Yeah, how we present it does matter: in particular, characterizing walkability as some sort of deprivation instead of what it is -- a straight-up improvement over car-dependent "modern convenience" -- is ass-backwards. If your city is designed right (or in my case, if the part of it you live in is old enough that it mostly pre-dates the Suburban Experiment fuckery and has only been moderately damaged since), getting to places by bike is superior to doing so in a car: not just more fun and healthier, but literally faster too (because you don't have to struggle to find parking or wait in long lines of cars). For example, taking my daughter to school on my cargo bike is maybe a 10-minute round trip, but takes at least double the amount of time in a car because the car drop-off queue wraps around the building and out into the street.

What we need are more people conveying the proper perspective and tone, like this guy and this guy. When the right tries to spin that bullshit, they need to be ridiculed as the pathetic invalids they are. They're not being made to eat crickets; they're just too squeamish to try and are projecting that cowardice on the rest of us. They balk at the prospect of walking for 15 minutes in a city because they're so weak and flabby they'd fucking collapse and die within 5 and they know it. They think cars are "freedom" because they're so used to the yoke of licensing/insurance/maintenance/being limited to roads and parking lots/etc. around their neck that they don't even feel it anymore and don't understand what true freedom -- to ride anywhere, roads or not, for free -- really is. (As for the sterilization part, that's just a straight-up lie they made up from whole cloth, so the only proper response there is "fuck you; quit lying.")

To frame it even more in their terms: what they need to be made to understand is that cars are for whiny girly-men and obese losers with no self-discipline, and that real men ride bikes!