Filtering, let alone splitting is actually illegal in a bunch of states. Which is awful because it forces bikes to stay in the blob of drivers who you’re basically invisible to.
E:Who the hell is downvoting you? People who think non-cars just have to follow the rules and we’ll be safe?
They’re getting downvoted because what they’re saying is like the vehicular equivalent of asking a victim of sexual assault what they were wearing.
Cyclists (and pedestrians) are vulnerable road users around cars. Of course they should exercise caution! No one’s saying they shouldn’t! But going around and telling people biking or walking they ought to be careful isn’t the solution to the actual issue; that being the dangers of cars.
We need public transit, safe cycling/pedestrian infrastructure, car-free areas, and streets that aren’t designed like highways going through our cities. No amount of vigilance by vulnerable road users can surmount the utter state of our car-centric infrastructure and a single moment of distraction from someone driving.
The equivalent would be downvoting a SA survivor for telling other women to be more aware and not to put themselves in a vulnerable position. The poster in question isnt pro-bikers-getting-murdered-by-cars, theyre living in the real world where we must take precautions at an individual level because society fails to protect us.
The equivalent would be downvoting a SA survivor for telling other women to be more aware and not to put themselves in a vulnerable position.
Yeah, that’s victim-blaming. I’m not saying caution is a bad thing, of course it isn’t. But what this kind of rhetoric does is frame things like the responsibility of the victims. That’s why the other commenter got downvoted.
Filtering, let alone splitting is actually illegal in a bunch of states. Which is awful because it forces bikes to stay in the blob of drivers who you’re basically invisible to.
E:Who the hell is downvoting you? People who think non-cars just have to follow the rules and we’ll be safe?
They’re getting downvoted because what they’re saying is like the vehicular equivalent of asking a victim of sexual assault what they were wearing.
Cyclists (and pedestrians) are vulnerable road users around cars. Of course they should exercise caution! No one’s saying they shouldn’t! But going around and telling people biking or walking they ought to be careful isn’t the solution to the actual issue; that being the dangers of cars.
We need public transit, safe cycling/pedestrian infrastructure, car-free areas, and streets that aren’t designed like highways going through our cities. No amount of vigilance by vulnerable road users can surmount the utter state of our car-centric infrastructure and a single moment of distraction from someone driving.
The equivalent would be downvoting a SA survivor for telling other women to be more aware and not to put themselves in a vulnerable position. The poster in question isnt pro-bikers-getting-murdered-by-cars, theyre living in the real world where we must take precautions at an individual level because society fails to protect us.
Yeah, that’s victim-blaming. I’m not saying caution is a bad thing, of course it isn’t. But what this kind of rhetoric does is frame things like the responsibility of the victims. That’s why the other commenter got downvoted.