Support road.cc

Like this site? Help us to make it better.

Back to news
news

Councillor resigns over anti-cyclist 'w*nking off the Dutch' tweet; Jeremy Vine tours Kensington High Street congestion; Coroner records air pollution cause of death; Sir Chris Hoy: Cyclists and drivers should be 'less tribal' + more on the live blog

It's Wednesday and Dan Alexander is here to take you through the middle of the week on the live blog...
Wed, Dec 16, 2020 09:06
107

SUMMARY

No Live Blog item found.

Councillor resigns over anti-cyclist 'w*nking off the Dutch' tweet; Jeremy Vine tours Kensington High Street congestion; Coroner records air pollution cause of death; Sir Chris Hoy: Cyclists and drivers should be 'less tribal' + more on the live blogcouncillor liam walker - via liam-walker website
16 December 2020, 16:59
Councillor resigns over anti-cyclist 'w*nking off the Dutch' tweet

Councillor Liam Walker found himself in hot water after replying to a tweet which suggested cyclists should "f*ck off over" to the Netherlands and that cyclists are "constantly w*nking off the Dutch." The councillor apologised after criticism from cycling groups and politicians, however a panel concluded he breached Oxfordshire County Council's code of conduct. He announced his resignation this afternoon on Twitter.

In a statement he said: "I have apologised to those who were genuinely offended by the tweet. It is regrettable that the process has taken up valuable staff time and that taxpayers' money has been used to investigate; at times, aspects of the response have felt disproportionate."

Councillor Walker tweet
16 December 2020, 16:20
Tadej Pogačar explains mixed emotions about beating Primož Roglič in Tour de France
Tadej Pogacar beats Primoz Roglic to the line in Stage 15 of 2020 Tour de France (picture credit Cor Vos/SWpix.com)

Tadej Pogačar spoke to L'Équipe this week and explained his mixed emotions about beating Primož Roglič in such a brutal fashion on the final TT stage of the Tour de France. Pogačar claimed the Yellow Jersey from his compatriot on Stage 20 with a devastating performance in the individual time trial stage to La Planche des Belles Filles. "At the time, I didn’t really know what to feel. Everything was tangled up in my chest, I had conflicting emotions," he said.

"I had been a Roglič fan since his first results. Between the ages of 15 and 20, I was shouting in front of my television for him to win, and now I was the one who had beaten him, who had denied him from achieving what he had been dreaming of for years… It was really strange. I kept telling myself: 'That’s racing, that’s sport, it’s normal that I want to win.'

"A few minutes after he finished, I was in the television tent and he came to find me and give me a hug. I’ll never forget that moment. It’s as though he was giving me permission to enjoy it and telling me it wasn’t my fault."

16 December 2020, 15:49
16 December 2020, 13:30
Landmark case as coroner says air pollution contributed to death of nine-year-old girl

In a landmark case, exposure to air pollution has been recorded as the medical cause of death of nine-year-old Ella Kissi-Debrah. It is the first time exposure to air pollution has been recorded as the medical cause of death in the UK. A coroner ruled that dangerous levels of air pollution "made a material contribution" to the child's death in 2013.

At the end of the two-week inquest at Southwark Coroner's Court, assistant coroner Philip Barlow stated: "I will conclude that Ella died of asthma, contributed to by exposure to excessive air pollution." The recorded medical cause of death was acute respiratory failure, severe asthma and air pollution exposure.

Ella and her family lived 25 metres from the South Circular Road in Lewisham, south east London. Professor Sir Stephen Holgate told the inquest that Ella's condition, combined with the air pollution she experienced on a daily basis had put her at "exquisite" risk. He added that he was "almost certain" her asthma would have been "substantially less severe" if the level of pollution in the area had been within lawful EU limits.

16 December 2020, 14:10
Belgian group buys majority stake in Canyon
canyon factory boxes - via canyon

Groupe Bruxelles Lambert (GBL) has acquired a majority stake in Canyon Bicycles.  Founder Roman Arnold will retain a 40% stake in the company and reinvest a substantial amount of the proceeds from the sale. He will also stay on as the chairperson.

The investment comes after Arnold's decison to step down as CEO following a record year which saw €400 million of sales. GBL already controls a majority stake in Adidas and their investment signals the end of TSG Consumer Partners relationship with Canyon.

