intransit1217

Well put. Do you think there is any value in writing to one's representatives?

tandempower

Don't derail the thread to discuss the general meaning and range of appropriate uses for "castration anxiety." Read the wikipedia entry on it, especially under the headings, "metaphorical," and "relation to power and control" and if you still want to discuss it, start another thread in an appropriate forum or PM me about it.

All I used it to mean was the automotivist response to growing popularity of bike commuting as a threat to the dominance of driving, which some people seem to fear could be undermined. The idea is that if bike commuting grows too much, it will threaten "our automotive culture," hence the need to promote driving and automotivism as something culturally American and bike commuting as something "communist," "Chinese," etc. Why would bike commuting be attacked culturally if it wasn't feared as a threat that could destroy the beloved automotivist culture? That is castration anxiety.

Irrational fear isn't a legitimate basis for anything so whatever you're implying must be moot.

Dave Cutter

Sure! No elected representative can exercise their craft without votes... and they know that.

Dave Cutter

My apologies. I was merely trying to politely let you know you were a little out of the range of understanding.

intransit1217

Just curious. Regarding "castration anxiety", Would the realization that operating a car-carrier amid a traffic jam constitute an awareness of "self castration"?

tandempower

I was just trying to explain why there is actively aggressive cultural defensiveness against bike commuting and 'castration anxiety' is the best term to describe it. If it is 'outside understanding' for some people, it's because those people aren't able to grasp the difference between cultural dominance and survival, the same way individuals defend against criticism or insults as if they were physical threats to one's life. It's important to recognize this kind of nationalist collective-ego defensiveness because it's the only way to make any sense of why people would attack something like bike commuting for gaining popularity. Obviously it's all about cultural identity. If it was rational, what basis would there be to rationally subvert growth in bike commuting to protect the hyperdominance of driving? It would be like an NFL team beating up high school football players because ticket sales for high school football games were going up in an area while NFL ticket sales were stagnating.

If I am misunderstanding your motives and responding in a less polite manner than you are, then I apologize. My sense, however, is that your politeness of tone is not at all heartfelt and is merely a wash for you to nitpick my use of 'castration anxiety' without responding to what I am actually saying with it. I don't know if moderators would call what you're doing "trolling" but it seems like subtle trolling to me.

Machka 

You are a politician, aren't you!

tandempower

Machka, you are a . . . , aren't you? Now, tell me, whatever word you fill in the blank with in that phrase, does it bother you to read it? If not, then you really must be a . . ., aren't you?

Machka 

Wonderful intelligent person?


Just saying that there are a few politcal spoof shows here ... and you sound just like the "politicians" on those shows.

I-Like-To-Bike

Evidence of people "attacking bike commuting for gaining popularity", "subversion of growth in bike commuting to protect the hyperdominance of driving", or "active aggressive cultural defensiveness against bike commuting"? Sounds like dreamy products of some form of "anxiety."

I-Like-To-Bike

Sounds more like the commentary from Emily Litella.

Dave Cutter

I admire your tactical and polite use of words. I decided to just apologize and back away before I typed something I later regretted.

Roody

Very interesting developments. For those who don't know, Sault Ste. Marie (pronounced soo-saint-marie) is a very northern city, just a stone's throw from Lake Superior. If a biking trend can happen there, it can happen anywhere!

Roody

Actually, traffic statistics suggest that car-bike crash rates go down when more cyclists appear in a given city.

Roody

Yes, that is one thing I have learned from your posts here.

tandempower

You may be a wonderfully intelligent person, but you're not above comparing someone to a laughable 'spoof' to cut them down on a level besides directly addressing something they said. My impression sometimes is that you have a dark, cruel heart lurking beneath the intelligent, happy surface.

I don't know if 'anxiety' is the right word, but it might as well be. My 'anxiety' is that progress will be persistently stifled by ego-driven status-quo maintenance that functions by culturally attacking alternatives in order to engender social negativity (hate) toward those of us that dare to resist conformity. Why would I want to be stuck with a societal culture that is policed against the growth of alternatives to driving by people who view culture as a means of subtly forcing people into economic expenditures for the sake of generating investment profits?

