This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Having done a lot of cycling over the years, including as a commute for many years in undisclosed European country, 1 in 5 cyclists are normal human beings, and the other 4 are CYCLISTS.
I have a theory that I derive from a great philosopher of our era, that in a contest between a weak and a strong horse, observers will naturally back the strong horse. However, caveat, in WEIRD society, there is also some sympathy for the weak horse, sometimes misplaced, but definitely there.
The horse that is really out of luck is the middle horse, and cyclists are the middle horse.
Motor vehicles are strong, confident, fast, going wherever they please with an inherent “Be wary of my power” statement accompanying them every where they go.
Pedestrians are frail and slow, but humanly so, and they have an inherent “Be cautious of my frailties, I am easily hurt” statement accompanying them wherever they go.
Cyclists are inhumanly fast, but also vehicularly slow. They can cause serious injury and possible death to a pedestrian, but are also prone to serious injury and death from vehicles. They are neither strong nor weak, but in the mushy middle.
This isn’t an insurmountable problem, until you run into the 4 out of 5 CYCLISTS who really, really want the rules written in such a way that they can push around and get mad at pedestrians in a way that even the strong horse motor vehicle users usually don’t want to treat pedestrians. While at the same time wanting to be treated as a weak horse that gets to both ride with the strong horses and be babied and given extra privileges like designated lanes, lane filtering, and bike boxes.
And those 4 CYCLISTS are basically Groundkeeper Willie from the meme. "You cyclists sure are a contentious people." "You just made an enemy for life!"
More options
Context Copy link
So I walk, cycle, and drive about equally whenever I’m going someplace, and I’d agree with you entirely.
As a driver, I get most annoyed with cyclists, then buses, then other cars, then pedestrians, in that order. Cyclists tend to weave in and out of traffic and go slowly enough to make it unsafe to be anywhere near them.
As a pedestrian, I get most annoyed by cyclists, then other pedestrians, then any vehicles. Cyclists jump up onto the sidewalk and speed by at what feels like breakneck speeds without giving me any space, and I’ve been struck by cyclists who don’t understand things like crosswalks numerous times.
As a cyclist, I am most annoyed by other cyclists, followed by vehicles, followed by pedestrians. Other cyclists will either be biking incredibly slowly (which is challenging to safely pass in a bike lane) or instead speed by me unsafely in said bike lane (I’ve actually been shoved over by a cyclist who forced me into the curb). I do recognize the irony in my complaints, to be fair.
When driving, I'm more frustrated by pedestrians than cyclists. Pedestrians cheat busy downtown intersections constantly, and this exacerbates congestion. The streets in my city are designed for timed flow patterns, and would work wonderfully if everyone would just respect the "stop crossing" signal. Pedestrians know they can get away with it (count on it, even) because it's the driver's responsibility not to hit them. Fine, I'd rather people not die, but this is pretty selfish. They also pay very little attention. The number of times I've been turning right into an alley with a pedestrian not looking up from their phone is too damn high. "I could have KILLED you! - you could have DIED! Don't you want to know about that? at least see it coming? At least shoulder-check!"
When cycling, again, pedestrians most of the time because despite having the clearest field of view and moving the slowest, they're paying the least attention. They are liable to step into my path without looking, then jump back like they've seen a bear and scowl like it's my fault.
When walking, cyclists and drivers in equal measure. It's not that they're doing anything wrong - it's that I don't want to have to be paying attention to them. I just want to have a chill walk and think about something other than road safety.
Aren't you supposed to yield to pedestrians when turning into an alley?
Yes, absolutely, and I do, but a lot of drivers aren't paying as much attention.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
It's a little counter-intuitive how cars are far more likely to kill us, but we get more angry at cyclists.
I think it is because most cars are relatively well-behaved and they respect my right-of-way at crosswalks and don't try to buzz me. It's just the 0.1% that is going to blow a stop sign or not yield that might kill me.
While with bikers it is a far greater number that don't respect the rules and will buzz dangerously close to myself and my kids on the sidewalk. They probably won't kill me, but they give me a sense of rule-breaking and fear.
Bikes are less predictable. They can weave, turn, and change speeds much more suddenly than a car. When I'm walking and I hear a car coming behind me, I glance back once to see its trajectory and adjust my path accordingly. When I hear a bike coming quickly towards me, I usually glance back several times to track it since I can't fully tell where the cyclists plans to go.
Or to put it another way, if someone drove a car like many Cyclists ride bikes, they’d get the cops called on them within moments and lose their license.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Why is it counterintuitive? A car weights 175x the weight of a bicycle, of course it's more deadly.
That's not the counter intuitive part.
More options
Context Copy link
Yes, that's what is counterintuitive: of course a car is deadlier, but we get more angry at cyclists anyway.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link