16 December 2020, 13:06
16 December 2020, 12:15
Egan Bernal's younger brother already attracting interest from Gianni Savio
Egan Bernal and Dave Brailsford (via ITV Cycling on Twitter)

Egan Bernal's 15-year-old brother, Ronald, is on the radar of Androni Giocattoli-Sidermec manager Gianni Savio, who is interested in signing him once he turns 18. Savio confirmed to Cyclingnews that he would be happy to help Ronald develop — similar to how he aided Egan's trajectory up until 2018 when the 2019 Tour de France winner moved to Team Sky.

Savio said: "I spoke to Vladimir Chiuminatto, who runs the Bernal fan club in Colombia and we spoke about Ronald. They say he has some of the talent of his brother and I’d be happy to help him just as I did with Egan but not until he’s 18.

"Everyone knows how I helped Egan develop and I’d be happy to do the same with Ronald but it’s far too early to think he’d automatically follow in Egan’s footsteps. Egan rightly wants to protect his younger brother and so do I, so let’s give him time to develop."

Egan is currently facing months of rehabilitation to recover from the spinal problem that hindered him in 2020.

16 December 2020, 11:40
A flooded bike lane isn't going to stop them
16 December 2020, 11:25
Brought By Bike: a new directory of companies and tradespeople who deliver by bike

Brought By Bike is a searchable directory of companies and tradespeople who deliver by bike. It was created to make it simple for anyone across the UK to find plumbers, bakers, electricians and anything else you can think of that will travel or can be delivered by more sustainable means. So far they have 180 listings (and the list appears to be growing as we type), including 19 bakeries, 11 gardeners, 10 breweries and 10 plumbers.

16 December 2020, 10:52
Hill & Ellis release new limited edition saddle and handlebar bag
Hill & Ellis saddle/handlebar bag

This stylish Hill & Ellis bag is designed to be 'perfect for the day ride, or a short commute' and can be attached to your saddle or handlebars. Handcrafted from leather in the UK, the bag is made from materials sourced as close to Hill & Ellis's London workshop as possible. It is available in seven colourways and costs £80.

16 December 2020, 09:30
Pork 'N Pine: Cycling Santa delivers Christmas trees and pork sandwiches

This is a unique business idea I can can get behind. Pork 'N Pine in Baltimore delivers Christmas trees and pork sandwiches via bike couriers dressed as Santa Claus... A tree delivered on a bike would be impressive enough but to get a pulled pork sandwich too... Someone in the UK needs to take notes. The service is so popular it has completely sold out for 2020.

16 December 2020, 10:19
Sir Chris Hoy: Cyclists and drivers should be 'less tribal'
Sir Chris Hoy podium London 2012 (copyright britishcycling.org.uk)

Speaking to The Herald, six-time Olympic gold medallist called on cyclists and drivers to be "less tribal." Hoy was speaking about how the UK can follow countries like The Netherlands and Germany in achieving a culture of active travel. He said: "My dream is, that in 20 years time we can look back and see the same thing that happened in Holland or Denmark or Germany where you aren't a cyclist, you are just someone getting around.

"People need to be less tribal about it. People see themselves as cyclists or drivers when in my opinion we are just people trying to get around. I think because the boom in cycling has come off sport, like the Tour de France, people buy all the gear but in other countries they don't cycle in lycra, a lot of people don't wear helmets."

Hoy believes the biggest barrier to people wanting to cycle to work or school is safety and that normalising cycling is crucial in encouraging more people to travel by bike.

"Holland wasn't always a cycling country, the big push came in the 1970s," he explained. "I do think it is the answer and it is achievable but it won't happen overnight and it won't be an easy process. Any change comes up against resistance. 

"If you are absolutely determined never to ride a bike and all you want to do is drive a car then fair enough but if there are more people on bikes then there are less cars and drivers are going to benefit too. The biggest barrier to people cycling to work or school is safety. If there is a collision between a cyclist and a car, it's the cyclist who is going to come off worst.

"We are all someone's husband, wife, son or daughter, we should be looking out for one another. You don't see the cyclist stopping at the red light, you only remember the ones that jump the lights in the same way that you only remember the white van that was aggressive."

