http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43848700/ns/business-forbes_com/

by w on Jul 22, 2011 8:30 am • link • report

as for the sex differentiation in cycling- most people around this area who cycle are men and they are adament athletic cyclists. Yes- there are more women cycling with the new CABI bikes but still it is a drop in the bucket. DC's stats for women are higher. In general- cycling needs to move away from the aggressive male racing fanaticism and towards a more accepting and broader population. Of course- most people on this bolg will disagree since most of the cyclists who blog here are men .However- this phenomenon is universally seen around the world and has been researched quite extensively by John Pucher and company.

by w on Jul 22, 2011 8:38 am • link • report

Today's air quality will be terrible; vehicle emissions make it that way.

by mph on Jul 22, 2011 8:51 am • link • report

Many thanks to Cody Rice. I hope to use that map as part of the intra-Ward redistricting process.

by Andrew on Jul 22, 2011 9:00 am • link • report

@w

I disagree with your assertion that "most people around this area who cycle are men and they are adamant athletic cyclists."

When I stand at the bus stop on those days when I don't bike, I see a diverse mix of both men and women riding to work. We're not building bike lanes and cycletracks and other infrastructure for people to go on training rides; we're building it so people can get from place to place on bikes.

When we're thinking about how to serve the bicycling community inside the city we should be concentrating more on people who use bicycles for transportation than those who want to suit up and race around. And I think that is what we already concentrate on when we think about bicycle infrastructure.

by MLD on Jul 22, 2011 9:09 am • link • report

I've not once ever had a positive interaction with a Metro employee. The most recent exchange went like this: Me-Excuse me sir, may I ask you a question? Him-Sure boss, what's up? Me-I'm wondering if you know about Metro's rule regarding idling? Him-The what? Me-I'm wondering if you know that you're not supposed to idle longer than 3 minutes except in cases of extreme weather? Him-Man...F#@k you!
Yep...straight to the point. We could care less about our customers and the community. I couldn't get his name b/c when I asked for it he took his name tag off and put it in his pocket. The night before, I asked a different bus driver the same question and he said "What the F#@K does it matter to you." and when I said that my house was nearby and the noise and vibration was a disturbance he told me to "get the F#@K out of my face and moved towards me. When my dog stepped in front of me (without prompting from me) he said "What...are you gonna make your dog bite me?" "I'll kill your dog."
Threats and insults...no customer service. Secret Shoppers can't come soon enough.

by thump on Jul 22, 2011 9:16 am • link • report

@w

Do you ever actually bike anywhere?

I regularly commute via bike from home in Arlington to work in DC. I'm also a pretty serious road biker. At least 1/3 of the other people I see on bikes are women -- both among commuters, and people training for a triathlon.

Women bikers may not be as vocal as the men on this blog, but that says jack about how many women bike in real life.

by Lily on Jul 22, 2011 9:22 am • link • report

while it is true that in the DC area- especially in the CITY- there has been a demonstrated increase in the numbers of women cyclists- itis still a mere pittance when compared to the numbers of men cycling.
As a country we need to move away from the over- emphasis on bike racing and "road- biking" which really means athletic cycling and not everyday practical cycling- we need to be more inclusive of other groups of people , races, sexes, ages, and also- those who choose not to blow a million dollars on fanct lycra with lots of advertising colors printed all over it.This also means a further and relentless emphasis on auto-protected bike ways and NOT bike lanes that are vulnerable to aciidents where the cyclist ALWAYS loses. Of course- my statements are controversial on this blog because the majority of cyclists are athletic or men and they will NEVER understand the use or need for bicycles outside of their own parochial spheres of experience. I would like to see DC turn into an American version of Amsterdam, Berlin, or Copenhagen.

by w on Jul 22, 2011 9:41 am • link • report

@w

I think we'd all like to see DC become more like Copenhagen, but that's not going to happen overnight. What you're saying about urban bicycling culture catering towards enthusiasts and professionals more than the everyday person is probably more true years ago than it is now, even if we're not where we want to be quite yet.

What you're saying is consistent with the article and I think most of us would agree that the right infrastructure improvements and public awareness need to be invested in. You're preaching to the choir, but you make a backhanded comment about most of us here not understanding what you're talking about b/c we're all training for races.

by Vik on Jul 22, 2011 9:50 am • link • report

As a country we need to move away from the over- emphasis on bike racing and "road- biking" which really means athletic cycling and not everyday practical cycling- we need to be more inclusive of other groups of people , races, sexes, ages, and also- those who choose not to blow a million dollars on fanct lycra with lots of advertising colors printed all over it.

