Here's another issue the helmet-optional crowd have to contend with; being called anti-helmet, when we're anything but.

Just because a helmet doesn't rank as high in priority to one as another, doesn't make that person as being against helmets. Far from it. In fact, many simply want people to know what helmets are good for, and what they aren't good for.

A similar silly analogy would be someone who prefers respect of choice calling someone who believes a helmet should be worn as being anti-bicycle (because of the inherent implication that cycling leads to injury more often than not cycling)

It seems holding a position that is different from another leads <a name that shall not be typed> to allege another is something he/she most certainly isn't.