Good Article About Judgement & Snobbishness Among Cyclists
 

Just about every thread in every bicycling forum eventually ends up being a pissing contest over who is a real bicyclist, what is a real bicycle, etc. This article from Bicycle Times, while not the final word, does a good job at opening up the conversation as to WHY we need to be so critical of each other...

Opinion: Plenty of pie for all

Financially privileged? To ride a bike? If you can't afford a bike, even a beater that your neighbour is throwing out, you wouldn't be able to afford a car. Lots of younger people I know are choosing public transit over the automobile, nowadays. So to each his own.

I thought the article was a bit over the top (I don't know if cyclists are that judgmental) but it made a good point about e bikes. They have a lot of promise in expanding the number of people who cycle and that is, I think, a good thing.

Only on the Road Forum do I see this so-called elitist attitude. The vast majority of cyclists just ride their bikes and don't come on a forum to talk about frame stiffness, 11 vs 10 speed, or achieving kom on strava.

I hate e-bikes on MUPs. Guess that makes me an elitist.

Electric Scooters are NOT bicycles in any shape or form. SORRY BUD. Nice try. No more than electric chair devices. Take your inclusion delusion someplace else.

I won't, however, complain at all if they take the place of CARS on the road. They are government over-regulated under powered motor cycles. So wussy they kind of fit in on MUPs.
E-assist is a different story.

Bicycles are human powered. What the hell is elitist about that ??? Why don't we all drive a Rolls Royce ???

Ya know, I wasn't sure which bike forum to post this thread on. I just think that, of all cyclists, commuting cyclists are the least "snobbish" about cycling. That's why I thought you all would appreciate the article.

I, personally, cannot have a conversation about bicycling here in New York without it turning into a contest about who rides further, who has more electronic chatchkes attached to their handlebars, and how you absolutely need special pedals and clips on your shoes to ride a bicycle. Perhaps this laughable type of rivalry doesn't exist where you live, but I don't think the author's point-of-view is purely personal.

Most people on this particular bike forum ride WHAT they like and HOW they like. But I'm telling you, you'd be amazed at what so many roadies and mountain bikers think about cyclists like us.

There is a bike store like that in my town.

In order to be worthy of their attention, you have to have a bike that cost at least $3000 that you bought from them.

$3K is the entry level - where they treat you like pond scum instead of just ignoring you. If you want them to be nice, it's going to cost at least $5k.

They do have MTBs and hybrids and all kinds of bikes in the store, but apparently only to scoff at, because only road bikes count.

I was actually in the store, speaking to one of the sales people, and preparing to order a replacement wheel for the hybrid I had purchased from them (the OEM wheels were crap, and the rear did not stand up to use), and the owner of the store comes up and tells me he needs the salesman for unloading a truck and I am welcome to come back another day. "Thank you, I will never come back," was my reply. I actually broke that vow about five years later. They'd moved to a new building in a very posh shopping center. I was out on a ride and needed something basic, which of course they did not have.

Since then I've purchased a road bike, a touring bike, and a tri bike - all from other stores. I can't imagine how this business model is working for them, but apparently it is.

This summer was a thread on the Fifty-Plus Forum, ”Bike Riding vs Cycling” with 105 replies, that IMO was a good discussion of the topic as in the article, and subject of this thread:

Sometime after that thread ended, I thought about this seemingly trivial distinction that makes me think a rider is a “real” cyclist. I watch the way they pedal. Without being judgemental about it, a cyclist has a fluid rotary pedaling motion, whereas I think “bike rider” when I see someone pedaling in a piston-like fashion. Now since pedaling is the foundation of bike riding, I think that style and form makes the distinction. Of course then, while an E-bike rider is a “bike rider” they are not cyclists. No moral or “snobbish” judgement here, but a more "objective" one, FWIW. :innocent:

@alathIN: That's unfortunate about the bike store. Obviously they have enough 'elitist' clientelle that they don't need the likes of you or I with our hybrids, fenders, and racks.

@Papa Tom: I was just thinking the same thing about the Commuting Forum. We are more utilitarian than elitist. That may have something to do with the fact that we are all combating common foes--road conditions, darkness, cold, snow, ice, rain, etc.

I will concede, though, that much (but not all) of the elitist chatter on the Road Forum is done very much tongue-in-cheek.

I find it interesting that the very magazine, or similar, that perpetuates that idea of elitism among cyclists is writing an essay dispelling it. :rolleyes:

I don't subscribe to any of the cycling mags, but have on a few occasions perused them at the bookstore. Their idea of a 'cheap' bike is one that costs $1K.

I think the real issue is a lot of the insecurity of new cyclists who will read into any action or comment. If you're looking for it, you'll find it.

A few times, when attending a group ride, I show up, unload my road bike from the car and someone will inevitably say something akin to "so I suppose that you're better than us."

One older lady was staring me down with a scowl and muttered to her friend (?) "friggin' road bikers think they're so special."

