MrCjolsen

The problem is the vehicular cycling is a riding technique that some people have turned into a poltical ideology.

patc

Don't worry about it. At all. In fact, for your own sanity, ignore it.

Take a mix of politics, a dab of religion, and a heavy dose of obsession, and you have the pointless and endless debates in this forum. Just ignore it all and go ride your bike.

If you have cycling related questions, I advise posting to any forum but A&S. Some very knowledgeable people in Mechanics. Some very practical answers in Living Car Free (with some politics there too). Lots of people actively posting about their actual daily cycling in Commuting.

Wogster

Vehicular cycling, riding a bicycle, as if it were any other road based vehicle. The bible of the movement is a book written by former cyclist John Forester, nearly 30 years ago, followers assume that they must not use any form of bike lane or pathway.

Adaptive cycling, riding a bicycle, as if it were any other road based vehicle making use of bicycle specific facilities where available, and where it makes sense to do so.

Often you get VCs and ACs on either side of the facility issue.... I could say more, but the sun just came out, the temp is +5C for the first time in about 2 months, and it rained all morning to wash the salt off the roads, my bike is calling......

Helmet Head

Vehicular cycling is not a riding technique (examples of "riding techniques" are "high cadence", or "use destination positioning at intersection approaches").

Vehicular cycling is an exercise of a political right.
Vehicular cycling is an ideology that holds the right of cyclists to ride in accordance to the vehicular rules of the road as its highest value.
Vehicular cycling is a traffic cycling paradigm based on the premise that cyclists (on roads) fare best when they act and are treated as vehicle drivers.

Bekologist

yep, ideology. Mjclosen had it pegged pretty dang good.

I-Like-To-Bike

You omitted the supreme cycling priority from the Leader of Vehicular Cycling as an Ideology:
Speed und Efficiency Über Alles!

sbhikes

Frame that. Political. Ideology. Paradigm. It ain't about riding your bike. It's about talk radio.

So if you ride your bike like talk radio, you're a vehicular cyclist. Otherwise, you're just a cyclist.

chipcom 

So this could be HH giving a vc lecture?

JRA

I'm glad to see you finally admit that vehicular cycling has become a political cause. But that seems to conflict with what you said in the "Working definition of 'Vehicular Cycling'" thread (post #104) where you imply that vehicular cycling is simply "riding a bicycle on roads in accordance to the vehicular rules of the road".
Vehicular cycling zealot speak with forked tongue.

I rode according to the rules of the road long before I ever heard of John Forester or vehicular cycling. I was proud and happy to assert my right to the road. If I thought that vehicular cycling were just a set of principles for riding in traffic, I would support it wholeheartedly.

Unfortunately, vehicular cycling is not just a set of riding principles.

Vehicular cycling has become a semi-religious cult. VC is closely associated with one political view, with the fallacies (masquerading as science) of John Forester, the social and psychological theroies of JF (some of which are patently absurd). VC has rightfully become a laughingstock.

It's unfortunate because the vehicular cycling riding techiniques are basically sound. John Forester, and his oh so uncritical followers have, unfortunately, made VC a subject of ridicule. The strange and wacky cult spawned by the publication of Effective Cycling is one of the worst things that has happened to cycling in my lifetime. The association of vehicular cycling riding techniques with the cult of the Followers of The Great One has become an obstacle to even wider acceptance of vehicular cycling techniques.

Helmet Head

Vehicular cycling is an exercise of a political right just like sharing a critical opinion about our government is an exercise of a political right.

Just because it doesn't feel like an exercise of a political right while you're doing it, or just because the purpose of doing it is not political, does not mean it's not an exercise of a political right when you do it.

It's easy to take rights for granted.

kalliergo 

Would you list some, please?

Again, examples please. Blanket, non-specific assertions are meaningless.

As one who has been a cyclist and cycling advocate for a very long time, I must say that I have seen VC treated as a laughingstock only by a small group of noisy naysayers here, in the A&S forum. It is quite stunning to find people (albeit not many) who often seem to be defiantly proud of their ignorance of (or disdain for) traffic safety and the best practices for road cycling, not to mention violently contemptuous of the single best-informed and most-thoughtful contributor to the discussion. (On the other hand, the dynamic here is interesting from a sociological viewpoint; it appears to be a virtual example of the behaviors that lead to such mob action as lynching.)

