this post was submitted on 17 Mar 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

traingang

22750 readers
50 users here now

Post as many train pictures as possible.

All about urbanism and transportation, including freight transportation.

Home of train gang

:arm-L::train-shining::arm-R:

Talk about supply chain issues here!

List of cool books and videos about urbanism, transit, and other cool things

Titles must be informative. Please do not title your post "lmao" or use the tired "_____ challenge" format.

Archive links for reactionary sites, including the BBC.

LANDLORDS COWER IN FEAR OF MAOTRAIN

"that train pic is too powerful lmao" - u/Cadende

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I bike commute almost everyday, I'm tired of people in the office asking "where's my helmet" then followed by a snide comment that it is dangerous and I should protect my brain.

Here are my reasoning for not wearing helmet:

  1. I need my noise-cancelling headphone. The loud sound of cars is giving me more brain damage.

  2. I've been cycling since I was 4, and I've never got hit by a car. I know road rules and not an aggressive cyclist when commuting.

  3. I wear helmet when cycling for exercise, mountain-biking, when I could be distracted by either maintaining my rpm or cycling on difficult terrain. I don't cycle that fast when commuting.

  4. Helmet-checking is victim blaming. Cars are predominantly at fault in car-cyclist crash, it is almost always car who is not paying attention, texting, had eyes going elsewhere, dozing off, going off lanes. You cannot doze off when on a bike. Cyclist had everything to lose in a crash and tend to ride conservatively, regardless of what you believe. The only exception to this rule is gig economy delivery driver who are always in a rush, and it is always the fault of delivery company to impose such ridiculous time rule that endanger their workers.

  5. The cycling lane is for everyone. Wearing helmet creates an image that cycling on shared public road as method of transportation is inherently dangerous, and as a result, especially in North America you only see young adults cycling to commute. People go into debt to maintain their car, just because they perceive cycling as inherently dangerous. Having only fit young adult cycle also gives an excuse for your local municipality for not upgrading the public cycling infrastructure and make it safer.

  6. Finally, it's not your business. It is considered rude to tell people they shouldn't smoke, drink alcohol, eat meat, eat ultraprocessed food. Everyone knows they are bad for you, but people still do it. Driving cars kill the planet, it is bad for every living being, but people don't get scolded everyday for car-commuting. Sure, after everything I mentioned, it is still safer to wear helmet, but it is rude to scold me on my bad habit.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] micnd90@hexbear.net 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (6 children)

I appreciate the good-faith argument you and many other people brought up. But I think it is a matter of cultural perspective. Let me try to explain the other way around. In North America, and other English speaking countries (UK, Australia, New Zealand), cycling is first and foremost a sport. With "sports" you inherently internalize two things: (1) inherent risk of physical injury and (2) wearing sports gizmos to mitigate the risk of physical injury. Furthermore, the cost of injury is fully on the person doing the sports as personal responsibility (broke your leg playing soccer? well, noone forced you to do soccer).

Where I come from (Copenhagen, Denmark), cycling is a utilitarian mode of transport. This is how I grew up culturally. You see not only young adults, but people of all ages, from literal 6 years old toddler to grannies cycling, predominantly without helmet. It is a simple efficient, and unglamorous way to get from point A to point B. Yes, of course, even in cities with safe cycling infrastructure like Copenhagen, or Netherlands everyone will be better off cycling with helmet. But this is putting the emphasis the wrong way. Cycling, and bike lanes in general should be accessible to everyone (including mobility assist vehicles), and as a collective we have to demand more inclusive, safer cycling infrastructure so toddlers and the elderly can feel safe cycling in a bike lane.

I feel agitated when I, coming from a city where cycling is inclusive and accessible for all, am told off by people who never lived extensively outside North America that I have to wear all kinds of gizmos, helmets, reflector vests, multiple reflectors, side mirrors, side mirrors glasses, helmets with side mirrors and lamps otherwise I am not a responsible person. I'm not wrong, it is North American urban planning that is wrong. I'm an experienced and confident cyclist, I never been in any cycling accident and I've spent almost a good 5-10% of my life on bicycle, I've been commuting since I was a kid, cycling by myself to grade school. I follow road rules and feel like I'm comfortable with the inherent risk of eating shit on my own. If I got hit by a car, most likely it is the drivers fault, and maybe from the accident the city will develop a safer infrastructure. My co-workers always say that they are for cycling infrastructure, but it is not only yay or nay, it is how bad they want it. Maybe being argumentative about not wearing helmet, and explaining that it is North American urban planning that is wrong, and there is a better way for the city and kids who grew up in the city will put demanding safe cycling infrastructure up higher on my co-worker priority list.

