Originally Posted by Brian Ratliff
Actually HH, there are instances of looking at Mr. Forester's presentation style, but the bulk of the comments are regarding what he writes about.
There are very few comments in this "debunking" thread that even attempt to address what Forester actually meant, much less being a critical analysis of that.
Like the issue of describing a general concern a "phobia" and his use of medical terminology which is not recognized by the medical field.
These are presentation style criticisms. Forester's main point in the piece cited in the OP - that the cyclist inferiority phobia exists - is acknowledged by Gene and others, even Diane, the OP.
Or the issue of his lack of enthusiasm for increasing the number of people who bicycle and his focus on the "skilled, high mileage cyclists" to the exclusion and, in fact, to the dis-benefit of lesser skilled cyclists who could benefit from transportational cycling.
Criticizing him for having a "lack of enthusiasm" is on thing. Using it to discredit his life's work is quite another.
These are all fair topics to pursue. JF has written about these topics and others publicly, so they are fair game for critical analysis.
Indeed, and I, for one, encourage critical analysis of anything he or anyone else has actually written.