Vehicular Cycling (VC) - Simple Question - Are There ANY Women Advocating for Vehicular Cycling?

...and don't you ever wonder why that is?

If we want to boost the number of cyclists and make the streets safer for cyclists, we need to forget about the Type A Alpha Male Racer Boys and their 'needs', and focus on what women want.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=getting-more-bicyclists-on-the-road

http://www.newwest.net/city/article/boises_kristin_armstrong_shines_in_many_ways/C108/L108/

(sorry about the cross post, but I'm sort of interested in what sort of response this receives here as opposed to out in the general forum)

:)

Wow, I didn't know all women want the same thing.

In all seriousness, the person in charge of our local bike to work effort is female, the local coop is run by a gal and her husband although she is the better wrench of the two. I would say the female contingent of our local scene is very equalized.

Glad I don't live in the animal zoo.

Wow, I didn't know all women want the same thing.

In all seriousness, the person in charge of our local bike to work effort is female, the local coop is run by a gal and her husband although she is the better wrench of the two. I would say the female contingent of our local scene is very equalized.

Glad I don't live in the animal zoo.

you didn't really answer the question, perhaps I should rephrase it: are any of these women you mentioned active advocates for vehicular cycling or do they advocate for other forms of bike infrastructure and facilities that are more conducive to cycling without elevated adrenaline and testosterone levels?

...and don't you ever wonder why that is?

If we want to boost the number of cyclists and make the streets safer for cyclists, we need to forget about the Type A Alpha Male Racer Boys and their 'needs', and focus on what women want.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=getting-more-bicyclists-on-the-road

http://www.newwest.net/city/article/boises_kristin_armstrong_shines_in_many_ways/C108/L108/

(sorry about the cross post, but I'm sort of interested in what sort of response this receives here as opposed to out in the general forum)

:)
I think it's a great idea to encourage women to cycle. Those stats make sense to me, that most cyclists in the US are men, which means it makes sense to make cycling appeal to women if the goal is simply to increase cycling.

But remember, the goal of increasing cycling is not necessarily consistent with the goal of making cycling safer. The perception that X increases safety is not the same as demonstrating that X actually making cycling safer.

The question is loaded - what do you mean by vehicular cycling.

By my definition - defensive bicycle driving according to the rules for drivers, on roadways - the answer is yes. I know two women League Cycling Instructors in my area, one an avid roadie and ride leader married to a former bike shop owner, and the other a professional transportation planner/consultant. I also taught some women in my classes who went on to become advocates for lawful vehicular on-road cycling.

Now, if your definition is someone who meets some polarizing, straw-man definition of a facility-hating, always-lane-taking alpha dog, I know few people like that of either gender.

increasing rider share across all age brackets and among both men and women is a valuable goal.

increasing rider share in any group, much less the "A" type cyclists -Steve, Danarnold, me, Randya, etc. will require a variety of stick and carrot techniques shown to work in other countries that facilitate rider share for all, not just us "A" types.

Danarnold, you are proving the axiom a little knowledge is a dangerous thing! have you read any John Pucher? How about the FHWA's "who is the design bicyclist?"

and the recent missive coming out of Portland.... let me search.... Roger Gellers' "the four types of cyclist"?

Randya, thanks for the briefs. That Scientific American article mentioned researcher Jennifer Dill, whose work analyzing rider share using actual tracking versus surveys or counts is gaining widespread notice.

likely her methodology will catch on as a virtual survey technique. heck, on g5 phones i see the possibilities of people being able to voluntarily sign up to be a participant in this type of stuff.

I know two women League Cycling Instructors in my area, one an avid roadie and ride leader married to a former bike shop owner, and the other a professional transportation planner/consultant. I also taught some women in my classes who went on to become advocates for lawful vehicular on-road cycling.

I'll bet neither of them go on the internet to rail against bike specific infrastructure

By my definition - defensive bicycle driving according to the rules for drivers, on roadways . . .

I agree with Steve's definition. I don't see any reference in that definition to "Type A Alpha Male Racer Boys".

The implication that women are unwilling/incapable of lawfully and defensively operating a human-powered vehicle on the roadway is insulting.

I'll bet neither of them go on the internet to rail against bike specific infrastructure

There are a couple of 'em on the ChainGuard list, but they are not as belligerent and smarmy as their male colleagues, and don't issue cascades of electrons belittling all who don't follow the party line.

The implication that women are unwilling/incapable of lawfully and defensively operating a human-powered vehicle on the roadway is insulting.

I implied no such thing, I implied that women are not interested in competing for roadway space with dangerous motor vehicle operators and would prefer bike specific infrastructure; why don't you read the links?

