Who might get the eye of a young woman...A fit cyclist w/o a car or a slob who has a Porsche.?

Look around, in our culture as it is at present, gals for the slob in the Porsche.

Where I live it's not too much of a stigma. I live in a rural area dotted with small towns, I live in one small town and my gf lives in another 13km away. Once her grandma asked why I would bike 13km at night when it was raining. That's a big deal for alot of people. People are generally more shocked at me riding in rain or cold or darkness, though most are impressed by a 40km+ effort. Considering most people my age have a car of equal or lesser value to my bicycle (any piece of **** is legal on the roads here, and my bike ain't bad!) they don't think I'm poor, they just think I'm foolish for choosing to ride a bike.

My gf doesn't have a hell of alot of money, so she doesn't own a car, though her parents own a few cheap ones and she uses them. She doesn't have a problem with me not having a car. We're moving to a big city next year and she knows as well as I do there's not much point having a car there. She knew me when I used a moped to get around was alot fatter, so I'm sure she's ok with the fact I now choose to ride a bike most of the time.

If a member of the opposite sex was to dislike me because of something as trivial as wether I have a car or not, then she's not worth it.

I'm about to commute to work for the first time ever. Oh, I think you guys need to hang out with more punks. In that community, it's driving a car that creates the stigma.

ONE LESS CAR.

Well, I am 39 male American in UK, I am married, sold the car, got the bike...I think that for most women who are intelligent and living with the thought that a guy can be more than the car he drives on the road...I for one know, that most of my peers could not run, ride or swim worth beans....all fancy car drivers, looking 10 years older. My advise, don't change your passions, meet someone who shares your view on life.

Gawd, if I wasn't already married, I'd be falling in love.

yep, women are taught to care about money is what it sums up to....to them money = possible dating material.

Problem is money = more money...that's it....quit reading into it. I've known so many a-holes that had money who treated women like **** that it's sickening. One of them once told me that he usually treated them like that because he himself knew it was about the money...so to him it was justified....I really can't agree with him there, just tell her off if that was the case.

Myself...I don't care...they can think i'm broke all they want...truth is I have as much in my bike as a good used car. My computer has far more than that....basically I spend the money on things that matter to me. Driving isn't one of them...I'm not cheap, actually I'm a bit of a high spender, usually blowing 1/4 of my income on needless stuff every month....such as a top of the line video card, or more parts for my roadie.

However I won't go bragging about it evereywhere I go, since expensive bikes will be stolen if too much attention is brought to them. I also don't say much about how much my bike costs....if a female recognizes it's expensive...it probably means she knows her bikes...and possibly is beyond the car=everything mode of thought.

I consider my cycling to be a filter. I don't hide the fact that I commute everywhere and don't drive, I wear it on my sleave. Sure, most women don't like it, but then again, I don't want to date most women. In the end, if your not dating someone who can accept your livestyle, why bother?

Personally, I find that women who are flexible enough to accept my cycling and see it for what it is are more interesting and intelligent. They are exactly the type that I would want to be dating in the first place.

SecretSatalite, your statement "everything you do by car can be accomplished without one" is blatantly false. This weekend I picked up 3740 lbs of gravel for my backyard patio. I don't care WHAT kind of extracycle, trailer, gullible friends, WHATEVER you have, you are not going to get 3740 lbs of gravel moved 8 miles in any kind of reasonable time frame without an automobile. Even if I paid the gravel place to deliver it, it would still require an automobile, it would just be theirs instead of mine.

If you are trying to make the point that a particular individual does not require an automobile, that is somewhat defensible, but stating that NO ONE needs them is simply false.

Playing devil's advocate here.

I suppose the logical counter to this is that you don't truly need 3740 lbs. of gravel for your patio. You would get by quite nicely with whatever was in your patio before you delivered the gravel. Sure, you want the gravel there, but that is not the same as need.

For the record, I agree with your statement that cars can accomplish things that bicycles cannot.

Well, I need the gravel to HAVE a patio (the gravel is the base layer, the patio stones go on top). It's that or go without a patio, which I don't want to do. But the argument isn't about whether I should have a patio or not, it is whether what I did with my truck could be accomplished without one, and my position is no, it could not.

True, that would be the time I would rent a truck.

Thing is if you use a car only when necessary as opposed to when convenient, more often than not a car will be so impractical cost-wise that renting would be a more suitable option.

[QUOTE=Eggplant Jeff] Even if I paid the gravel place to deliver it, it would still require an automobile, it would just be theirs instead of mine.QUOTE]

So what's wrong with having it delivered? The issue is not that motor vehicles are not necessary to perform some tasks, but that it is possible for many, perhaps most, people to live without one. Someone that chooses a car-free lifestyle would simply have the business vehicle deliver the purchased goods, rather than own a truck so he can bring it home himself.