As I understand it, pro-automotivists feel the exact same way about growing bike commuting. The problem is that it is castration anxiety that is unfounded because driving doesn't have to die as a culture for bike commuting to flourish. In fact, driving flourishes the more people drive less and bike more instead. The irrationality is in the abstraction of driving and bike commuting into a simplified 'fight to the death' where there is one 'winner-take-all.' In that mindset, castration anxiety for automotivism is possible because these culture-defenders fail to exercise reason in thinking through all the possibilities of automotivism surviving in cities where bike commuting and public transit have a larger share of total travel. Instead, they see it as a war against the future to minimize deviation from the past. That's narrow-minded and backward.

Some cultural progress is more understandably threatening. Communism and fascism were and are true threats to freedom because they actively subvert freedom in support of other goals, namely economic good and social conformity, respectively. It was somewhat understandable, therefore, when Joe McCarthy was outing closet communists in the 1950s after a close-call brush with collectivism during WWII and the rise of communism prior.

Mobilizing collective-identity culture to subvert growth in bike commuting (e.g. playing the "unAmerican" card or the "communist" card), on the other hand, is just the opposite of invoking US collectivism against the collectivist spirit of nazism and communism. US collective identity is being used to promote a product, an expensive product that lines the pockets of businesses and investors globally. And instead of promoting the idea that automotive business can flourish in a climate where the ease and popularity of bike commuting and transit are growing, they are taking the castration-anxiety approach of undermining growth of alternatives and infrastructure reforms that make it easier to choose those alternatives. In other words, this is anti-freedom automotivism. This is automotivism where freedom to choose alternatives is construed as a threat to the freedom to drive and to have roads, cities, and rural areas where access is by driving only and there are many areas that are nearly impossible to reach or traverse comfortably by bicycle or public transit.

Why don't you just PM me and say whatever it is that you avoid saying because you might later regret it? It would be better than the way you seem to choose your words carefully to withhold huge amounts of hate or whatever it is you feel toward my posts. All I think our differences come down to is that you are a person who avoids grasping things you disagree with in order to undermine them on a deeper level than just saying you understand but prefer to look at things differently. When I cite 'castration anxiety,' it discredits a certain political position that you don't want discredited, so you deny the legitimacy and/or veracity of the analysis. We really should discuss this with PMs, though, because it derails thread content.

Dave Cutter

I agree with you completely!!! Not only have I read and believe those [same] stats.... it has been my own experience as well.

So... since we agree of some issues... and you question my posts.... you must also question your own. I might make it simpler for the rest of us that read your posts if you indicate which [of your] posts you have confidence in.

Dave Cutter

Hate?!?! No... absolutely no hate. I feel you're misguided. I believe you're looking way too deep... at a very shallow subject. If you need an emotional response from me in regards to your comments I would say: "indifference" mixed with slight amounts of confused-curiosity. Sorry.

Since you seem fond of Freudian expressions.... Sometimes a cigar is... just a cigar. Mostly... motorist are just people trying to get to work on time and than home again to their family's. Cyclists can sometimes be just one of the countless number of distractions and irritations they deal with daily.

tandempower

Well, if you're truly emotionally neutral and I've misread your writing as indicating something more, I'm glad to be wrong. I don't think I'm 'looking too deep at a shallow subject,' but I'm not sure I could explain to you the complexities of how the same herd of motorists who just appear superficially to be motivated by time-scheduling can have something deep triggered by a car commercial with Bob Dylan asking, "what's more American than America?" while showing imagery of route 66 in the 60s.

I know I'll get flack for mentioning controversial historical examples but it's the same way that most southerners didn't own slaves but Lincoln's election managed to sway approximately 100% of voters in southern states to vote against him while he was still able to win based on his votes in the north. It's the same way that most people living in white-only areas weren't vicious racists but could be angered by civil rights progress 'threatening' their established patterns of living. People who otherwise don't think or care much can somehow be reached by propagandists who characterize change as something that will eradicate their cherished way of life and, like you say, they won't think deeply enough to question the assumptions of the propaganda.