16 December 2020, 08:46
Jeremy Vine takes you on a tour of Kensington High Street now the bike lane has been replaced with...congestion

One of the key reasons for the Kensington High Street cycle lane being removed was that it was causing congestion...This video, shared by Jeremy Vine, shows what it is like to cycle down the High Street now the wands have been removed for a few weeks.

The broadcaster followed up the video by saying: "Someone will die on that street. But many will simply not brave it on a bicycle. They'll use cars, and the congestion will get worse. The irony is that the council acted after being attacked in the Daily Mail by Nigel Havers, who said the cycle lane had ruined his Sunday walk."

However, the message that some took from this is not how little change removing the bike lane has made to congestion but rather that the cyclist in the video is riding dangerously...

Dan Alexander

Dan is the road.cc news editor and joined in 2020 having previously written about nearly every other sport under the sun for the Express, and the weird and wonderful world of non-league football for The Non-League Paper. Dan has been at road.cc for four years and mainly writes news and tech articles as well as the occasional feature. He has hopefully kept you entertained on the live blog too.

Never fast enough to take things on the bike too seriously, when he's not working you'll find him exploring the south of England by two wheels at a leisurely weekend pace, or enjoying his favourite Scottish roads when visiting family. Sometimes he'll even load up the bags and ride up the whole way, he's a bit strange like that.

Add new comment

107 comments

Avatar
Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
1 like

I'm sorry, and anyone who's been bored by my comments on here will know I am massively pro-cyclist, pro-cycle lanes and anti-motor vehicles, but in my opinion both Vine and his pilot cyclist are riding like absolute spanners there. Reacting to idiots making a road more dangerous by riding more dangerously is not a solution, and the absence of a cycle lane does not confer carte blanche to ride at speed down the wrong side of the road into oncoming traffic. Imagine what we'd say if we saw a video of a car driver refusing to wait but accelerating down the wrong side of the road directly head-on with cyclists? Yes Jeremy, someone will definitely get killed there if idiots continue to ride like that.

Avatar
EddyBerckx replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
16 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

I'm sorry, and anyone who's been bored by my comments on here will know I am massively pro-cyclist, pro-cycle lanes and anti-motor vehicles, but in my opinion both Vine and his pilot cyclist are riding like absolute spanners there. Reacting to idiots making a road more dangerous by riding more dangerously is not a solution, and the absence of a cycle lane does not confer carte blanche to ride at speed down the wrong side of the road into oncoming traffic. Imagine what we'd say if we saw a video of a car driver refusing to wait but accelerating down the wrong side of the road directly head-on with cyclists? Yes Jeremy, someone will definitely get killed there if idiots continue to ride like that.

They rode no different to 100% of motorbikes and mopeds out there - perfectly legal and I believe, taught by motorbike instructors.

The only difference is instead of riding like that for miles on end, it was more like 30 feet, and bicycles are half the width.

Not saying this is you btw, more of a general comment but I often find leisure (sunday lanes) cyclists to be out of touch with how to ride in town, they are drivers who ride a bike occasionally...and seem to think you are meant to sit in traffic like a car for hours on end.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to EddyBerckx | 3 years ago
2 likes

EddyBerckx wrote:

They rode no different to 100% of motorbikes and mopeds out there - perfectly legal and I believe, taught by motorbike instructors.

The only difference is instead of riding like that for miles on end, it was more like 30 feet, and bicycles are half the width.

Not saying this is you btw, more of a general comment but I often find leisure (sunday lanes) cyclists to be out of touch with how to ride in town, they are drivers who ride a bike occasionally...and seem to think you are meant to sit in traffic like a car for hours on end.

I ride a 16 mile round trip Peckham-Fulham most days, sometimes twice a day, on some of London's busiest roads and in my misspent youth I once spent a year as a motorcycle courier in London, so I am familiar with the need to overtake on the outside to make decent progress in London traffic. However, overtaking into a stream of oncoming traffic is definitely not sensible nor is it legal, the Highway Code states that you should not overtake unless "the road is sufficiently clear ahead." If there's a line of traffic coming towards you that has to divert towards the side of the road (where we would do well to remember there may be other cyclists riding) to let you through it's certainly not "sufficiently clear ahead."

If I'd ridden like that during motorcycle training I would have got a proper earful!