I didn't say a word, didn't do a thing...that I know of.

I hope you are not confusing Bicycling Times with Bicycling Magazine (I once did.)

Bicycling Times sponsored an Adventure Fest in Pennsylvania this October attended by a few subscibers of the Fifty-Plus Forum, that I thought was quite egalitarian.

Look at the pictures of bicycles that accompanied the article; not very many bikes that look like they came from the stores where 90% of American bikes are sold. Nor do they look like the kind of bikes typically seen ridden on the streets of Europe.

The pictures look like the bikes sold only at LBS that cater to the Real Cyclists™ who subscribe to the Bicycle Times.

i would take issue with this statement from the article. the only "privilege" that a person in our society needs to ride a bike is to be physically able to do so. after that, the rest is a 100% pure grade-A malarkey.

you can get a no-frills hybrid at walmart for 100 bucks. you could even score a used trek, giant, or other name brand hybrid for the same price at the local bike co-op.

you don't need a $4,000 carbon fiber wonder-toy, lycra body suits, and a club for group rides to ride a bicycle. all you need is a bicycle.

but enthusiasts (of all stripes) are famous for overthinking the simplest of things.

In a way, I guess I do feel smug about cycling to work. I am doing something a lot of people aren't because they think they can't. I've been in their shoes as I no longer have very young kids to drive around.

I may be too old and experienced but I didn't think the article was good. It was a rambling bunch of assumptions and statements trying to make a point that failed. We are all elitists, bikes, cars, food, art, who we know, what we know, our jobs, etc. The real issue not addressed is the societal one of acceptance. We are less accepting than we use to be. Sure there were some significant unacceptable issues of the past, but now it is broken down to smaller groups.

i attempt to go beyond this understanding from non cyclists. i have had friends say they want to ride but are afraid to. I say i will ride with you they are surprised. If I ride with a slower rider and we are riding together, I will ride my motobecane with fenders and a rack at whatever speed the person I am riding with wants. I will ride it fast with my friend who says he tired and wants to take it easy but then cranks it. I will ride my road bike on charity rides with the weekend warriors and especially this year since I have some good mileage so I will ride fast because the motor is more important to a point than the bike.

I say hi to people when I pass them either on the street, at bus stops, or on group rides.

i think that it is being friendly is key. I think that if the person is on a bike then we have something in common.

Except in the 50+ forum where you could conceivably have an actual pissing contest (at least amongst the men) to see who's prostate gland is still in decent shape.

We have our elitist moments also, as commuter/enthusiasts. We can get so enamored of our various accessories that we believe that they are essential, and must be of some minimal quality even.

But for the most part I don't think so. There's another guy who commutes to the offices where I work, and I'm more impressed by his old entry level Trek, milk carton and all, than the carbon/ultegra Bottecchia that he rides when the weather is nice. Though both are really nice bikes for their respective purpose. So our local "commuting community" between the two of us represents the old hard-tail, the nice road bike, unrepentant "fred" and fender-lights-rack type (me), more traditional road bike and a more outlandish bike (also me). We don't have much leeway for elitism.

After reading this tread, I realize how lucky I am. I love riding my bikes and working on them. Simple.

Well said. That's very cool.

After reading that article several times, it seems to me that the author is the one displaying astounding elitism. Ms. Schwinn asserts that the argument that "E-bikes aren't real bicycles" is laughable. What I find laughable is the idea that words have no meaning. A bicycle is a human powered vehicle. An E-bike is a motorized vehicle. It is a pretty clear, simple, distinction.

I would not consider myself elitist about what I consider a bicycle. Here is a partial list of what I consider bicycles: Carbon fiber road bike, 29er Mtn bike, steel road bike, hybrids, department store bike shaped object, 26" mtb bike, 27.5" mtb bike, 1940s balloon tire cruiser, turn of the century track bike, 1880s high wheel ordinary, the hobby horse, my son's trike, hightech trikes, recumbents, tandems, the vehicles at the IHPVA races. All HUMAN powered.

On the other hand, you have motorized vehicles. Starting on the low and slow end with segways, Electric scooters, E-bikes, mopeds, scooters, 50cc motorcycles, 100cc motorcyles, 250cc motorcycles, high performance electric motorcycles. All rely on MOTORS.

And the idea that old people need motors to ride their bicycles off road? Give me a break. I'm sorry your body is not up to it anymore, but there are no guarantees in life. I'd love to run another marathon, but I'm pretty sure my knee won't let me. Does that mean I get to use a motorized assist? Hell no. It means my marathon days are over.

"But the U.S. has been much slower to pick up the technology, partially because of the aggressive backlash of self-identified “cyclists.”" No, I don't think so. I'm probably not going to buy an e-bike, but if you want to buy one, knock yourself out. I'm not standing in front of the e-bike shop preventing customers from entering.

An e-bike is both human powered and electrically assisted. Most people consider them to be bikes.

Ha!

I think you're being a little unreasonable here.