John Forester is a grumpy and intolerant old guy (he was a grumpy and intolerant younger guy, too). He certainly doesn't get everything right. On the other hand, Effective Cycling is an absolutely seminal work in its field, and no serious and well-informed student of the subject would argue otherwise. Taken together with the writings of Allen, Hurst, etc., it is the foundation of a body of knowledge that supports safe and lawful cycling on North American streets and highways.

I-Like-To-Bike

Of course not. Seriousness is defined by an absolute belief in this seminal piece of "work." At least by the bug-eyed acolytes, that is. Proven 80% risk reduction is it, eh? Best available evidence, eh? Serious, eh?

Baloney!

What are YOU? Don't ask.

chipcom 

Specifically?

Above even the law, it seems.

Well at least HH is on record that vc is political - so perhaps we can get all political-based vc discussions moved to P&R and keep only the technical discussions here.

sbhikes

It could be. Or it could be Ann giving one of HH's lectures. Or it could just be her insulting HH on the radio. I don't know and I don't really care, either.

Since VC is a political thing and not a set of tools, I can't see what difference it makes in my life as a cyclist.

kalliergo 

Really? You don't understand how politics affects -- indeed substantially controls -- your life as a cyclist?

Can this possibly be a serious statement?

sbhikes

Yes. It is a serious statement. Whatever politics anybody tries to make cycling into, I will exercise my politics by voting as a citizen, not as a cyclist. And I will cycle as a cyclist, not as a person with a political agenda.

Helmet Head

For those of you who are opposed to the political defense of the rights of cyclists to act and be treated as drivers of vehicles on roads, why? Why are you so opposed to those of us who take political interest in clearly defining this right so we can effectively defend it?

kalliergo 

This has no effective meaning.

What we may and may not do, how we do it, when and where we do it -- all these things are determined, in a (more or less) self-governed society, by the outcome of a political process. Cycling is, quite obviously, utterly subject to that process.

Politics, in a system like ours, is how we express ourselves concerning the rules we live by. You may rest assured that, if cyclists ever abandon politics, those rules will become decidely unfriendly to cyclists and cycling.

That's just how it works.

chipcom 

Politics doesn't affect my life as a cyclist any more or less than it controls the rest of my life.

Politics is the process and method of making decisions for groups, advocacy is an umbrella term for organized activism related to a particular set of issues (both definitions from wiki). Here we advocate for cycling issues in general, while vc zealots make no bones about the fact that they do NOT represent all cyclists, just a particular group of cyclists subject to their own definition. So again, if one wishes to discuss vc in the political sense, perhaps it should be done in the P&R forums while the rest of us continue to attempt to discuss advocacy for ALL cyclists and cycling in general, which of course can include technical, rather than political aspects of vehicluar cycling.

chipcom 

But you, by your own admission, do not represent cyclists as a whole, you only represent a subset that conforms to your own definition. You want to talk politics for one specific group, take it to P&R, A&S is for ALL cyclists and cycling in general, IMO.

I-Like-To-Bike

Exactly. The "political" Vehicular Cyclists (AKA Forester mantra spouting acolytes) represent only the self proclaimed 5%'ers (tops) whom they consider worthy (AKA "competent".) Competence/worthiness for this gang is evidenced by being a club cyclist or being certified by other "competent" cyclists. The VC politicians should take their advocacy of misrepresentation of cyclists to P & R, or more appropriately to Foo.

remsav

Political exercise of ideology based on a paradigm premise based on being trated as a vehicle driver. lameo

kalliergo 

This seems like a fairly transparent attempt to twist reality in order to banish the very mention of ideas you don't agree with. In other words, bullying behavior, again.

Why not, instead, actually discuss matters of cycling safety and advocacy. You say that's what you want to see here, but you appear to be engaged in something else entirely.

Bruce Rosar

FYI from my state's Rules of the Road:

Bekologist

that quote, bruce, still doesn't intend for the politically motivated VC to ignore safe & clear on-road facilities like classed lanes soley to make a political statement.

VC are evangelical; AC is Unitarian.