carless

https://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/survey/commuter.htm
The United States.
In a political sense- people who ride bikes will never achieve a significant change in attitudes, infrastructure, subsidies, or even painting stoplight sensors unless more people ride. Regardless of the merits, few people ride and most consider it socially unacceptable (-NYC), juvenile and dangerous. Most bicycle riders are generally seen as Lance, homeless or a kid; think a sidewalk is safe and and not wearing a helmet is certain injury.
While you may disagree: geographical and regional differences- most people see us like this.
As a philosophical starting point this explains several political elements of riding a bicycle anyplace. We subsidize mass transit and invest in roads. We build million-dollar-a-mile roads instead of million-dollar-10-mile MUD's. Bike lane markings are slick (rain) crawl up curbs and disappear before intersections. Californians debate a $5 a bike recycling tax as Los Angeles beats Fresno in the smog Olympics. The pattern or premise is always based on the stereotype and homeless people/kids don't vote or pay taxes.

While I'm light on answers, I have seen historical parallels in political movements.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)
Libertarians are the bicycle advocates of political parties.
"As in any political party, there is some internal disagreement about the platform, and not all the party's supporters advocate its complete or immediate implementation, but most think that the USA would benefit from most of the Libertarian Party's proposed changes.However, under a policy known as the Dallas Accord, the national Libertarian Party does not favor any particular Libertarian approach, leaving this to be decided by the actual locality or users."

Translation: Nobody knows squat about us, and we have several approaches to this end. We splinter along so many lines that we are left with no discernible identity, and no real public impact. (Thats them not us...)

After reading the same VC/bike lane/stickies/road rage stuff I skim and leave. Didn't somebody start a scuba diving comparison thread: that was the last meaningful read.
The most direct personal bicyle advocacy is to ride to work, errands, school, and tell people. If a majority of people did this nationally I wouldn't be carless and some other schmuck would be bikeless, ranting about Vehicle Code/car lane/stickies/bike rage.

Brian Ratliff

Check out the "Practical Cycling" thread. I started that specifically to generate ideas to get past the very problem you outlined. I agree with your analysis of the problem, but not of the outlook. Important advocacy goals are being met in various places around the county, if not everywhere. Bicycling advocacy in Oregon, for instance, is alive and kicking. And everyone here advocates by being seen riding our bicycles.

One step at a time to get to the goal. That's how it starts.

Brian Ratliff

No, the discussions on the board are meaningful, though perhaps not always in a direct way. Answers don't come in a vacuum. Ideas are not generated out of thin air. The knowledge and analysis from different perspectives contained in these threads on this board help to generate ideas about what problems there are to solve and how to solve them.

To become heavier with answers, you'll do well to participate. We would enjoy your company on this forum.

nova

This forum needs more cycling advocacy and less bike lane and vehicular cycling advocacy. No one ever posts ideas on advocating the use of bicycles. Nearly all the threads are VC BL VC vs BL vs what ever.

LittleBigMan

I remember when I was ignorant about how easy it is to get around by bike. When I finally learned I could, and started riding to work, I found out people at work had the same ignorance problem. They were shocked I'd try such a thing. Over the years, their comments have changed from, "That's dangerous," or "you'll catch pneumonia," etc. to, "Did you ride your bike today?" in a friendly tone. I know from experience that my riding has broken down walls of ignorance.

At the same time, I don't notice any of them adopting bike commuting. Instead, they take up walking or weekend riding on recreational paths. Yet it has become more socially acceptable to them, and that's good for me.

closetbiker

It sure does seem, at some times, that we are a "marginalized" group, but despite the fact that in my area, only 2% of the cities traffic are commuting cyclists, there are an awful lot of resources that are dedicated to and for cycling.

Every bit of traffic not in a car is essentially creating space on the roads for other traffic. To encourage cycling helps drivers. How much would a 2% increase in road capacity cost the people of the land? Probably more than the money spent on cycling initiatives.

After a few years of improving our infrustucture, our local advocacy groups are now starting to push for more and better education.

The more everyone realizes that cycling is better for all traffic, the less problems cyclists will have from others.

One of the best things you can do is ride and give unsolicited advice that shows how riding is better for everyone. Another good thing someone can do to decrease this marginilazation is to get out of the house and join a group that shows people just how cyclists help traffic and encourages people to get out of their cars a little more often.

Treespeed

Here in Los Angeles I only see one other commuter. I personally don't count the sidewalk riders or college kids going to class on their beach cruisers. The reason I don't count these folks is the simple fact that if the sidewalk riders had a car they would use it and the college kids will give up transportation cycling as soon as they get their first job.

I don't expect to see the percentage of transportation cyclists change in Los Angeles in my lifetime. Even when we see $5 a gallon gas the perception remains for most folks that cycling in traffic is incredibly dangerous. And how can people not think that when we have a thread on the road forum discussing how a newbie probably deserved to get knocked over because she was blocking the bike lane. An attitude, which to me is synonomous with motorists believing that they don't have to yield to cyclists.