It would be so nice if everyone was a rational and reasonable as you imply. I maintain faith that they are at some level. It's unfortunate that there is so much cultural discourse geared toward their irrational and unreasonable side.

Machka 

Do you watch political spoofs ... satire ... on TV?

If not ... you should! First of all, you might enjoy it. Secondly ... you'll see what I mean.




And ...

Didn't you do that already?

Machka 

+1

And especially your comment: "mostly ...motorist are just people trying to get to work on time and than home again to their family's"

As long as cyclists more or less stay out of the way, and don't do something stupid like run a red light, most motorists don't give them a second thought. Most motorists are likely too busy thinking about their own lives.


[HR][/HR]
As it happens, it is winter in North America, and although Seattle might have a mild winter compared with Boston, people tend to ease up on the outdoor activities, like cycling, during the winter.

Also, the popularity of sports (like cycling) and other hobbies, do ebb and flow.

I remember when macrame was all the thing in the 1970s. My mother and I, and other ladies in the community attended classes in church basements to learn how to make it. Evidently it came into popularity first in the 13th century, then again in 16th century, then again in the 19th century ... and of course in the 1970s ... but from what I understand it is back again, to some extent.
Macrame*|*News

Dave Cutter

I am can be just as bad! Sometimes it takes something like getting buzzed by a distracted motorist... to remind me of the precariousness of sharing streets with automobiles. Which almost always... reminds me of how temporary and precious life is.

I (like I am sure many cyclist have) once had to call my spouse to come scape me and my bicycle up... and take me to the hospital. Now a little excitement on a busy city street while cycling can remind me just how caring my wife really is. I am in no way an excitement junkie. But a little occasional excitement mixed in with the physical challenge of cycling "works" for me.

Roody

I rarely agree with tandempower's POV, but I greatly admire his thoughtfulness, thoroughness, and attirude of respect for others on the forum. His posts are not spoofs or satires. Rather, he has spent a lot of time giving us well composed answers. I think he deserves some answer as to the content of his posts, not your hastily misperceived judgment of his character--which you have no real way of knowing. If the posts are too difficult for you to understand or if you choose not to respond to their content, you might want to use the forum's ignore function rather than make muddled inferences about his personality or temperament.

bragi

I had a slow period in class today, and I informally polled some of my 13-14 year old students about bicycles today. 1/3 of them have never ridden a bicycle. Several have used a bicycle to get to school, but only one does so every day. All of them think bicycles are very uncool, even the one who rides his bike to school regularly. When I asked if helmets had anything to do with it, they said not really, they just thought the whole bike experience looked kind of stupid. All of them think bicycles are a good thing for society generally, but it's more of an adult activity as far as they're concerned, and not something they're all that interested in for themselves. Over 2/3 of them did not imagine that they'd ever ride a bicycle when they grew up, not even in college. They supported my own bicycle riding, but this was insincere; I know they mock me over it behind my back. (But then, they mock me behind my back over any number of things...)

The results of this probably invalid poll tell me tha in about 10-15 years the bicycle infrastructure we're building will be the exclusive domain of a few old cranks who hate cars, nerdy bicycle enthusiasts in Lycra, and poor people. It'll be kind of like it was 10 years ago, only with more, mostly unused, bike lanes.

Roody

This is depressing, but gives me a lot to think about. My grandson will be sixteen in a few weeks. He seems to be ambivalent about bikes and cars. Sometimes he says he just wants to get his license but, like your kids, he thinks bikes are a good idea for society. Yesterday he told me he's getting a new bike for his birthday and he'll be doing a lot of riding this year--including his school commute. Remember, all kids are very changable and subject to peer pressure--which could account for some of what they told you in class.

I think you're both too pessimistic and too optimistic. Too pessimistic to think that just because the kids are off bikes right now, they will stay that way throughout their lives. Too optimistic to think that the world we're leaving them will allow unlimited transportation choices like our generation has had. Maybe they won't want to ride bikes...maybe they will have to ride them.

These are just initial reactions to your post--I will need more time to think it through thoroughly.