Avatar
EddyBerckx replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
4 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

EddyBerckx wrote:

They rode no different to 100% of motorbikes and mopeds out there - perfectly legal and I believe, taught by motorbike instructors.

The only difference is instead of riding like that for miles on end, it was more like 30 feet, and bicycles are half the width.

Not saying this is you btw, more of a general comment but I often find leisure (sunday lanes) cyclists to be out of touch with how to ride in town, they are drivers who ride a bike occasionally...and seem to think you are meant to sit in traffic like a car for hours on end.

I ride a 16 mile round trip Peckham-Fulham most days, sometimes twice a day, on some of London's busiest roads and in my misspent youth I once spent a year as a motorcycle courier in London, so I am familiar with the need to overtake on the outside to make decent progress in London traffic. However, overtaking into a stream of oncoming traffic is definitely not sensible nor is it legal, the Highway Code states that you should not overtake unless "the road is sufficiently clear ahead." If there's a line of traffic coming towards you that has to divert towards the side of the road (where we would do well to remember there may be other cyclists riding) to let you through it's certainly not "sufficiently clear ahead."

If I'd ridden like that during motorcycle training I would have got a proper earful!

Maybe I need to look at the video again but from memory there was a clear stretch of road, they used it then pulled in a few seconds later when the oncoming traffic came near? That's pretty normal in traffic for me at least (I don't like riding like that tbh, but cars and vans take up so much room these days there is no room to filter between lines of traffic on many London roads anymore and that's not mentioning the ones who deliberately block you)

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to EddyBerckx | 3 years ago
2 likes

EddyBerckx wrote:

Maybe I need to look at the video again but from memory there was a clear stretch of road, they used it then pulled in a few seconds later when the oncoming traffic came near? That's pretty normal in traffic for me at least (I don't like riding like that tbh, but cars and vans take up so much room these days there is no room to filter between lines of traffic on many London roads anymore and that's not mentioning the ones who deliberately block you)

If you look from 1:03 onwards they ride in the oncoming lane whilst eight oncoming cars pass - rather absurdly Vine even captions it "Serious Hazard: Oncoming Traffic". If you know it's a serious hazard why one earth are you riding into it, for heaven's sake?

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
7 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

EddyBerckx wrote:

Maybe I need to look at the video again but from memory there was a clear stretch of road, they used it then pulled in a few seconds later when the oncoming traffic came near? That's pretty normal in traffic for me at least (I don't like riding like that tbh, but cars and vans take up so much room these days there is no room to filter between lines of traffic on many London roads anymore and that's not mentioning the ones who deliberately block you)

If you look from 1:03 onwards they ride in the oncoming lane whilst eight oncoming cars pass - rather absurdly Vine even captions it "Serious Hazard: Oncoming Traffic". If you know it's a serious hazard why one earth are you riding into it, for heaven's sake?

As long as you're not endangering others, then cycling through traffic is a compromise between safety margins and speed. Different people will obviously choose a different compromise which can be affected by confidence, experience etc. To my mind, 'serious hazard' means that you have to be aware of the risks and make your decisions accordingly.

Personally, I'd cycle pretty much like that cyclist through traffic and if there's what I consider a reasonable gap, then I'd overtake despite oncoming traffic. It's a common dilemma as to whether to overtake on the inside and risk vehicles pinning you to the curb or overtake on the outside and risk hitting oncoming vehicles - which depends very much on the specifics of the situation. Conversely, choosing to not take those risks is also perfectly reasonable and understandable.

To be clear, if you're choosing to overtake into oncoming traffic then you should consider yourself responsible if there is any collision, so you have to be confident of your risk assessment and bike handling (e.g. knowing that there aren't potholes in that section of road) and also whether the oncoming traffic is going to need to change course for any reason.

Avatar
hawkinspeter replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
15 likes

I disagree. That kind of cycling may look dangerous, but it's the only way to make sensible progress when there's so many slow/stationary vehicles blocking the road. There's a big difference between a cyclist overtaking stationary vehicles and possibly putting themselves at risk and a car driver accelerating down the wrong side of the road and putting others at risk.

As to the tweet about vehicle drivers not knowing where a bike is coming from - just make sure when you are moving straight ahead that it is clear to do so and if you are making a maneouvre, make sure that it is safe to do so (mirror, signal, mirror, maneouvre).