The only thing that will get more folks on bikes is if they have to, which would be ludicrous gas prices. But before then we'll go through a few more wars to secure cheaper fuel, and then will come a demand for better public transportation. But again it's too late for that too as we've put it off for years and painted ourselves into an auto only transportation system.

If people ask I'll tell them about all of the benefits of transportational cycling, but I am tired of trying to convince other people to ride. It's just like any other advocacy program, people have to want to change. Can anyone honestly say they don't know to wear a condom, or not eat 3 big macs for lunch? The information is out there, but folks prefer to drive. They see me cycling and they think, "well that dude's helping the environment so I can still drive." In most people's eyes alternative transportation is for other people.

webist

I am not nearly as concerned with whether or not another person rides. I am however, concerned that they see my riding in a positive light. Most folks I know seem to look at my cycling in a positive way. In general, most folks seem to take me in a positive way. Were I to approach others in an obnoxious, rude or insensitive manner, I suppose I might be thought of as an obnoxious, rude or insensitive cyclist by some.

I do speak positively about cycling. I do answer people's questions. I do respond gratefully to compliments and gaciously to other comments. I try to project my cycling habit as one of the positive things about me.

Hopefully, when a non-cycling acquaintenace of mine hears a negative reference to cyclists, they will recall that the cyclist they know is a great guy and say so. More importantly, maybe they'll be careful on the road.

scarry

Quote by David Garman, Assistant Secretary, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Department of Energy...........................................
I heard this on C-span and it grated on me. He said, "There are two kinds of people in the world, those who have a car, and those who want one."

This guy is working hard for the fuel cell car future, the guilt free car. As if the tailpipe emissions and foreign dependence on energy are the ONLY consequences of car use.

We bike people are off the radar. We do not matter, we are just dreaming of getting in a car.

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/20040312-2.html

Roody

Safety is an important part of advocacy. I have been carfree much of my life, but I would not have started riding again if I had not learned that cycling can be safe. I think that fear for their safety is certainly one of the top reasons people give for not riding.

closetbiker

Me too.

I want other road users to see a cyclist on the road and think, "good for him, he's helping out" rather than, "That b*stard is in my way. Get off the road!"

The former example I can live with, the later kind of marginalization we all could do without.

carless

I will be in PDX for Xmas, I'll buy the coffee (after I hit Powell's).
Not to be disparging, what is the killer app for bicycling? To be fair, the killer application for drunk driving was (interestingly enough) a critical mass of people- who know people affected. It is well known if you drink and drive, your toast and maybe- dealing w/ county lock up, court dates, , $, job problems, etc..
The textbook reasoned arguments involving sound logic are dated. The scientific method of bicycling, as applied to poor recent immigrants, homeless people, and two wage-earner households is meaningless. It's as if you explained a rotary engine to Chinese Villagers- They want a car.
I understand you have given careful thought to formulate immaculate/reasonable ideas to complex thoughts, but go macro. What would make most people ride a bike?

carless

I will be in PDX for Xmas, I'll buy the coffee (after I hit Powell's).
Not to be disparging, what is the killer app for bicycling? To be fair, the killer application for drunk driving was (interestingly enough) a critical mass of people- who know people affected. It is well known if you drink and drive, your toast and maybe- dealing w/ county lock up, court dates, , $, job problems, etc..
The textbook reasoned arguments involving sound logic are dated. The scientific method of bicycling, as applied to poor recent immigrants, homeless people, and two wage-earner households is meaningless. It's as if you explained a rotary engine to Chinese Villagers- They want a car.
I understand you have given careful thought to formulate immaculate/reasonable ideas to complex thoughts, but go macro. What would make most people ride a bike?

LittleBigMan

This is a question that has many answers, including that some people disregard the question as irrelevant, since (they say) it's ridiculous to try to get people to ride who don't already want to. I think that's only partly true.

I would approach it differently.

A doctor recently stated that children and teens who exercise are more likely to exercise as adults. I would agree with that. In fact, I would say that children who ride bicycles for fun are more likely to enjoy riding them as adults.

Carry it a step further, and you find that adults who start an exercise program are much more likely to continue it if they enjoy it. For example, someone who loves tennis is more likely to continue playing it than someone who dislikes it, but plays tennis purely for the exercise.

If kids who like bicycling continue liking it as adults, then one way to increase the number of adult cyclists is to increase the number of child cyclists and make it fun for them. Obviously, recreation is the main way for a child to enjoy bicycling, so kids need plenty of places to ride and have fun doing it. I'm not sure it would significantly increase the number of adult cyclists, but it might.