Ha. I'm a woman, and I ride wayyy more aggresively and VC than my boyfriend. Of course, I've also been accused of being petty and vindictive, but hey, comes with the territory. I've since become slightly more cautious after a few incidents where I realized that I was close to becoming "dead right".

I implied no such thing, I implied that women are not interested in competing for roadway space with dangerous motor vehicle operators and would prefer bike specific infrastructure; why don't you read the links?

Read the links. The Scientific American article is speculative at best. The comments from Kristin Armstrong (my hero and a fellow member of Boise's Bike Safety Sounding Board) are not gender-specific.

Originally Posted by High Roller
The implication that women are unwilling/incapable of lawfully and defensively operating a human-powered vehicle on the roadway is insulting.



I implied no such thing, I implied that women are not interested in competing for roadway space with dangerous motor vehicle operators and would prefer bike specific infrastructure; why don't you read the links?

What's the difference between "lawfully and defensively operating a human-powered vehicle on the roadway" and "competing for roadway space with dangerous motor vehicle operators"? Two views of exactly the same process and conditions, aren't they? However, why is it particularly important to add new female transportational cyclists? If bicycle transportation is the good that we seek to maximize, I would think that adding 10 new female cyclists would be the same as adding 10 new cyclists at the present mix, say 2 female plus 8 male.

because this discussion here is entirely male dominated

because this discussion here is entirely male dominated

It may be, but how would you KNOW that, considering most here post with pseudonyms?

I implied no such thing, I implied that women are not interested in competing for roadway space with dangerous motor vehicle operators and would prefer bike specific infrastructure; why don't you read the links?

I know plenty of women roadies who both prefer to avoid high-traffic roads and dislike bike-specific infrastructure. They prefer vehicular cycling over depending on mode-separated facilities, but they choose routes that feature less potential for social friction. How should one classify them? I still consider them vehicular cyclists.

Even the most die-hard female vehicular cyclists have better things to do than waste time and energy arguing about facilities, especially online. They tend to focus more on harassment prevention and legal issues, if anything, and are more consensus-oriented. Or they have better social lives.

The implication that women are unwilling/incapable of lawfully and defensively operating a human-powered vehicle on the roadway is insulting.
+1.

There are less women VC advocates because there are less women cycling than men in general. Postulating that women bike less because they are afraid of vehicles is reductionist and does nothing to get more women on bikes. I would say that some people bike less because they are less assertive or have seen accidents or do not like the idea of being on the road while not in a car.

Women are still struggling for equal treatment in the cycling world to begin with, let alone becoming outspoken advocates of VC. And titling the thread "Simple Question - Are There ANY Women Advocating for Vehicular Cycling?" sounds accusatory - as if women are at fault for not becoming or having any strong VC advocates. Sorry, sir, we'll get right on that!

Have you met Keri Caffrey, or read any of her items on her Commute Orlando (http://commuteorlando.com) blog?

+1.

There are less women VC advocates because there are less women cycling than men in general. Postulating that women bike less because they are afraid of vehicles is reductionist and does nothing to get more women on bikes. I would say that some people bike less because they are less assertive or have seen accidents or do not like the idea of being on the road while not in a car.

Women are still struggling for equal treatment in the cycling world to begin with, let alone becoming outspoken advocates of VC. And titling the thread "Simple Question - Are There ANY Women Advocating for Vehicular Cycling?" sounds accusatory - as if women are at fault for not becoming or having any strong VC advocates. Sorry, sir, we'll get right on that!

+1 again. In addition, it is also mostly men who argue about things on the Internet.

Also +1 for Keri and Commute Orlando. She's got some great articles and videos. She also helped found a women's cycling club called "The BOBbies" (Babes on Bikes), which adheres to VC principles. Also see http://www.youtube.com/CommuteOrlando and http://luvbobbies.com/.

you didn't really answer the question, perhaps I should rephrase it: are any of these women you mentioned active advocates for vehicular cycling or do they advocate for other forms of bike infrastructure and facilities that are more conducive to cycling without elevated adrenaline and testosterone levels?

Clearly yes.

More generally, there are many observed gender differences including behavior -- for an interesting and well-written take on the matter read Crossing by D McClosky (http://books.google.com/books?id=ZcTmj4og9zsC&dq=McClosky+crossing&printsec=frontcover&source=bl&ots=bTXPgkU-qL&sig=edlPIZ4zx-Sv1Of4jllFbeaYoz0&hl=en&ei=FIfDSujcAdG7lAfA9-zuBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false) -- such that asserting a causal relationship is quite difficult. A long literature that discusses how women argue/discuss matters differently than men -- at least the subset that I read -- would support some of the observations made here. My take on it, is that making assertions on "how VC" females are based on comparing female to male internet posts is probably biased.

