What is it with women cyclists?

Porgy

dilemna wrote:

Porgy wrote:

dilemna wrote:

And many cyclists have head phones in their ears which is a big no no :shock: .
.

That's your opinion - would you like to back that up with some facts?

Yep I pass must be at least 10 riders every day who have head phones in. 8 out of 10 of them I hear clearly what they are listening to. If you can't hear something coming up behind you - such as me as they give a sign of fright as they didn't expect another cyclist to pass them, how on earth are you going to know if you are about to be run down? I see soooo many cyclists who don't bother to look behind when changing direction let alone when a vehicle is approaching fast and close from behind. Frequently looking behind will save your life and a final life saver immediately before you pass, turn or cross anything definitely will. I always here cars long before I see them. Engine note and tyre noise is a good indicator of their speed and proximity.

I can hear the traffic when I have headphones on and I am aware of the state of the traffic at all times.

I use the revolving facility that my head came with to look left and right and behind me.


25 years of cycling with headphones on - and not a single problem as a result apart from the occasional jerk on a bike shouting at me about wearing headphones.

Porgy

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Come on, the assertion that more women are being killed this may due to misogyny of HGV drivers is utterly ridiculous. You are essentially saying that these events are murder.

manslaughter probably.

anyway - i'm not arguing - it was a REMARK

and a throw away one at that

No, saying its because of misogyny means that HGV drivers are targeting come cyclists because they are women. Intent - murder.

It was a stupid remark and you should withdraw it.

i can't

i won't


what you gonna do about it?

dilemna

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Come on, the assertion that more women are being killed this may due to misogyny of HGV drivers is utterly ridiculous. You are essentially saying that these events are murder.

manslaughter probably.

anyway - i'm not arguing - it was a REMARK

and a throw away one at that

No, saying its because of misogyny means that HGV drivers are targeting come cyclists because they are women. Intent - murder.

It was a stupid remark and you should withdraw it.

+1

Porgy

dilemna wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Come on, the assertion that more women are being killed this way due to misogyny of HGV drivers is utterly ridiculous. You are essentially saying that these events are murder.

+1.

we've already established you're an idiot - i wouldn;t want you backing me up in an argument - i'd have to change sides. :P

Sewinman

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Come on, the assertion that more women are being killed this may due to misogyny of HGV drivers is utterly ridiculous. You are essentially saying that these events are murder.

manslaughter probably.

anyway - i'm not arguing - it was a REMARK

and a throw away one at that

No, saying its because of misogyny means that HGV drivers are targeting come cyclists because they are women. Intent - murder.

It was a stupid remark and you should withdraw it.

i can't

i won't


what you gonna do about it?

Absolutely nothing. :roll:

Porgy

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Come on, the assertion that more women are being killed this may due to misogyny of HGV drivers is utterly ridiculous. You are essentially saying that these events are murder.

manslaughter probably.

anyway - i'm not arguing - it was a REMARK

and a throw away one at that

No, saying its because of misogyny means that HGV drivers are targeting come cyclists because they are women. Intent - murder.

It was a stupid remark and you should withdraw it.

i can't

i won't


what you gonna do about it?

Absolutely nothing. :roll:

sanctimonious git - go preach to someone else. :roll:

dilemna

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Come on, the assertion that more women are being killed this may due to misogyny of HGV drivers is utterly ridiculous. You are essentially saying that these events are murder.

manslaughter probably.

anyway - i'm not arguing - it was a REMARK

and a throw away one at that

No, saying its because of misogyny means that HGV drivers are targeting come cyclists because they are women. Intent - murder.

It was a stupid remark and you should withdraw it.

i can't

i won't


what you gonna do about it?

Absolutely nothing. :roll:

sanctimonious git - go preach to someone else. :roll:

What an arrogant and unpleasant so and so. Just the sort of image those critical of cycling and cyclists love to see and quote.

