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 -
The Economist has published an article (paywalled, sorry) on the state of cyclists in New York, which dropped the day I was leaving the city. It was the first time I had visited as an adult. I came away with some respect for it (loved the food, service, and how fast everyone walked). The point of the story is supposedly that cyclists are now being treated unfairly:
I’m a cycling nut, so the issue is close to my heart. In a T2 city, I feel like our role is that of a scapegoat. People fantasize about killing cyclists pretty regularly, and none of them understand the challenges and tradeoffs we have to deal with. At this point, I've just thrown up my hands in despair at this ever being better, so I just get on the road as little as possible.
The people on two wheels in NYC are a different breed. Each of the longtime residents I asked - 100% - are now more scared of cyclists than cars. My 3 day trip felt the same to me. Every car was attentive and respectful of me as a pedestrian. The cyclists were fast, heavy, and disregarded almost every crosswalk signal or red light, despite having their own lanes. What’s the quantitative danger?
Notice the sleight of hand here. What’s included are E-Bikes, scooters, and mopeds - each of these truly motorized vehicles. The number of people killed by analog cyclists nationwide has been, for many years, single digits. This is important. E-bikes allow users to achieve speeds and momentum totally beyond their skill, and are often part of poorly maintained machines that are part of sharing programs. My mind is blown that even 8 people have been killed - that's an enormous number even in a place as dense as NYC. It probably means a huge number of serious injuries as collateral damage.
Put simply, the fixie riders racing through the city are psychotic but not dangerous to pedestrians.
As you’d expect, the lede is buried, along with the Culture War. The cyclists zipping through the city on E-bikes are exclusively yapping in a foreign language on speakerphone, with DoorDash bags on the back of their cycles. Nothing should get in the way of private taxis for burritos.
To recap how insane this is:
It’s so similar to LA, albeit with fewer vehicle fires and bricks on heads. The fix just cannot be the obvious and correct one. Instead, it’s to hop on Reddit to “map police hotspots” or refuse to stop as a way to LARP civil disobedience.
People who bicycle because they’re young/poor are largely fine. The bad cyclists are the ones who are committed to cycling as a lifestyle- either for fitness or for environmental reasons. Like, rules apply to you.
At least in my neck of the woods, the spandex-clad roadies and messenger-bag-toting commuters generally follow the rules of the road. Maybe they don't come to a complete stop at 4 way stops (frequently cars don't either!), but I rarely see them run red lights or disregard pedestrians (although there are relatively few of those here too). Large groups of roadies do sometimes run lights a bit (but so do cars), I suppose, but there aren't that many of those and they're pretty predictable altogether. Maybe it's different in more urban areas, but around here the biggest group of cyclists I'd complain about is when the local homeless decide to ride in the dark in dark clothes without lights and without a clear sense of self-preservation (the street one block over has a lower speed limit, less traffic, and a marked bike lane, maybe avoid the busy frontage road?).
Intetesting. I would call out the spandex-clad roadies as the worst of the worst. There's some hills with two lane roads by me. They like riding down hill in the street rather than the bike lane even though they are much slower than cars. I get stuck behind a line of cars following spandex man. I wish those guys were ticketed and had to go to traffic court.
Kids are mostly fine. Maybe ride too fast on sidewalks sometimes. Particularly recently with surprisingly fast electric bikes. But they generally don't suicidally shoot into traffic and they've avoided getting too close to me when walking. They slow down and carefully go around me and my family. Spandex man could learn a lot from middle schoolers how to navigate the world as though other people also occupy it.
Maybe this depends on your local demographics? Around here (historically known as a cycling-friendly locale), the average roadie is mid-20s to middle-aged, out for some exercise, and seems pretty interested in making it home safely. I've been one in the past, and the most dangerous stuff I've seen them do was (actual sanctioned and mock practice) races on open roads, where the biggest risks were clearly to each other, and the serious folks were pretty loudly insistent about actually yielding at yield signs where legally required and watching for cross traffic.
More options
Context Copy link
As an actual spandex-clad roadie, I don't get lines of cars behind me. They just pass, generally. Probably just NJ aggressiveness, but it works out fine. If they don't want to pass when there's plenty of room, that's their problem; if I could go faster I would and I'm not going to stop because they're timid. There's one hill with a 4-lane (2 each way) road where sometimes they'll get pissed instead of using the empty lane to their left; I'm not sure what about that road is special.
I'm on the West coast. The road I'm talking about is hilly and 2 lanes. It is not safe or practical to pass on it. Instead we get a line of cars following a bicyclist. Not that often really. Not a great burden on me. But that road has a proper bike lane. These people chose to obstruct traffic.
It's not safe or practical to pass a bicycle on it, particularly when the bicyclist is going slow on the uphill parts? Or drivers are just too timid to do it?
The problem occurs downhill. Every now and then someone goes downhill really fast and partially blocking the road, but not as fast as the cars.
There is a bike lane here. If they kept to the middle or right side of that there would be no problem. But some ride at least part in the road. I don't see this behavior on other bike lanes. This hill has some deranging affect on some people.
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
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link