I am also a female who rides vehicularly. I agree with all points made by coffeecake and would like to add something else that I have experienced as a female bike commuter. My my family, friends, and co-workers continually discourage from taking a more assertive position on the road or for commuting by bike altogether and I believe in part it is because I'm a female. I am told that I should ride on the sidewalk, not ride at all, never ride at night, don't ever ride in the cold... however, a male co-worker at my job who commutes by bike is never admonished at all. I had one woman come up to me and say, "if you had a child, you wouldn't act so irresponsibly". How insulting..

I think women are still thought of as being delicate and nervous, and needing protection, and this attitude especially from your peers, can have an affect on women who aren't as stubborn and rebellious as I. I have also been told by other women that besides being terrified of getting hit, they are too self-conscious to get on a bicycle unless they are at the beach or in the park. I believe that building seperate paths and facilities for cyclists only reinforces this fear that cars and bicycles can't co-exist safely. We need to address the fears that some women may have in riding vehicularly which requires a little courage to get out there and assert your right to travel safely on public roads. Perhaps it's different in places where a lot of people travel by bicycle, but I can count on one hand how many cyclists I've seen on the road here. And I have never seen another female cyclist riding in the road since I have started commuting. Plenty of sidewalk cyclists- none riding vehicularly.

I find it hard to discuss these 'women' issues without buying into the bull that women should be treated differently. I have two daughters, one a Harvard educated lawyer, the other a financial analyst. I'm very proud of both of them and of the fact they were encouraged to be all they could be and that. Gender difference issues were never dignified by being acknowledged, except for the inescapable physical differences.

ask them about biking in boston :D and how pleasant it would be for a mom with their infant in a trailer.

well, all those american wymmen just need to HTFU :rolleyes:

why is american female bicycling participation so low compared to other countries?

why do the elderly bike in such low numbers in this country? fully 25 percent of danish over 75 bicycle for transportation. here, a fraction of a percent.



there are barriers to more popular cycling in america. those of you blissfully unaware, read "the four types of bicyclist" by Portlands' Roger Geller.

the four types of cyclist (http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=44671&a=237507)

it lays out bike participation and barriers to greater US cycling in a non sexist way. very compelling, as are John Puchers' frequent visits to this topic.

the Roger Geller article is required background reading as to why more people do not bicycle in america.

Yeah, I too am tired of the sausage fest that is cycling

"Filigree" at Lovely bicycle! (http://lovelybike.blogspot.com/) is an advocate for vehicular cycling.

Have you met Keri Caffrey, or read any of her items on her Commute Orlando (http://commuteorlando.com) blog?

^ Yes. Her.

She's made several instructional videos on CommuteOrlando and is active in the blogosphere when people as VC questions.

"Filigree" at Lovely bicycle! (http://lovelybike.blogspot.com/) is an advocate for vehicular cycling.

I didn't see anything about vehicular cycling (I didn't look too hard) but it is a very intelligent and interesting site about bicycling. The blogger has an appreciation for the aesthetics of bicycling for pleasure and practicality. Good pictures too.

I didn't see anything about vehicular cycling (I didn't look too hard) but it is a very intelligent and interesting site about bicycling. The blogger has an appreciation for the aesthetics of bicycling for pleasure and practicality. Good pictures too.

I did note with interest that there seemed to be a preference for paths in the photos... not too many are "on road."

a few caveats (applicable to both men and women):

bike infrastructure and vehicular cycling are not mutually incompatible.

vehicular cyclists can support and endorse bikelanes and bike master plans that facilitate lawful road bicycling behaviors.

vehicular cyclists aren't against bike infrastructure, only idiots rally against bike infrastructure.

Gene in San Diego is a good example of a vehicular cyclist that also endorses facilities. i believe he considers himself a vehicular cyclist but also recognizes the unpalatability of high speed, high volume roads and bike traffic without modifications to facilitate bike travel.

I did note with interest that there seemed to be a preference for paths in the photos... not too many are "on road."

Maybe it just isn't as safe to be whipping out the camera while in traffic.

I've thought about this and came up with the following:

1. Women are looking for security when doing anything. Say a women bikes to the grocery store. How many times has she been told to watch for strangers? Would that not figure in to this question?

2. Women who ride may not have a buddy to ride with.

3. The crux of the biking problem may be vanity ie "Does this bicycle make me look fat?"

Dogbitteneear

I know plenty of women roadies who both prefer to avoid high-traffic roads and dislike bike-specific infrastructure. They prefer vehicular cycling over depending on mode-separated facilities, but they choose routes that feature less potential for social friction. How should one classify them? I still consider them vehicular cyclists.

Even the most die-hard female vehicular cyclists have better things to do than waste time and energy arguing about facilities, especially online. They tend to focus more on harassment prevention and legal issues, if anything, and are more consensus-oriented. Or they have better social lives.