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
9 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

.....Yes Jeremy, someone will definitely get killed there if idiots continue to ride like that.

Only if an idiot car driver hits them at speed. As a driver, I have no issue with folk filtering, and in traffic that heavy, particularly in a busy urban area with tons of pedestrians, I would not be driving at speed and manner to be a risk to the vulnerable.

The riders are simply not posing any risk in this example.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
2 likes

Captain Badger wrote:

Only if an idiot car driver hits them at speed. As a driver, I have no issue with folk filtering, and in traffic that heavy, particularly in a busy urban area with tons of pedestrians, I would not be driving at speed and manner to be a risk to the vulnerable.

The riders are simply not posing any risk in this example.

Filtering is riding between lines of stationary or slow-moving traffic, not riding in the opposite lane that has fast-moving traffic coming down it.

Sorry all, clearly from the responses so far it's outrageous that I should disagree with St.Jeremy of Vine, but nothing's going to persuade me that riding fast down the oncoming traffic lane with cars coming towards you at speed is anything but a stupid thing to do.

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
4 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

.......

Sorry all, clearly from the responses so far it's outrageous that I should disagree with St.Jeremy of Vine, but nothing's going to persuade me that riding fast down the oncoming traffic lane with cars coming towards you at speed is anything but a stupid thing to do.

Disagree all you like, fill your boots. It's not outrageous, it's a difference of opinion (although you do seem a bit butt-hurt that I disagree with you).

My take is simply that the risk is brought by drivers driving inappropriately for the environment and conditions, and that risk is not just for riders, but for peds also. If I drive safely for peds in that environment, de facto I drive safely for riders too.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
2 likes

Captain Badger wrote:

Disagree all you like, fill your boots. It's not outrageous, it's a difference of opinion (although you do seem a bit butt-hurt that I disagree with you).

My take is simply that the risk is brought by drivers driving inappropriately for the environment and conditions,

Is the part in parentheses really necessary? Really?

In numerous circumstances that is true. In circumstances where any road user, car, m/bike, cyclist, whatever chooses to cross the line into the opposing oncoming lane that has relatively fast-moving traffic already in it, they are creating the risk. All the comments thus far seem to be variations of "I ride like that because it would be slower if I didn't" - that is not an acceptable reason to ride carelessly and dangerously in my opinion.

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
5 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

....

Is the part in parantheses really necessary? Really?

About as necessary as this

"Sorry all, clearly from the responses so far it's outrageous that I should disagree with St.Jeremy of Vine"

Rendel Harris wrote:

...

that is not an acceptable reason to ride carelessly and dangerously in my opinion.

I agree with that sentiment, only it didn't reflect what we saw. The actions of the riders would unlikely result in their or others' deaths without the involvement of careless & dangerous drivers.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
1 like

Captain Badger wrote:

Rendel Harris wrote:

....

Is the part in parantheses really necessary? Really?

About as necessary as this

"Sorry all, clearly from the responses so far it's outrageous that I should disagree with St.Jeremy of Vine"

Rendel Harris wrote:

...

that is not an acceptable reason to ride carelessly and dangerously in my opinion.

I agree with that sentiment, only it didn't reflect what we saw. The actions of the riders would unlikely result in their or others' deaths without the involvement of careless & dangerous drivers.

What I said about JV was hardly as personal or as vulgar and puerile as what you said to me, was it?

If you look at the video again, Vine himself captions the part where they ride in the opposite lane with "Serious Hazard: Oncoming Taffic." Clearly he thinks it's dangerous, the question is if he thinks it's dangerous why the hell's he doing it?

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
3 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

....

What I said about JV was hardly as personal or as vulgar and puerile as what you said to me, was it?

You'd have to ask JV what he thought. You do still seem a little sore though. Sorry about that old boy.....

 

Rendel Harris wrote:

If you look at the video again, Vine himself captions the part where they ride in the opposite lane with "Serious Hazard: Oncoming Taffic." Clearly he thinks it's dangerous, the question is if he thinks it's dangerous why the hell's he doing it?

Again, maybe ask JV. My take is that he is correct, the oncoming is a hazard - JV and the rider in front assessed the risk and proceeded. As a driver, I'm confident that I could negotiate that situation safely - only careless dangerous drivers would cause a problem there.

