John Forester

More very bad logic. Bike lanes are the result of two causes. One is the desire by motorists to push cyclists aside, as inferior roadway users, as evidenced by the history of their invention. The other is the emotion, created and fostered originally by motorists, that cyclists are inferior roadway users who need their own space to make them safe and legitimate. The items that sbhikes mentions as results are mostly causes. Furthermore, incompetent cycling is the result of America's sixty years or more insistence that cyclists are inferior roadway users. Therefore, incompetent cycling is the far earlier result of America's insistence that cyclists are inferior roadway users, while bike lanes are a later result.

Sbhikes's characterizations of cyclists who do not oppose bike lanes, presumably being those who actively advocate them and those who merely accept them, are more accurate, since bike lanes are the result of the cyclist-inferiority view. Any cyclist who believes that he or she is by nature inferior to motorists in ability to operate in traffic or in legal status as a roadway user might be the victim of mental illness, delusions, or phobia, or similar things to a lesser extent, although if that person is simply complying with what he or she has been taught, can be considered plain ignorant. Furthermore, all those characteristics are very likely to be accompanied by incompetent cycling. It is difficult to imagine a competent cyclist who suffered from any of these conditions.