Porgy

dilemna wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Come on, the assertion that more women are being killed this may due to misogyny of HGV drivers is utterly ridiculous. You are essentially saying that these events are murder.

manslaughter probably.

anyway - i'm not arguing - it was a REMARK

and a throw away one at that

No, saying its because of misogyny means that HGV drivers are targeting come cyclists because they are women. Intent - murder.

It was a stupid remark and you should withdraw it.

i can't

i won't


what you gonna do about it?

Absolutely nothing. :roll:

sanctimonious git - go preach to someone else. :roll:

What an arrogant and unpleasant so and so. Just the sort of image those critical of cycling and cyclists love to see and quote.

actually you are the very picture of smugness and idiocy i am confronted with every day


a little spat on a bulletin board and you try to tell me i'm an unft cyclist!

Well fu.ck you and the bike you rode in on.

DonDaddyD

Wow, this thread got hostile quick. I think Porgy is the new me! LOL!

Anyway.

Headphones.
I noticed that I drive better in my car with the windows wound down. Why? Because I can hear traffic, oncoming cars when I'm emerging from a side road that sort of thing. I will say that I cannot hear a cyclist over the engine in my car.

I tried cycling with headphones, near impossible, for me. However, as I've been wearing glasses since I was about 8/9yrs old I've become really reliant on my ears. I had limited periphery vision due to the glasses so my ears compensated. I very much ride my bike with both my ears and eyes. But that's just me.

The mysogyny statement
As joke cuts very close but could been seen as funny.

As a serious point it does imply manslaughter and that is wrong. The post was ill-thought-out and that is coming from me.

But I like Porgy and he has contributed positively elsewhere (its not like he is a troll) I won't string him up and hang him for posting it, I'll simply disagree. I will say though, that there is more to gain from discussing and considering what others have written, Porgy - if you truly believe what you posted - but its your choice.

benno68

Come on people, no need for all this - kiss and make up, you know you want to :?

Porgy

i'll make up but i won't kiss.


Anyway the backgroudn to this is I've been taking upt he case of female cyclists being wiped out by lorries on another bulletin board. the consensus view there was that it's all the cyclists' fault, that i do not accept.

But on that bulletin were, unbeknownst to me, a few HGV drivers who took the view that theses cyclists deserved to die, and one advocated actually running them over.

And I took on board my wife's veiws that misogyny is far more widespread than society geenrally accepts - and she's had incidents ont he road where the offending driver has actually referenced her gender in hurling abusing at her.

So put those together. I think there's a sizeable number - it may be small - but it significant - of drivers of all types of vehicles who act on their prejudices. It doesn't have to be deliberate murder, ther'es any number of things they can do that will occasionally result in death, but usually just frightens the cyclist.

with lack of action from the CPS / courts / politicans it's hard to know what's really going on.

I would not discount mysogyny as a factor.

Don't understand why some people are so dead against this idea.

DonDaddyD

Porgy wrote:

i'll make up but i won't kiss.


Anyway the backgroudn to this is I've been taking upt he case of female cyclists being wiped out by lorries on another bulletin board. the consensus view there was that it's all the cyclists' fault, that i do not accept.

But on that bulletin were, unbeknownst to me, a few HGV drivers who took the view that theses cyclists deserved to die, and one advocated actually running them over.

The thoughts of one should never be applied to the many.

Its like claiming all cyclists RLJ because a motorist saw one cyclist RLJ.

And I took on board my wife's veiws that misogyny is far more widespread than society geenrally accepts - and she's had incidents ont he road where the offending driver has actually referenced her gender in hurling abusing at her.

Again its a generalisation. While I sympathise with your with, she hasn't encounter all HGV drivers or a representative proportion of HGV drivers to make such a blanket statement.

The ones she has met are tossers granted. But that doesn't mean they all are.

Come on, they may hate us, and paint us with the same brush. It doesn't mean we have to succumb to their same logic.