Sure, that's what I was saying. If you're making the point that AN INDIVIDUAL can live car-free, that is true (several people on here do, in fact). But the statement I was arguing with was that anything that a car can do, can be done without one. And that's only true for a specific person or people, not for the country or world as a whole. Because if neither I nor the gravel store had a truck and there was nowhere to rent one, my gravel would still be sitting at the store.

Oooh, are we playing "unsubstantiated stereotypes"? Because I'd love to make some stereotypical assumptions about the size of your penis based on the way you talk about women.

In other news, can it, jerk. Not all women are taught that and the ones who are, well, who do you think taught them that? Baby girls aren't raised in a vacuum.

Well, you could haul the gravel in your panniers, one load at a time... ;-)

This was never an issue for me personally. I Had two cars and a motorcycle when I met my wife 14 years ago - still preferred commuting by bike back then and still do (no car or truck or MC for me now - we share her little car in the city and kinda wish we didn't own that anymore......makes more sense to just rent a car for the dozen or so occasions a year we need one.)

I WILL Say this -

1. Living out in the suburbs I felt (often and regularly) the scorn and ridicule of teens, adults and anyone in a motor vehicle who looked down upon an adult male riding a bike. Clearly the feeling was that I was a Loser for not having a car (ironic since I did and used when neccessary).....only children, migrant workers and dishwashers rode bikes in my home town in Suffolk county. A bike was looked upon as something bums resorted to because they couldn't afford the almighty car. Unless we're talking megabuck mountain bikes ridden by extreeeeme sports weekend warriors or flashy road bikes for the spandex-inclined. These were apparently acceptible due to the expense but the humble three speed or basket paperboy cruiser or modest mtb were not for a real man. God forbid an adult attempt a responsible and healthy method of transport which is accepted in most of the world......I guess in America real men drive internal combustion engines and pollute the air their wives and kids breathe, all so their 'self images' can be enlarged.........puke!:mad:

2. For any guy who HAS faced this - why would you want to be with a woman who has this attitude? I am not saying dump her (You certainly may want to try and explain your position first) but if she won't budge, you may find her priorities are a wee bit skewed......but, hey, to each his own.

among the majority of americans, yes there is a stigma attached to bicycling, esp commutting by bike. Especially outside large cities, as soon as you cross the border to the 'burbs, the perseption is you must be on crack, homeless, or have a dui or something if you're riding a bike. though i know there are different categories of bikers I can tell (yuppie roadies, commuters, old people on old bikes, etc) I know this isn't true.

BTW I agree most people dont "need" a car..... (like I'm supposed to NEED cable tv, a cell phone, a large truck, etc etc , none of which I have)

how is my statement "blatently" false? if you really wanted your patio gravel, you could take it one load at a time or maybe get a bunch of friends and haul it all in trailers. takes longer but still done by bike. and whats a resonable timeframe. it took me all day to move the rail road ties for my garden on my bike. that was fine. the reality is that its more comfortable for you to have all the gravel moved in one trip. its more comfortable for you to use an automobile. and a patio? now thats a nonessential in the xtreme to make you more comfortable. a luxury. you did not give any evidence that it is false to say that no one needs a car. the example you gave of why you needed a vehicle just proves that you value living a comfortable lifestyle

It's unrealistic that people will give up any luxuries once they become accustomed to them. Now that I drive very infrequently I actually enjoy it at times (couldn't say the same about my daily car commutes, even though they were short and traffic-jam free).

I do personally like to challenge myself to do things old skool but I have my agenda and everyone else has theirs. Saying your business or prsonal use of a motorized vehicle is necessary is one thing; having no regard for the environment is another. I don't expect everybody to follow my model for universal utopia, but when their choices have what I believe will be disasterous results for the planet, wouldn't it be imprudent not to act?

There's no reason to not question the alarming overuse of oil in the USA - whether using cars for trips where feet, mass transit or a bike would suffice, or worse yet, using a gas guzzling, penis lengthening, third world draining ghetto riche pompous piece of SUV for sheer vanity where a humble econobox would do.

ok, enough rant from pgoat today.....

If you're going to argue such extremes, why do you even have a bike? Everything you can do on a bike, you could do on foot. It's just slower.

Slow enough that it gets rediculous, perhaps, but so is the idea of moving almost 2 tons of gravel by bicycle. How much can I carry in a trip? 300lbs would probably be pushing it, and even at that, would take me 13 trips... Probably 2 hours per trip, you're talking 26 hours of labor. Versus about 40 minutes by truck. This is a PERFECT application for an automobile... using it at or near its maximum capacity, for a task it was designed for. Using a 5000-lb truck to move 3700 lbs of cargo is efficient. Using a 5000 lb truck to move 220 lbs (me and lunch) to work is a waste.