 

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
1 like

Captain Badger wrote:

You'd have to ask JV what he thought. You do still seem a little sore though. Sorry about that old boy.....

Again, maybe ask JV. My take is that he is correct, the oncoming is a hazard - JV and the rider in front assessed the risk and proceeded. As a driver, I'm confident that I could negotiate that situation safely - only careless dangerous drivers would cause a problem there.

Your apparent obsession with hurting other people's bottoms is disturbing...

Can you truly not see how absurd it is to ride towards oncoming traffic in the oncoming traffic lane and then say oh if I get hit it'll be because the car driver was careless or dangerous? Really? I can tell you this, in law if one of those cars hit Vine or his pilot fish, provided the driver was sober and within the speed limit, it would be classified 100% the cyclist's fault, and rightly so.

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
3 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

....

Your apparent obsession with hurting other people's bottoms is disturbing...

And yet you keep returning to it darling..... the obsession is not mine luv

Rendel Harris wrote:

Can you truly not see how absurd it is to ride towards oncoming traffic in the oncoming traffic lane and then say oh if I get hit it'll be because the car driver was careless or dangerous? Really? I can tell you this, in law if one of those cars hit Vine or his pilot fish, provided the driver was sober and within the speed limit, it would be classified 100% the cyclist's fault, and rightly so.

Oh dear, someone seems to be a bit overwrought. Perhaps go and have a nice cup of tea.....

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
0 likes

Captain Badger wrote:

Oh dear, someone seems to be a bit overwrought. Perhaps go and have a nice cup of tea.....

Thank you for the tacit acknowledgement that you don't have an argument.

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
1 like

Rendel Harris wrote:

Captain Badger wrote:

Oh dear, someone seems to be a bit overwrought. Perhaps go and have a nice cup of tea.....

Thank you for the tacit acknowledgement that you don't have an argument.

Avatar
quiff replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
3 likes

Oh come on children, play nicely. But "butt-hurt"? Really?

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to quiff | 3 years ago
1 like

quiff wrote:

Oh come on children, play nicely. But "butt-hurt"? Really?

Yes, it's slang. Thought it was a fairly commonly understood term... 
butthurt
/ˈbʌthəːt/

INFORMAL•US
adjective
adjective: butt-hurt

overly or unjustifiably offended or resentful.
"they're all butthurt that she released the album online first"

 

 

Avatar
quiff replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
2 likes

Genuinely never heard / seen it before (I'm clearly neither US nor informal). Seeing it for the first time, I read it as a pretty unpleasant slur along the lines set out here: http://persephonemagazine.com/2013/01/can-we-please-stop-using-the-term-... If Rendel did too, then I wouldn't say they were "overly or unjustifiably offended".     

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to quiff | 3 years ago
0 likes

quiff wrote:

Genuinely never heard / seen it before (I'm clearly neither US nor informal). Seeing it for the first time, I read it as a pretty unpleasant slur along the lines set out here: http://persephonemagazine.com/2013/01/can-we-please-stop-using-the-term-... If Rendel did too, then I wouldn't say they were "overly or unjustifiably offended".     

Thank you, it is indeed a foul homophobic term referencing anal rape and idiots providing dictionary definitions showing that it's passed into common parlance doesn't change that.

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to quiff | 3 years ago
1 like

quiff wrote:

Genuinely never heard / seen it before (I'm clearly neither US nor informal). Seeing it for the first time, I read it as a pretty unpleasant slur along the lines set out here: http://persephonemagazine.com/2013/01/can-we-please-stop-using-the-term-... If Rendel did too, then I wouldn't say they were "overly or unjustifiably offended".     

They were "overly and unjustifiably offended" that folk failed to agree with them....

The etymolgy as far as I am aware is relating to a slapped arse ( I did wonder if Rendell was projecting towards the end. By that time they were focusing more on a throw-away comment than the topic in hand).

Any sexual connotation really had not occurred to me. 

 

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
0 likes

Captain Badger wrote:

 

The etymolgy as far as I am aware is relating to a slapped arse ( I did wonder if Rendell was projecting towards the end. By that time they were focusing more on a throw-away comment than the topic in hand).

 

Any sexual connotation really had not occurred to me.