So put those together. I think there's a sizeable number - it may be small - but it significant - of drivers of all types of vehicles who act on their prejudices. It doesn't have to be deliberate murder, ther'es any number of things they can do that will occasionally result in death, but usually just frightens the cyclist.

with lack of action from the CPS / courts / politicans it's hard to know what's really going on.

I would not discount mysogyny as a factor.

Don't understand why some people are so dead against this idea.

Because what you are implying is that the majority i.e many HGV drivers, but also motorists in general hate women to the point that they are willing to commit manslaughter and conciously make the decision to kill.

Ask yourself this, despite being a cyclist do I suddenly hate cyclists and women to the point of wanting to kill if I was also a HGV driver and behind the wheel of one?

Are these drivers would be killers because they are HGV drivers or is it by chance that the HGV profession has a nack of hiring murderers?

Porgy

DonDaddyD wrote:

Porgy wrote:

The thoughts of one should never be applied to the many.

Its like claiming all cyclists RLJ because a motorist saw one cyclist RLJ.

For evidence yes - I know that - but I was just asking the question effectively - didn;t realise it was such a taboo.

We can only ask questions based on what we think might be the case from our own personal experience.

Then we can gather evidence for proof or otherwise - I wasn;t trying to do that.

Because what you are implying is that the majority i.e many HGV drivers, but also motorists in general hate women to the point that they are willing to commit manslaughter and conciously make the decision to kill.

well i tried not to - and i don;t think i did. If I did then I haven't successfully conveyed what it was I intended to. Maybe I'm too tired.

Anyway - I won;t raise this again as long as no-one comes on to have another pop at me.

DonDaddyD wrote:

Are these drivers would be killers because they are HGV drivers or is it by chance that the HGV profession has a nack of hiring murderers?

No - just that they're men, many men are misogynist (not most please note), and some of those drive HGVs.

Anyway - that's just me trying to explain what i meant.

Would somebody be able to delete all my posts going back to when i started posting this morning as I have obviously upset some people?

and i would hate to upset people.

always_tyred

Does calling someone a "silly bint" count as misogyny?

If so, does calling someone a c0ck count as misandry.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

jedster

Don't understand why some people are so dead against this idea.

Because, however critical we are of the care and attention paid by some HGV drivers in some of these instances (e.g. the guy nr Kings X who was parked alongside a cyclist for 4 minutes before the light changed and apeared to be reading his clipboard as he ran over her) we don't remotely think that any of them INTENDED to kill another person. An there would have to be INTENT for misogeny to be involved.

I don't understand why you don't understand this!

J

Porgy

jedster wrote:

Don't understand why some people are so dead against this idea.

Because, however critical we are of the care and attention paid by some HGV drivers in some of these instances (e.g. the guy nr Kings X who was parked alongside a cyclist for 4 minutes before the light changed and apeared to be reading his clipboard as he ran over her) we don't remotely think that any of them INTENDED to kill another person. An there would have to be INTENT for misogeny to be involved.

I don't understand why you don't understand this!

J

and i don;t understand why you don't read all i worte instead of the bits you wish to in order to become upset and then complain.

Everyday I have drivers risk my life deliberately becasue they ahte cyclists. This website is full of such accounts. I'm sure they don't mean to kill, but occasionally they do.

Luckily for me the most anyone has succeeded in doing is wrecking my bike and putting me in hospital.



everyone seems intent on asking what it is that women cyclists do differently wrt lorries. Why isn;t it equally valid to consider that there might be somehting different that some lorries do around women cyclists?

Porgy

Always Tyred wrote:

Does calling someone a "silly bint" count as misogyny?

If so, does calling someone a c0ck count as misandry.

Yadda, yadda, yadda.

and you are a silly bunt

c0ck off :P

DonDaddyD

Porgy wrote:

DondaddyD wrote:

The thoughts of one should never be applied to the many.

Its like claiming all cyclists RLJ because a motorist saw one cyclist RLJ.