Add to that a cultural environment that rewards cycling and honors cyclists. Lots of kids enjoy sports, but how many American kids enjoy rugby? Cricket? No, they love baseball, football and basketball, mostly. That's because the culture honors those sports.

Part of me thinks that maybe, as cycling for sport becomes a bigger and bigger business, with more American heros, the more it will permeate the culture and encourage cycling.

closetbiker

...and maybe we can get onboard and remove the popular misconception that driving around in a car is the "safest" way to travel.

I think one of the reasons we don't see kids riding bikes to school anymore is that misconception, so parents end up driving the kids everywhere, not understanding that getting injured in a car accident is more likely than being hurt while riding a bike.

But how likely is that to happen? I'd say not very because the auto industry has been very good at convincing everyone that the only way to get around (and get around safely) is in a car despite the obvious carnage and jams on the roads.

The industry has managed to marginalize evryone who is not in a car.

Brian Ratliff

A critical mass of people is necessary here as well. Getting that critical mass is our problem.

As to your question: what would make most people ride a bike? Convenience. Not cost, not environment, not morality, not exercise. Convenience. People do what is convenient for them, even if it costs them more and makes them fat and stressed out. Why do students in college overwhelmingly ride a bike everywhere? Convenience. Finding parking for a car on a college campus is harder than simply picking up a bike and pedaling. Why do most adults drive cars everywhere? Again, convenience.

How do we make cycling more convenient? Well, that's why we're all here.

Brian Ratliff

carless: It's good you asked this question. It got me thinking. More on this later.

LittleBigMan

Given our current national urban-sprawl model, along with the entrenched car-centric culture and economy, bicycling cannot compete against driving in convenience for the vast majority in America. Only those who absolutely love to ride will attempt to switch to a bicycle from a car.

Yet, shrinking distances might give the bicycle an advantage. Also, having to choose between cycling and walking could do the same thing.

But still, I don't think we'll redesign our cities just to get people on a bike. Economic forces are what causes our cities to sprawl, and economic forces are what is also causing people to move back intown in many places. It's not driven by idealism, but market forces.

In the mean time, those of us who love to ride will continue to find creative ways to accomodate our needs.

Brian Ratliff

I didn't comment on how cycling could become more convenient. I simply reported an observation. If what you say is true, however, than we can all sit down because cycling will always be a fringe activity.

Yet, I don't think what you say is true. Variables change. Economics change.

LittleBigMan

I didn't say we should "sit down" and accept things as they are. I said, "In the mean time, those of us who love to ride will continue to find creative ways to accomodate our needs."

I think the first order of business is to find ways to fulfill our own bicycling needs. Trying to fulfill the bicycling needs of people who aren't yet riding is much more difficult, and with limited resources, should take a back seat to higher priorities.

sbhikes

Convenience is a definite incentive. In our car-centered urban design, bikes just aren't convenient.

Another good "killer app" for cycling is weight loss. Seeing someone start commuting to work lose 20 pounds is inspiring. Unfortunately, I've been riding my bike 4-5 days a week (up from 2 the year before) for a year now and best I can do is keep from gaining weight.

The irony about driving kids to school because it is so dangerous is that it is self-fulfilling. It is only so dangerous because so many people are driving their kids to school. If they all stopped, there wouldn't be so many cars and it wouldn't be so dangerous.

And I agree that it's the image thing as well. The reality is that it's just so sensible and civilized to ride a bike to work or to the store to pick up a few things. But people just can't see it because of how car-centered we are.

Maybe we should all dress up when we ride. You know, instead of Lance suites wear a real suit, a button-down collar and dress shoes. With a brief case on the back rack. Image is everything.

Brian Ratliff

Regarding the dress-up, I was pondering this myself. In The Art of Urban Cycling, Robert Hurst makes some suggestions to this point as well. Sometimes I wonder if the sports aspect of cycling hasn't taken over and made transportation cycling less relevent.

My only problem is that my commute, under the best of circumstances, is still over an hour long. And what would I wear in the rain?

I-Like-To-Bike

You wonder ONLY sometimes that the sports aspect of cycling hasn't taken over? Have you looked at the product offered for sale for the last 30 years at any U.S. local bicycle or chain xmart/dept. store?

sbhikes

What would you wear in the rain? Why an English raincoat of course! With an umbrella in one hand, too, if you're daring.

There's no reason why, on better weather days, you couldn't wear a nice shirt and maybe some Dockers and change out of that into your clean, dry work clothes. In other words, instead of a spandex riding suit it's riding suit of a different sort.

closetbiker

I think it becomes more convenient to ride a bike when the traffic bottle necks and parking becomes expensive (because of demand from increased traffic).

I've had to drive my kids places on occasion where there is significant traffic commuting to or from work and even including the distances involved, it would be more convenient to ride a bike because you can easily by-pass the bottlenecks that the drivers sit and wait in.