The SA article: "Women were less likely than men to try on-street bike lanes and more likely to go out of their way to use “bike boulevards,” quiet residential streets with special traffic-calming features for bicycles." I think you raise a good issue about harassment and I think this confounds the issue of women and traffic. Unfortunately, women out riding on bicycles often have to endure being "hit on" by other road users which is not something men usually have to put up with, so it is not strange that they might prefer quieter residential streets with less "potential for social friction" as you put it.

Randya, to answer your query, to which oh so few females here even answered ???
I am an almost vehicular cyclist, I've been a courrier in Montreal, I've cycled, toured and commuted on 4 continents plus the Caribbean (which I consider separate), I prefer faster traffic roadways over slower traffic, am against most cycling infrastructure (I find they promote incompetence), and have been riding helmetless for 40 years.

But then again, I've always been a tomboy, will never have kids, weigh 225 lbs, on a 5'7 frame, so boy do I look fat on my cycle compared to all the skinnies out there! Maybe I just scare drivers! I can stare a driver down and sometimes even interpose myself in front of traffic on purpose. So maybe I don't count cuz I'm not an average female cyclist?

But I NEVER cycle with female friends, cuz all my female friends are riding slower and in places where I have no interest in riding. And the reason so few of my girlfriends cycle at all??
2 points:
-Cuz they're unfit
-and they're chicken chit

In almost all sporting activities, I prefer male companions. Girls are raised differently, I think women could have more road smarts and confidence, IF they were raised to not fear. But that's not reality.

As for VC, my style is similar but personalised: I only take a lane on narrow streets, traffic jams, straight-way through intersections, downhill, or anytime I'm going near traffic speed, and left turns, I don't give way to backed up traffic unless there is a nice 100% safe shoulder to aside to (I hate weaving cyclists), and I'm accustomed to motorists brushing up to me so close that my open jacket swats their vehicle.

my girlfriends are chicken chit!

hey, that's the spirit of 'vehicular' cycling! everyone else is too scared to ride, must be a personal problem.

high speeds, high volumes of distracted drivers on cellphones, agressive driving, every hundreth driver yelling something out the window at the slow bicyclists,


it could also be a lack of respect from motorists or agressive behavior towards bicyclists that turn them off from a lot of road riding.

would you say 'you're chicken chit'! to your grandmother?

a few caveats (applicable to both men and women):

bike infrastructure and vehicular cycling are not mutually incompatible.

vehicular cyclists can support and endorse bikelanes and bike master plans that facilitate lawful road bicycling behaviors.

vehicular cyclists aren't against bike infrastructure, only idiots rally against bike infrastructure.


+1

In my experience, vehicular riders in general and commuters and other utility riders in particular can be especially effective advocates for useful cycling infrastructure in that they (ok, we) are also willing to be critical of problematic "improvements."

To answer your question, yes. She can even stop traffic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMJUt6E9XN8

http://planetgreen.discovery.com/tv/woman-stops-traffic/episode-marlow.html


...and don't you ever wonder why that is?

If we want to boost the number of cyclists and make the streets safer for cyclists, we need to forget about the Type A Alpha Male Racer Boys and their 'needs', and focus on what women want.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=getting-more-bicyclists-on-the-road

http://www.newwest.net/city/article/boises_kristin_armstrong_shines_in_many_ways/C108/L108/

(sorry about the cross post, but I'm sort of interested in what sort of response this receives here as opposed to out in the general forum)

:)

I enjoy vehicular cycling and prefer it to trails and paths. I am a 31 year old female with less than a year of proper cycling experience, who is not very athletic or tough. I ride in a skirt, because that's what I tend to wear off the bike. And I don't care about the politics of any of it - I just do what feels best. I simply find roads more convenient, more fun, and more liberating than paths when it comes to transportation. I do go on trails when I feel like being in nature, but I do not use them for transport.

Here is one post that mentions VC:
http://lovelybike.blogspot.com/2010/02/why-dont-we-do-it-in-road-new.html

and here is one complaining about mandated bike trails, with a female friend in Vienna:
http://lovelybike.blogspot.com/2009/11/paul-and-haul-out-on-town.html



I did note with interest that there seemed to be a preference for paths in the photos... not too many are "on road."
I don't feel it's safe to pose for photos in the middle of the road, in the midst of moving traffic : )

The theme of my website is not advocacy of any sort, but beautiful bicycles and interesting scenery (usually nature or architecture) to which I get via cycling. I happen to like VC, but I don't "advocate it" or feel the need to photograph myself performing it, as I see nothing of interest in the images this would produce.

For example, we cycled to this destination through the city, on the road:
http://lovelybike.blogspot.com/2009/11/cross-town-express-to-castle-island.html
but didn't take pictures until we got there - because the destination was of interest, not the route.

Hope that makes sense.