For evidence yes - I know that - but I was just asking the question effectively - didn;t realise it was such a taboo.

We can only ask questions based on what we think might be the case from our own personal experience.

Then we can gather evidence for proof or otherwise - I wasn;t trying to do that.

We identify through generalisations, familiarity and past experiences. If I posted a picture of me, many would have an idea of what they would expect me to be like. As many have commented, I'm nothing like they expect.

I personally believe that we should always be midnful of giving people the benefit of the doubt and not assume or marginalise them as people based on experiences unrelated to that specific individual, lest we ourselves become prejudice.

Yes my personal experience may be that I'm more likely to be pulled over by the police, but not all police officers are c0cks or racists. For example.

well i tried not to - and i don;t think i did. If I did then I haven't successfully conveyed what it was I intended to. Maybe I'm too tired.

Anyway - I won;t raise this again as long as no-one comes on to have another pop at me.

Fair enough, and don't get me wrong I see your point. Msyogyny is prevalent within society. We assume women, particularly 'school run Mums' are bad drives, some claim that women have less spatial awareness than men and many expect women to be slower cyclist than male cyclist.

Who is to say that their isn't an air of mysogyny in the cases where women have been hit by vehicles, that the motorist took the attitude that it is/was a women and therefore drove in an aggressive many (to get infront) and brutally took their lives. But equally there are prejudices applied to motorists such as the assumption that motorists are mysogynists or that they hate cyclist and it could easily have been the fault of the cyclist acting on those prejudices.

We simply don't know and its wrong to assume. The more measured stance is to say impartial until the facts because we don't know and there are too many variables to account for. Example: I nearly got knocked over, but I was in a rush and though it would have been the motorists fault, my actions because I was rushing would have been the cause.

That's why the generalisation was wrong in the way that you said it but not in the way that you thought it. IMO of course.

But I'll drop the matter.

snailracer

A thread somewhere claimed that women cyclists are given more room by overtaking vehicles. Perhaps lorries allow more room while overtaking them, which unfortunately tempts the women to squeeze into the wider gap left between lorry and kerb at the next set of lights.

Sewinman

Dear oh dear. :roll:

As I understand it, these incidents largely occur when a lorry driver does not see the cyclist who is to their left, on the inside at a junction. The lorry driver then turns left and hits the cyclist.

To argue that misogyny is involved implies that in fact the lorry driver DID see the cyclist, noted she was a women, and then deliberately turned in order to knock her over and harm her. In some cases this would then result in death.

In my view that is an utterly ridiculous assertion.

Porgy

Sewinman wrote:

Dear oh dear. :roll:

As I understand it, these incidents largely occur when a lorry driver does not see the cyclist who is to their left, on the inside at a junction. The lorry driver then turns left and hits the cyclist.

To argue that misogyny is involved implies that in fact the lorry driver DID see the cyclist, noted she was a women, and then deliberately turned in order to knock her over and harm her. In some cases this would then result in death.

In my view that is an utterly ridiculous assertion.

Dear oh dear - keep misunderstanding what i tried to say and then come back to start the argument again.

Argumentative, troublemaking, sanctimonious, smug tw@t is what you are.

and thick too by the looks of it.

I'm going on holiday now and won't be back for a while.

Sewinman

Porgy wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

Dear oh dear. :roll:

As I understand it, these incidents largely occur when a lorry driver does not see the cyclist who is to their left, on the inside at a junction. The lorry driver then turns left and hits the cyclist.

To argue that misogyny is involved implies that in fact the lorry driver DID see the cyclist, noted she was a women, and then deliberately turned in order to knock her over and harm her. In some cases this would then result in death.

In my view that is an utterly ridiculous assertion.

Dear oh dear - keep misunderstanding what i tried to say and then come back to start the argument again.

Argumentative, troublemaking, sanctimonious, smug tw@t is what you are.

and thick too by the looks of it.

I'm going on holiday now and won't be back for a while.

