Originally Posted by
BarracksSi
Renegade clothes and shiny spandex aren't worn by grownups. Adults wear them, sure, but not "grownups", who will, because of their job, wear slacks, a nice shirt, and a coat, probably with the tie stashed in a pocket.
So a "grownup" is someone who dresses a particular way? That makes sense.
There we go again, recommending a whole new set of gear to go riding. Well, unless you mean that specific outfit, in which case other, non-cycling-specific clothes will still do fine for the rest of the year.
Read again what my man wrote -- there's no suggestion of any sort. Wearing a suit (or whatever a "grownup" wears?) on a bike in NYC is only going to be comfortable for a few weeks in the Spring and Fall.
Like Schwinnsta posted, though, it's a bike-positive article overall, pointing out an option for people who don't want to have to wear zip pants and a highway worker vest just to ride to the shops.
I don't get it, who is saying that someone has to dress a certain way to ride a bike? (other than the NYT article harhar) The article is not what I would call "bike positive". It's written very-much in an us vs. them (err, we vs. they) manner, as if the manly-be-like-Lance-men and impractical-fixie-riding-cult-members don't exist or don't ride genteel publications such as the NYT. Furthermore, the idea that nobody in NYC rides in non-hipster-or-racer clothing is absurd. Flat-out crappy reporting, flying in the face of reality, if you look at it that way. How is that bike positive?