This one is unique. It manages to pull the helmet debate inside the critical mass debate. No small feat...

:roflmao: :roflmao: :roflmao:

If CM is not related to cycling advocacy or safety, why is it always discussed in the Advocacy & Safety forum? Why can't we make a new forum, entitled "Barenakedbiker's Victim Complex," or perhaps "Barenakedbiker's Mental ************," where we can discuss CM in a suitably pointless context?

- Warren

Now there you go again, Warren.----Ronald Reagan.

What discussion of cycling, if any, do you find useful? And if all of these threads are so horrible, why are you here? You don't offer any useful or positive alternatives. All you do is throw insults.

Your posts are so consistently cranky and unconstructive that they are almost a self-parody.

I picture ILTB as kind of a cranky Dick Cheney type, almost all of his posts can be paraphrased as, "GRRR."

Some of recent ones from ILTB are just insults, agreed, but the 'overall' is not as bad. Maybe some of the more recent bad are just really bad attempts at humor as other that are funny are not constructive either.

Al
I take it that you consider your endless repartee with HH constructive. Have you learned anything yet?

Take a look at the last few pages of pictures. Its of folks riding all over the road like they are in some parade. You'd think they could ride 3 abreast and keep a lane open for faster traffic. By the way it sure would be fun to ride with these folks!

Like this one: http://donsorsa.smugmug.com/photos/33637249-M.jpg

Al
Curious, were these pics meant to glamorize or de-glamorize CM? Where are the guys with the $3,000 exoti-bikes and color-coordinated spandex? All I see here are a bunch of scraggly lookin' folk on bikes that are too small, too big, saddles too low, stems too short, position too upright, and oh, yeah, did anyone also happen to notice the lack of (god forbid) helmets?

Not about safety, you say? You're wrong...look at some of these guys in the picture: a couple of guys have reflectors on their wheels, and even a couple of guys are actually looking to their right for cops...err, I mean crossing traffic. Judged by the speed with which they're riding (granted that the photographer hasn't used a super-fast film) these riders are going at a snail's pace. That, in my book, accounts for some safety-minded cycling! Screw the lack of helmets.

Al,
I respect people who don't "jump on the bandwagon." What I don't respect are people who shout insults from the peanut gallery without offering their own solutions. That's just cowardly.
Oh PUHLEEZE! Whaa, Whaa , Whaa. Should I give a dang about YOUR respect? Save it for the Three Stooges of VC Debate.

Oh PUHLEEZE! Whaa, Whaa , Whaa. Should I give a dang about YOUR respect? Save it for the Three Stooges of VC Debate.


See, Angry guy. "GRRR, VC Stooges, Grrrr." It's hilarious,:D though I do feel sorry for this guy's kids, doesn't sound like he deals well with conflict.

Stanley, you either need a vacation, or you need to go on a long bike ride. Or go back to the first page of this post, look at all the ridiculous naked people, laugh and lighten up.

nouveaux....jeez
Hurricane.....double jeez

This ongoing lunacy cannot possibly take that much of your time. Spend some of it using the spell checker.

and it's en masse, remember?

And the point you're refusing to get is this: if CM is really an advocacy group, and the CM ride is really about taking one's rightful place in traffic, you need to be an adult about it, which means wearing a helmet, and ragging on those who don't. I see bike helmets in thrift stores these days. You don't need to unload $90 on a Giro.