You may be frustrated by it but the claim that the design of most roadways is auto-centric is pretty accurate.
Where I differ with some VC ideologues is on whether or not conspicuously bicycle-specific designs are always a bad thing.
Specifically, I differ with some VC ideologues on bike lanes, which, let's face it, is where the real dispute is.
Despite claims by VC-ist to the contrary, well-designed bike lanes are not in conflict with the rules of the road, general traffic principles or vehicular cycling. They do not make bicyclists second class citizens and, despite the apparent belief by VC-ists that everyone who doesn't kiss JF's rear end is an idiot, bike lanes do not necessarily teach improper cycling techniques.
I really couldn't give a rat's behind about paint on pavement but I know a shoot-yourself-in-the-foot position when I see one, and VC-ist "foaming-at-the-mouth" opposition to bike lanes is exactly that. Even if I agreed entirely with John Forester's political agenda (which I do not), I would see opposition to the one on-road bike facility, bike lanes, as a losing proposition.
The push-back VC-ism gets from life-long rules of the road bicyclists like myself is real. John Forester can only explain the push-back by inventing a phobia, which others call a taboo. But neither the phobia theory not the taboo theory can explain those opposed to the VCist ideology who might be rational, might have some experience, might know a thing or two and might actually believe in riding according to the rules of the road (and might have been doing so since long before they ever heard of John Forester and his crackpot auto-centric social theories).
Quite honestly, opposition by VCists to bike lanes, as a general principle, is one of the stupidest positions I've ever seen a group of ideologues take in my life. YMMV