Two-wheeled fascism: the trouble with London's cyclists
-
By Michael Hodges
Updated: Thu Jul 30 2009 -
Time Out columnist Michael Hodges goes on the offensive against dangerous London cyclists. Have your say on the issues and read other responses and comments
What you said | Have your say
A very aggrieved cyclist turned up on BBC Radio 4 last week. He was upset about London cyclist deaths, in particular the number of cyclists killed by lorries that turn left at junctions and fail to see riders who are often trapped between the vehicles and safety railings against which, with woeful irony, they are crushed.
This is an extremely dangerous situation that should be stopped but, as well as being outraged by it, the man was clearly dangerous himself. In a tremulous, public-school voice on the edge, it seemed, of tears, he openly admitted that he ignored traffic signals: ‘It doesn't matter if the light is red or not, I’m just bothered about seeing a space in the traffic ahead and slipping in to it.’ Feature continuesAdvertisementThis neatly turned what was his and other cyclists’ problem into our problem. And by ‘our’ I mean the great majority of us who attempt to walk around the city every day and don’t want to be hit by cyclists ignoring red lights. The man could make his outrageous admission so easily because, in his and other cyclists’ world view, plebs who walk don’t matter. We are mere obstacles in the way of the divine right of an athletic, clean-living few to cycle wherever they want.
In the past, cyclists would at least be shame-faced enough about their aggression to lie: ‘Bikes are allowed on the pavement’; ‘we’re being forced on the path by the roadworks.’ Or they would blame us for being on the pavement in the first place: ‘The pavement doesn’t belong to pedestrians, it’s ours as well’ (well, yes it does, actually, and no it isn’t).
But now the London cycling community – privileged, white, self-absorbed and arrogant – can’t be bothered to make stuff up any more and is taking to the airwaves to encourage its members to break the law (and just to be clear, it is against the law to deliberately ride through a red light).
The arrogance of London’s rogue cyclists is as extreme as their appearance. Go to the website of the London Cycling Campaign (www.lcc.org.uk) and on the homepage you’ll find a picture of a grown man in a yellow anorak and tights riding his cycle across the pavement.
He’s coming up behind a lumpy male pedestrian in a baseball cap who has no way of knowing the cyclist is behind him because cyclists – around the time they started to dress in leotards and Waffen SS helmets – abandoned the traditional, and useful if you’re going to drive through a group of people, bell.
Lumpy men in baseball caps are ridiculous, laughable even, but not having thunderous thighs and a cagoule doesn’t justify physical assault. Yet. The worship of the (white) male human body, the disdain for the lower orders, the generally humourless attitude (seen any laughing cyclists recently?), we’ve been here before haven’t we? In fact we fought a war to stop it. Did London survive the attentions of the Luftwaffe only to be overrun by a new pack of two-wheeled fascists?
The original London fascists, Mosley’s blackshirts, survived on handouts from the aristocracy but modern pedestrian-hating cycling groups are allowed to register as a charities (the LCC is Registered Charity number 1115789). Worse, the government actually gives our money to the new fascists; funding for cycling has doubled in the last two years and there is now a Cycle to Work scheme to provide VAT-free bicycles. Why should pedestrians’ taxes pay to put more cyclists on our paths and support organisations committed to making our lives harder?
LCC has direct links with Sustrans, a group that is dedicated to turning country lanes into cycleways, forcing the ordinary hikers that traditionally use them out of the way. If successful, Sustrans’ s campaign will undo the radical work of the last century when mass trespasses won ordinary people access to the countryside. Quiet lanes and tracks where women, children and pensioners can dawdle along enjoying the flora and fauna would become noisy cycleways plagued by mountain bikes and bellowing male riders in neon body stockings.
In town and country then, the pedestrian is under assault from cyclists. Given the ferocity of the assault, letting tyres down and bending mudguards whenever the opportunity arises doesn’t seem an adequate response any more. So what are we going to do about the new fascists?- Add your comment to this feature
|
|
More ways to enjoy Time Out
-
Weekly London newsletter
The best of London in your inbox
-
Time Out Widgets
|
|
77 comments
and that wasn't sarcastic, i genuinely think that people who are criticising cyclists should have a go and see thinsg from the other side. i HAVE got the bus to work and i HAVE gone to work by car.
Tim Hubbard, it is really really frustrating when cars give you little/no room and then people are in the gutter wiating to cross over/on our cycle path (of which there are very few!!) I don't think it is good taht the person started shouting at you, but i always stop and tell people that it is dangerous to walk in the cycle lane (and yes some of them are on the pavement.. it is split up for both you and I) or put their feet on the road. The reason we don't get the bus is we are trying to travel cheaply, quickly and be envin. friendly!! As I said before, why on earth aren't people proud of our cycling community?? The VAST majority are nice, friendly people who are just going to work. It beats me why someone would get so angry about us. Why not try cycling tomorrow?? I had the most beautiful, relaxing cycle in this morning from Ealing to Uxbridge and there was no rage. Could you cycle to work too or are you too far out?