I should know better, but.... Do you have any practical steps we can take? I mean, that we're not pursuing. Other than banning moisture-wicking clothing, and forcing everyone to ride 75 pound step-through bikes?

by oboe on Jul 22, 2011 9:50 am • link • report

@w, I bike to work on Bikeshare every day, wearing my work clothes and proceeding at a rather sedate pace. I would concur with a previous poster that about 1/3 or so of the other cyclists I see are women, often going faster than me, whether they be athletic or not. No way would I describe the number of female cyclists as a "pittance" and I'm out tere every day.

by MrTinDC on Jul 22, 2011 9:54 am • link • report

"Today's air quality will be terrible; vehicle emissions make it worse. "

A repeat of another comment but I have to. Vehicle emissions don't just make it worse; they are the primary reason that we have poor air quality.

by rg on Jul 22, 2011 10:14 am • link • report

@w

I truly don't understand your comment. Do you know of some set of (presumably male) road bikers who are lobbying against bike infrastructure?

"athletic" biking and bike commuting are not mutually exclusive. road cyclists may be majority male, but they are certainly not exclusively, or even predominantly, male.

Your strawman sort of doesn't pass go, on several levels.

By the way, as a statistician, I'm a little skeptical of the article's data presentation. It could well be that separated tracks encourage a disproportionate percentage of new cyclists to use them, and that the proportion of new cyclists are more equally gendered (or possibly even predominantly female). All that tells us is that NY cyclists were historically male, and that new bicyclists like segregated lanes. Their gender may be incidental.

by CJ on Jul 22, 2011 10:16 am • link • report

Hm. That lamppost advertising thing might be the first good federal intervention that we've had in DC's laws in quite some time.

Makes a heck of a lot of sense too. (Or, they could ban lamppost advertising entirely, and I'd be really happy. I certainly wouldn't cry if the NCPC got involved in that, given that the sea of "VOTE ORANGE" posters that blanket the city every 2 years are almost certainly uglier than any kind of power )

by andrew on Jul 22, 2011 10:38 am • link • report

My wife often bike commutes from Falls Church to the city and she is virtually the only woman ever on the trail in the morning commute until she gets very close to the city.

That said, even though she's a more confident female biker than most, she will go many blocks out of her way to use cycletracks and avoid on-road biking. While anecdotal, she's a great example of the need for cycletracks to cut the gender gap. In fact, a possible reason why there are not more female bike commuters from VA is the lack of L&M cycletracks to connect the Canal towpath trail with downtown.

by Falls Church on Jul 22, 2011 10:45 am • link • report

@ Falls Church

You should show your post to your wife.

Am i the only one who views this gendering of cycle tracks as enormously sexist?

by CJ on Jul 22, 2011 10:48 am • link • report

@CJ

I think what's more sexist is that if we build bike infrastructure with only the preferences of male bike riders in mind. Maybe the statistics in the study are suspect and there should be better research, but if women truly have different bike infrastructure preferences than men, then we need to provide equal accommodation to both gender's preferences.

by Falls Church on Jul 22, 2011 10:59 am • link • report

Thank god for Respect DC - it's going to be the biggest dance-off since West Side Story!
It's on now! Walmart better pull up their legwarmers and get ready to be served.

by Riff on Jul 22, 2011 10:59 am • link • report

@Falls Church

But, we haven't built bike infrastructure with just men in mind, so that's a moot point. We have limited resources as it is. I think the steps we've made benefit men and women. Building higher-quality and safer cycle tracks, is substantially more expensive than what we have now and it'll take time for those projects to be politically and fiscally feasible.

And infrastructure is just one component of what W alluded to earlier. Basically, we need to do a better job selling the importance, need and benefits of bike infrastructure to John/Jane Q. Public. I agree with this, but I think it's just wrong to say that we've been catering to enthusiasts. If that were the case, we probably wouldn't have what we have because the political support wouldn't be there. I don't see what is so hardcore about CaBi.

There's a lot we need to do in the city, but even more in the suburbs, obviously.

by Vik on Jul 22, 2011 11:16 am • link • report

@Thump

I'm often irritated by Metro employees, but there are some good people working in the system, and they are often unfairly lumped with the lousy culture around them.

