Long thread, so I haven't read all of it. Maybe tomorrow. I did want to address your points, though.

1: From my perspective, absolutely, but it's more complicated than that. There is often an enormous disparity between the kind of "at need" commuter you are referring to than the "by-choice," largely middle-class commuters that make up most of this board and what you might think of as "bike culture." Most of us have found a way to work this ostensibly lower-class form of transportation into our middle-class identities, sometimes rather defensively. Much is made of the fact that commuting by bicycle is a choice, which somehow makes it more pure. I can't tell you how many times I've read posts where some commuter, being harassed by motorists or others, brings up the fact that they have a car - often nicer than that of their harassers - as a kind of ironic badge of honor. Heaven forfend that we actually be perceived as working-class people without the power to make that choice!

Basically, I suspect that the issues involved in being so deep in the working-class that transportation is difficult to afford become much easier to negotiate when it becomes possible to "trade-up" to a car. From that perspective, lacking the power to make that choice probably sucks a lot. Having a car when you need it is a huge advantage, so why not seize the opportunity? Anyway, point is, I'm glad to see anyone riding a bike, but I'm even happier when people can seize more agency in their lives. I'd most prefer to see a world of equivalent access where we ALL made the choice to ride our bikes.

2. Yes! To gain access to automotive ownership and the advantages thereof, but continue to ride by choice - that would be wonderful. However, I don't blame for anyone who doesn't, given the circumstances. I don't happen to think that car access is a class-leveler (nothing is), but it makes it a hell of a lot easier to pass. I think that this is a shame, and I'd like to see a world where things are different.

3. Any "bad example" to drivers is an invention of those drivers to justify the oppression of cyclists as a class. Mistreatment by motorists has nothing to do with the actual behavior of cyclists, it is a political issue. I'm by now entirely fed-up with this whole line of reasoning. It's nonsense. Of course we should all strive to ride legally and set a good example, but for our safety and the safety of other riders. Riding legally is not safer because it makes drivers happy (it doesn't), it is safer because of the way traffic works. Increased safety due to legal riding is a direct result of traffic mechanics, not because it somehow makes motorists be nicer to us.

4. Define "bike culture." "At-need" commuters are not PART of bike culture. They have no relationship to it. How can they influence it in any way? And what aspect of it might be in such need of protection, anyway?

"Again"? What you talkin' 'bout, Jack?
"Anger"? is that what your crystal ball tells you, Sigmund?

Posting about the stupidity and/or contemptuous attitudes of the self proclaimed Cycling Saviours is not anger just because it may sting the affected.

Observations right on target or not are left up to interpretation of the on lookers. Example : the girls in the gym that are always put off because guys are looking at them when the wear the most least material garments. Come on no game necessary its speaks. It is what living in community is about. I think the difference in arguments here are whether you come into contact with the individual and for what reason.
1) wrong way riding
2) stole my little girls bike
3) asks for money while looking you right in the eye at stop lights.
4) said "on yer right" and would not get out of the way.
Ect...
No one said "I looked over and saw the guy riding down the block doing nothing wrong so I wrote this."
V

I never knew being a drink driver had social status. And as for contempt it sounds like you are the one who hates everybody here but doesn't mind posting you veiws. And what is a BF profile Sigmund?

I don't think that expecting other cyclists to do a decent job of respecting the rules of the road is any more "safety nanny" than expecting motorists to do the same. Riding on the wrong side of the road is DANGEROUS! I know, I got hit doing it, and I don't do it anymore. I feel bad when I see other cyclists do it, because I don't want anyone to get hurt, including myself. I've had a couple close calls with wrong way cyclists.

I'm not sure poverty motivates very many. A car is enough of a priority for most who're over college age, and a lousy used car can be had awfully cheap.

A large fraction of those who lose their licenses via DUI just drive illegally, so the ones who are biking, even badly, are relatively OK in my book.

Since this thread doesn't seem contentious enough ...
I am familiar with the sort of cyclist you describe and based on my observations of the ones around here (Colorado), I think they mostly can't get licenses or register cars because they're illegal immigrants. So they're OK in my book because anyone choosing to live here as an illegal immigrant almost has to be doing it for commendable reasons.

Well, OK, actually it's just that riding a bike instead of driving carries a lot of weight with me. I'm not coming up with what exactly you could do on a bike that would make me think I'd prefer you were in a car. Sure, I get annoyed at bad cyclists; but they're a lot better than bad drivers.

For starts anyone who posts on a commuter list a quote praising the pleasure of pain while cycling: ala "My legs are burning, my lungs are raw and I can feel my heart beating out of my chest. It's good to know your still alive eh"

For seconds anyone who is anal enough to log his daily commuting miles and post the figure as his signature.

Third and most important, a passion for finding some pretext for feeling superior in some manner to other cyclists.

I have really tried and just cannot understand this post. What are you trying to say?

Woops here it is
Observations are usually right on target and are left up to interpretation of on lookers. Example : the girls in the gym that are always put off because guys are looking at them when the wear the "most" least material garments. Come on ,no game necessary, its speaks for its self. It is what living in community is about. I think the difference in these arguments here are whether you come into contact with the individual and for what reason.
1) wrong way riding
2) stole my little girls bike
3) asks for money while looking you right in the eye at stop lights.
4) said "on yer right" and would not get out of the way.
Ect...
No one said "I looked over and saw the guy riding down the block doing nothing wrong so I wrote this."
V

Maybe he is just trying to push your buttons; or thinks it is humorous or clever to write gibberish.

Touche....

Lil brown bat: I just read your reply to me. Are you high, or do you just not know how to read? I don't know what your problem is. Are you just trying to start some sort of argument? You just don't make sense with your whacked out conclusions.

I prefer to spend money NOT at the pump.

I'd rather spend money on my car for race tires and VP leaded racing fuel.

The bike keeps me in shape, and from going insane. I start school, which is 10 miles away, in 2 weeks and am planning to ride to school and back as long as the weather permits, and even after, if I can find showering facilities.

a happy cyclist is a good cyclist.

Nothing like a timely reply!

Are you still an abuser, or have you stopped beating your wife yet?

Same goes both ways, I guess.

No. You, on the other hand, sure seem to have an ample supply of fightin' words, li'l buckaroo.

"Whacked out conclusions"? I asked you exactly how you know that people "who ride because they have no other way of getting around efficiently" don't obey the rules of the road. Are you stopping and interrogating them about why they're riding, or what?