[–] CommunistCuddlefish@hexbear.net 1 points 2 weeks ago (5 children)

That's an interesting and different perspective I'm not familiar with. But don't people still fall and get hurt? You haven't, good for you. You're just one person.

And if you're in a dangerous situation (biking in North American cities), being "right" simply isn't going to protect you in a bad situation. There is no cosmic justice that will protect you from a cracked skull.

[–] micnd90@hexbear.net 0 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (4 children)

Yes, people fall and eat shit, even with robust cycling infrastructure. Drunk cycling is a thing in Denmark, and beyond 12am a lot of people cycles in zigzags going home from bars. There are no rule against drunk cycling because it is way safer than drunk driving, and public sector workers are annoyed at drunks who take public transport. Every other week or so drunks will fall off into the canals etc., especially on this bridge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inderhavnsbroen that was built wrong, off the most famous bar street/harbor in Copenhagen, Nyhavn. The bridge was the biggest public infrastructure scandal in Denmark (they miscalculated the length, so the bridge doesn't connect and they have to add zigzags, which caused drunk people to crash and sometimes fell off bikes). These accidents are all taken with humor by most people, and Copenhagen is still amongst the safest city for cyclist.

Here's the thing, for commuting and transport most people cycle slowly. In Denmark the speed of traffic for cyclist is usually not more than 10 mph (because you have to accommodate the elderly, kids, people in cargo bikes delivering packages, parents carrying their kids in cargo bikes, etc.) and it is pretty hard to get seriously hurt cycling at 10 mph even if you crash into utility pole head on. Even amongst bike commuters in NA, a lot of people want to cycle fast "to get workout" done in the morning then take a shower at work - this is by far the least safe way of commuting because you are exerting at near physical limit and likely not paying attention to traffic.

It is clear to me that the true menace is not other cyclist or stationary objects, but cars, more importantly cars that are not used to cyclists. There are safety in numbers, a group of cyclists is more visible than individual cyclist zipping in and out parked cars on side of a street. The only way to get more people to cycle is to provide safe cycling infrastructure, and I'm only one person, so in my own way, to get my co-workers to advocate or at least strongly think about these things is to show up at work not wearing helmet and being belligerent.

[–] CommunistCuddlefish@hexbear.net 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

10 mph! How can you stand to ride so slowly?

I like biking. It's just a pleasant physical activity. I cannot fathom being ok moving so slowly though. When I've been in a rare 10mph zone it feels just miserable trying to go so slow and it's so incredibly easy to exceed that speed without even trying.

[–] micnd90@hexbear.net 0 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Yes, that's the thing. People who cycle simply for transport don't sweat at all and don't bother doing any physical exertions. This is why the most common commuter bikes in Denmark are the 3 speed internal gear hub upright bike with coaster brakes. You chat and joke casually with your friends on a bike lane riding side by side just like how you would chat on a car. Everyone is doing the same thing and traveling at same slow speed. In comparison, all cyclists in NA are tryhards.

This is also why I'm quite confident and safe cyclist in NA. I know road rules, right of way, I take a whole lane when necessary (so cars behind me have no choice but to wait until the road is wider to pass me), I don't hide and cycle in sidewalks (which is proven to be more dangerous than being on the road), but I also don't zip across traffic and be unpredictable. The noise cancelling headphones also helps so I don't have to hear the occasional verbal insults hurled at me by angry carbrained Yankee.

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 1 points 2 weeks ago

If I rode 10mph my commute would be over two hours each way

[–] CommunistCuddlefish@hexbear.net 1 points 2 weeks ago

Ok well honestly you've completely lost me now because I can't get over biking without physical exertion. I'm going to just disengage now. Happy cycling and stay safe!

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)