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 -
I dunno, pros seldom raced in helmets until ~2002, maybe a little earlier in cobbled classics, and I definitely think the sport was more aesthetic pre-helmet. Not saying it's not worth it, on net, but.
The UCI started requiring helmets during the Armstrong years (there was a year or so in which they were allowed to remove them on a terminal climb in a race). The aesthetics are maybe worse (Fignon's pony tail!), but there really have been (and continue to be, and I'm not going to look at rigorous stats right now) a number of fatal high-speed crashes in bike races that helmets may mitigate somewhat.
My understanding is that the occasionally-seen soft helmets of the 80s were less about mitigating concussion-type injuries and more about road rash on scalps. I'd like to think the science has gotten better there.
It was most probably the UCI requirement that did it. My recollection is there is (was?) a slight areo, cooling, and obvious weight, penalty. At least, excepting TT specific helmets on the areo front.
The science has developed quite a bit over the last decade, I think because the NFL poured money into helmet research to show they they were doing something about CTE. There's now coverage for a huge variety of helmet types, including most cycling disciplines. If you were ever unfortunate enough to actually need protection from a helmet, I assume anthing rated by any reputable agency would be better than nothing. The Virginia Tech lab seems to publish the most about the methodology and have an extremely extensive testing protocol though.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link