I almost got mowed down by an idiot cyclist coming up from behind me today. Scared the hell out of me! He screamed all sorts of insults at me. Next time this happens I'll make sure I'll buckle the cyclists wheels by booting him/her off their bike! They should also stay in the ruddy road as well and not on the pavement. If they say it's too dangerous on the road, take the flippin' bus!! Pavements are for pedestrians, not bikes...
Gary Scott - and all you other cyclists - why can't you read?
Hodges may be a tosspot but he is right, he did not say "Frankly those cyclists being crushed by lorries are usually asking for it" or anything like it.
Those words are not in his piece, they are in responses to his piece by other people.
"If Dr Susan Williams and the other lady who is praying that I get cancer actually read my article they'll see that I DID NOT say 'cyclists deserve to die' or dead cyclists were 'asking for it.' "
Oh, but you came pretty close:
You actually wrote:
"Frankly those cyclists being crushed by lorries are usually asking for it."
I repeat what another poster said- would you say this to the dead womens' families, face to face?
"Which is slightly different. Do they still want me to get cancer? And which kind? Eye? Lung? Liver?!"
Yep. All of those. Being pointlessly offensive is easy isn't it? Does it pay well?
People! People! Everybody gets trapped into defining road users as good and bad by the way they get around-feet, cars, bikes etc. It's really simple-there are responsible and courteous road users and irresponsible and rude road users on all kinds of transport. Lets all slow down and be patient.
As a committed cyclist I strongly dissprove of cyclists who go through red lights - as strongly as i dissaprove of people on foot who step into the road without looking.
If Dr Susan Williams and the other lady who is praying that I get cancer actually read my article they'll see that I DID NOT say 'cyclists deserve to die' or dead cyclists were 'asking for it.' I said cyclists being hit at traffic lights was a 'dangerous situation that should be stopped.' Which is slightly different. Do they still want me to get cancer? And which kind? Eye? Lung? Liver?
I got knocked off my bike by a truck last week and it drove off not even knowing what it had done. Sometimes the road layout is to blame. These roads are usually not fit for cyclists. The government promote cycling but are not providing enough to ensure cyclist safety. And Michael Hodges is a tit.
"For riders killed nearside by turning, blinded lorries isn't this actually true? "
Nope, because the women were killed by lorries overtaking and then turning left. The cyclists did nothing worng, they were killed by inattentive drivers who then try to mitigate their punishment by saying "She undertook". Witnesses proved this was a lie. Someone is killed in a criminal act and Mr Hodges says they deserved to die. This is beneath contempt.
Michael man, your article is great, its so over the top that we have got to laugh, you should be proud to know that it is generating quite some commentary on cycling websites. Can I suggest that you spend a day or two with a London cycle courier. Try to pick a day when its raining and the wind is blowing, smile through the adversity and remember that you are free and that you are alive. Michael a good friend of mine was going down the strand, a pedestrian stepped out without looking properly, swerving he lost control came off his bike and hit a metal bollard...he died in the ambulance. We aren't fascists Michael, we are just trying to earn a living or get to a place utilising perpetual motion where we can earn a living. We love pedestrians, we respect pedestrians, and the same goes for 99% of cars, taxis, you name it. Michael chill man we really aren't that bad
"Frankly those cyclists being crushed by lorries are usually asking for it." For riders killed nearside by turning, blinded lorries isn't this actually true? You wouldn't step out in front of one, why would you ride like this? Lack of imagination, lack of training or lack of awareness of how lorries move: how can riders be educated? Probably is Darwinian, isn't it?
"Frankly those cyclists being crushed by lorries are usually asking for it. Let's call it Darwinian Theory at work".
My dear friend Seb Lukowmski was killed by a lorry which failed to notice him. Seb was crushed to death by an inattentive driver. I don't think anyone "deserves" to die but is Time Out really saying that people who are just trying to get to work in the capital should be killed? What's Mr Hodges going to write next week, raped women deserve it, abducted children were asking for it?
What a truly horrible piece of work from a third-rate listings magazine, it's worrying that Mr Hodges may very well have a driving licence and be roaming London streets looking out for people who deserve to die.
"Frankly those cyclists being crushed by lorries are usually asking for it. Let's call it Darwinian Theory at work".
The three women killed by lorries in London this year deserve rather better than this. Would Mr Hodges tell the families of these women to their faces that their loved ones "deserved" to die?
This is pure hatred, factually inaccurate and gratuitously offensive. You will lose many readers over this nasty piece of work.
should one of the most famous magazines in london really be paying someone to write crap like this, so offensive as it is to a vast number of londoners, not to mention biased beyond credibility.