Classic - 'play the man, not the ball'.

DonDaddyD

Sewinman wrote:

Dear oh dear. :roll:

As I understand it, these incidents largely occur when a lorry driver does not see the cyclist who is to their left, on the inside at a junction. The lorry driver then turns left and hits the cyclist.

To argue that misogyny is involved implies that in fact the lorry driver DID see the cyclist, noted she was a women, and then deliberately turned in order to knock her over and harm her. In some cases this would then result in death.

In my view that is an utterly ridiculous assertion.

I wouldn't dismiss it as an utterly ridiculous assertion. There was a motorist that had an altercation with a cyclist and admitted to deliberately bumping him. Then there was the cyclist who was stabbed in his chest in Colliers Wood.

So I wouldn't dismiss it as utterly ridiculous. What I would like to think is that it is unlikley.

Sewinman

@DDD - This thread is about why women, in general, tend to be the victim of such incidents. Its not about individual cases such as those you mention (not involving HGV drivers, left hooking, or women). Porgy wrote that the misogyny of HGV drivers in general could be a reason. As i said, in my view, that is a ridiculous assertion.

Anyway!?

DonDaddyD

Sewinman wrote:

@DDD - This thread is about why women, in general, tend to be the victim of such incidents. Its not about individual cases such as those you mention (not involving HGV drivers, left hooking, or women). Porgy wrote that the misogyny of HGV drivers in general could be a reason. As i said, in my view, that is a ridiculous assertion.

Anyway!?

I find it hard to disagree with you.

Here's a question, could it be the overarching attitude towards women that they are the weaker sex, therefore slower - which has its roots in msogyny that inadvertently led to the deaths of so many women.

Truthfully I think its a combination of attitudes and general perception of women as well as the female tendency to stick left.

Sewinman

I think its a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, rather than the mind set of the driver. The driver, as I understand it, does not see the cyclist, so I don't understand how his prejudices or otherwise could have any bearing.

Why women in London seem to find themselves in that position more than men is another discussion entirely.

roger_merriman

DonDaddyD wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

@DDD - This thread is about why women, in general, tend to be the victim of such incidents. Its not about individual cases such as those you mention (not involving HGV drivers, left hooking, or women). Porgy wrote that the misogyny of HGV drivers in general could be a reason. As i said, in my view, that is a ridiculous assertion.

Anyway!?

I find it hard to disagree with you.

Here's a question, could it be the overarching attitude towards women that they are the weaker sex, therefore slower - which has its roots in msogyny that inadvertently led to the deaths of so many women.

Truthfully I think its a combination of attitudes and general perception of women as well as the female tendency to stick left.

in all honesty 6? dead ladies, while very sad, is in terms of stats noise even the total 100 something is close to noise and simply very hard to get a trend on it.

it's friday folks, it's hot it's summer go have fun! worry not about cycling as it's really not a danger.

jedster

Look, I find it seriously unlikely that women are dying in these incidents because of deliberate or even subconscious acts of violence by male drivers.

Which group is the most frequent victim of violence in our society?

Young men.

That genuinely IS a fact.

I'm not saying that there are not some men who focus violence on women but in general men are more likely to be violent towards men.

J

DonDaddyD

Sewinman wrote:

I think its a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, rather than the mind set of the driver. The driver, as I understand it, does not see the cyclist, so I don't understand how his prejudices or otherwise could have any bearing.

Why women in London seem to find themselves in that position more than men is another discussion entirely.

I'm skeptical. Personally I think many motorists, HGV or otherwise, hide behind the I did not see them card. Not all of them but its possible that some are lying.

DonDaddyD

OK. To clear things up.

Having this conversation does not bother me. I'm not aggitated, vexed, frustrated or angry. If it distresses anyone then please don't take offense at my willingness to discuss this. It is interesting to me.

I don't think that HGV drivers are subconciously or conciously female hating motorists who are actively committing man slaughter/murder.