Are you going to try and argue that ANYONE does not value living a comfortable lifestyle? Everyone values comfort. They may not value particular comforts more than other things, but no one deliberately chooses a harder lifestyle without good reason.

i'm trying to argue that a comfortable lifestyle doesn't have to involve being fat, being a yuppie, killing the environment, killing our society with urban sprawl and pollution-all that. its not hard at all for me to live the way i do. i'm supre comfortable. we just value different things. the difference in our values is that you have a totally unsustainable lifestyle(mines only semi-sustainable, my ecological footprint is 16acres).

I can see now that you and I are really not in disagreement. There are some tasks that clearly are better and more efficiently done by motor vehicles. But those that live car-free have discovered there are often legitimate and feasible alternatives to the private motor vehicle. For instance, I will use your example of the patio. Assuming neither you nor the gravel store had a motor vehicle for delivery and there were no local places to rent a truck, there is still another alternative. In fact, by coincidence, I also added a patio to my home within the past year. I simply hired a contractor, not so much because of any difficulty in getting the materials, but because I'm a total incompetent at anything resembling construction. The contractor purchased and delivered the materials, built the patio and handed me the bill. I assume it may have cost more than doing it myself, but it was far, far less expensive than purchasing and maintaining a motor vehicle. Besides, if I was a handy man and wanted to build it myself for further savings, I have no doubt I could find someone to deliver the materials. (It is a pretty slack enterprise to sell a product like gravel and not have a delivery option, IMO.)

Back to the original topic of this thread. Being car-free does not mean being independent of motor vehicles. What it means is a willingness to forsake the costly convenience of owning one. I, for instance, live 25 miles from my job. But I have a good option for bus transportation. I commute two miles to the nearest bus stop, load my bike on the front rack and take the bus to my job. No traffic and parking hassles. The bus fare I pay each year is less than the amount of a single month's car payment and parking fees. Does this mean I'm cheap? Not exactly, it means I choose to spend my money on higher priorities.....like living in an upscale neighborhood, going to Europe twice a year and routinely eating out at nice restaurants....things I could never do if I was saddled with the expense of motor vehicle ownership. Without a doubt, one of the smartest things I ever did in my life was abandon the car. It has made me more free and independent and I can not imagine ever going back. If people view me with a social stigma because I don't own a car, I really don't care and in fact relish the idea that I am showing it can be done.

My wife loves it.......

Secret your posts are awesome! I did that footprint thing and I came out at 12 acres, as I live right now. If I change a few things like no more flying, bike-only, and "electricity with energy conservation" whatever that means, it goes down to 9. Americans average 24. The footprint idea comes from a book called "Radical Simplicity" by Jim Merkel. Well worth reading!

Someone a while back on here compared universal car ownership to slavery, it made life easier, and while everyone kinda knew in the back of their mind it was wrong, it was profitable, or at least felt profitable, so everyone kinda went along.

its freaky when you take the quiz. i'm trying to lessen my footprint. i eat too much prepackaged food and my house isn't very energy efficient. i also dont have a water catchment system all set up. but it should be by next rainy season.

I find it ironic that someone who prefers two-wheeled transport, only of the non-motorized variety, would subscribe to such a ridiculously ill-informed stereotype of motorcycles and their riders.

-Trevor (Commutes via motorcycle on non-pedal days. Though not being a crotch-rocket I guess it's not "cool".)

You must be some kind of amazingly powerful cyclist!

How can you tow a 4,000 pound boat with a bike?
How can you drive 900 miles in 12 hours to get to fantastic riding in other states?

etc.

etc.

For some people, cars are also another form of recreation, and not basic transportation.

What is so amusing about this thread is that carless evangelists who bemoan the close mindedness of people who can't imagine not having a car are guilty of the same close mindedness, in reverse.

The fit cyclist in the Porsche.

But who would want to hang out with someone who is so shallow as to be attracted to someone simply because they drive a certain make of vehicle?

The USA has an incredibly high average standard of living, taking for granted luxuries not remotely available to the majority of the world. Acknowledging this is NOT being evangelical, or ultra-liberal. Ackowledging this does NOT mean that I don't think I'm spoiled myself.

Taking your boat to a lake to fish, or towing jet skies or ATV's to a park, or building a patio or pool, are in the end personal luxuries that seem to be repeatedly mistaken as necessities by some posters. I highly recommend to these posters that you spend some time world-hopping in under-developed countries and avoiding the three star hotels. If you'd been born in a different place, to different parents, chances are you would not be reading this email right now but would instead be bent over in a rice field, knee deep in water, sun-up to sun-down, and would have an average life expectancy of about 40 yrs. What some of us are saying is that we COULD get by on bike, or FOOT for that matter, if we lowered our standards of living. That's all.

As far as the 'same close mindedness in reverse' I agree. We should avoiding being elitist when it comes to the biking thing, and try to remember when it was new to us. I can't fault people who look at me askance for commuting so much when until a few years ago I never would have dreamed that I could bike as far as TEN miles <gasp> let alone hundreds.