Ah, you had no idea that it referenced anal rape but you somehow imply that I must be gay. You're making yourself look very stupid and really not very nice at all.

Avatar
Captain Badger replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
1 like

Rendel Harris wrote:

Captain Badger wrote:

 

The etymolgy as far as I am aware is relating to a slapped arse ( I did wonder if Rendell was projecting towards the end. By that time they were focusing more on a throw-away comment than the topic in hand).

 

Any sexual connotation really had not occurred to me.

Ah, you had no idea that it referenced anal rape but you somehow imply that I must be gay. You're making yourself look very stupid and really not very nice at all.

I don't believe it does. Yet again a disagreement results in your being "overly or unjustifiably offended". But if it actually does, I apologise for its use in that context. I meant arse-slapped

Not sure how my pointing out your projection of opinions onto what others say implies anything about your sexuality.... 

Not nice? We've already established that I might disagree with you, if that satisfies your definition.... Stupid? I must be in responding yet again. Good day Rendell, have that cup of tea.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to Captain Badger | 3 years ago
0 likes

Captain Badger wrote:

I don't believe it does. Yet again a disagreement results in your being "overly or unjustifiably offended". But if it actually does, I apologise for its use in that context. I meant arse-slapped

Not sure how my pointing out your projection of opinions onto what others say implies anything about your sexuality.... 

Not nice? We've already established that I might disagree with you, if that satisfies your definition.... Stupid? I must be in responding yet again. Good day Rendell, have that cup of tea.

You really should make a beeping noise when you try to back up like that. I don't think I need point out how ridiculous your pathetic attempt to justify your unpleasant language and attitudes is, it's there for all to see.

Avatar
TheBillder replied to quiff | 3 years ago
2 likes
quiff wrote:

Oh come on children, play nicely. But "butt-hurt"? Really?

I notice while this poor behaviour is going on that our resident stirrer is almost silent. Which is bad news as they will think their efforts have worked. If people want to devalue the debate with anger and insults then this forum will be damaged.

Is there space for people to apologise, retract, be the adult in the room? Without sarcasm? Both Badger and Rendel have made points I agree with. There's no need for cheek or falling out.

Avatar
GMBasix replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
9 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

Sorry all, clearly from the responses so far it's outrageous that I should disagree with St.Jeremy of Vine, but nothing's going to persuade me that riding fast down the oncoming traffic lane with cars coming towards you at speed is anything but a stupid thing to do.

We could debate the rights, wrongs and shades of how the cycling was done in the video for quite some time (personally, I think overtaking with oncoming traffic may be OK if the oncoming lane is wide enough, and you can negotiate your passage - but that is subject to a whole load of factors, including being there to make the judgement at the time). But it doesn't help.

The key point of the piece is that the premise for removing the cycle lane was bogus and prejudiced.  It was a retrograde measure, with a council facing high profile, minority pressure from the usual petrolhead gammon attitudes. The council is failing its residents and those passing through for whom it has a responsibility.

Avatar
Rendel Harris replied to GMBasix | 3 years ago
2 likes

GMBasix wrote:

The key point of the piece is that the premise for removing the cycle lane was bogus and prejudiced.  It was a retrograde measure, with a council facing high profile, minority pressure from the usual petrolhead gammon attitudes. The council is failing its residents and those passing through for whom it has a responsibility.

I entirely agree, I was/am disgusted with the removal of the cycle lane and the reasoning behind it. I just don't think it's sensible to claim "I was forced to cycle dangerously because there wasn't a cycle lane". Personally I'm avoiding KHS completely at the moment and riding through the backstreets - longer but faster.

Avatar
quiff replied to Rendel Harris | 3 years ago
4 likes

Rendel Harris wrote:

...nothing's going to persuade me that riding fast down the oncoming traffic lane with cars coming towards you at speed is anything but a stupid thing to do.

I'm partly with you. I avoid riding in the opposite lane when traffic is approaching, and I do think it was a bit daft to label oncoming traffic a 'serious hazard', as if they were absolutely forced to ride into it, but for me it's a question of degree. In this clip (a) I'm pretty sure the video is still sped up during that section, so I think they're actually making cautious progress, not riding 'fast' as you say, and (b) they are using a tiny amount of the oncoming lane, which drivers would not be using.        

Pages

Latest Comments