I'll give you an example -- I was on the platform with my daughter at Federal Center and her thermos containing milk cracked in my bag creating a horrible mess. The station custodian saw me struggling and couldn't have been kinder about helping me clean the mess and providing me with a clean towel to help keep it under wraps. It was totally above and beyond and I was so grateful.

then again, I once got cussed out by a different custodian who thought hauling the trash up the elevator took precedence over me my toddler. That was bizarre

by anon on Jul 22, 2011 11:17 am • link • report

The reason that DC entrepreneurs are picky about which neighborhood they're willing to locate in is that there are very few DC neighborhoods with all the necessary nearby amenities (metro, retail, commercial activity). This is combined with the fact that where there are these amenities, the office space above retail is very limited, not to mention the overall skepticism within DC of non-government, non-legal commercial activity to begin with.

by JustMe on Jul 22, 2011 11:26 am • link • report

I've generally had great luck with Metro employees.

At the very, absolute worst, station managers are sometimes mildly apathetic, and there are a handful of lousy bus drivers (although these are the exception).

MetroAccess is a different story. Those drivers are outright homicidal.

by andrew on Jul 22, 2011 11:31 am • link • report

I also imagine that Adams Morgan will be much less of a pressure-cooker once the new sidewalks are in.

by andrew on Jul 22, 2011 11:31 am • link • report

That gentrification article was great, but ignores the existence of two populations:

--Poor white people. Poverty is not strictly drawn among racial lines, and I think that we overlook that very frequently here in DC.

--Middle and upper-class African Americans who either have college degrees or work as skilled laborers. This group of people is much, much larger than anybody seems willing to admit, and is particularly problematic for the purposes of this discussion -- from an economic perspective, they are can certainly be "gentrifiers," but are also partly responsible for the District's declining black population, as many of them choose to move to the suburbs to raise families.

We're moving toward becoming a postracial society. We're certainly not there yet, but we need to stop spinning every societal problem in the DC area as a function of race.

by andrew on Jul 22, 2011 11:35 am • link • report

@anon-I'm sure there are good employees, I just haven't met one yet. Not one. I've met a lot of unfriendly, unhelpful, impatient, rude, and openly hostile employees, but not one that's gone "above and beyond". The most I can ever get for a positive response is a one syllable "yes" or "no" in answer to a question.

by thump on Jul 22, 2011 11:36 am • link • report

@CJ -is it sexist to cite the statistic that men are at greater risk of dying in a crash* than women, and that mens' risk of unintentional injury is greater than womens? Its because they behave differently (stupider? one might say?). The slightly greater birth rate of boys over girls is evened out in the population by adulthood, as if nature expects boys and young men (and young-at-heart men) to make worse decisions than girls and young women that endanger their lives needlessly.

If its the case that women are more likely to prefer cycle tracks than men than the pattern of lesser risk taking behavior (smarter?) observed in women compared to men is repeated in this observation too.

*car crash
http://www.menshealth.org/code/BEHV-JMS.PDF

by Tina on Jul 22, 2011 11:36 am • link • report

It's funny how nearly all the comments are about the bike gender issue. I found a couple of the other links far more interesting ... Such as the signage on the lampposts and the gentrification issue. I guess it's a bicycling crowd on here today ....

by Lance on Jul 22, 2011 12:30 pm • link • report

What is that population map supposed to tell me? All I see are red and green layers that say stuff like "62.02 1247 P0010001: SMD: 6D05" when I click on them.

by OX4 on Jul 22, 2011 12:31 pm • link • report

@Andrew:

"Middle and upper-class African Americans who either have college degrees or work as skilled laborers. This group of people is much, much larger than anybody seems willing to admit, and is particularly problematic for the purposes of this discussion -- from an economic perspective, they are can certainly be "gentrifiers," but are also partly responsible for the District's declining black population, as many of them choose to move to the suburbs to raise families.

Um, no.

About 100,000 white households in DC. About 1/2 (50K) of them make over 100K.

123,000 black households. Only 16,000 make over 100K.

Below 100K household income, it is very hard to afford a house in the district.

If you include a slightly larger middle class -- making over $60K -- you get about 37,000 households. Maybe 70,000 people.

The point being is poverty is still a real issue and racial divide.

by charlie on Jul 22, 2011 12:59 pm • link • report

@EF/rg/mph
> vehicle emissions make it worse

So what do you guys suggest for those who have to go to work? Walk, bike, or stand around waiting for a bus? I wouldn't recommend that for anyone and your snarky anti-automobile stance isn't helping anything.

by movement on Jul 22, 2011 1:55 pm • link • report

@ movement -- Taking the bus is not actually the end of the world. Some of us do it every day, which does actually contribute to cleaner air in the region. So yes, I would suggest you take the bus. Your refusal to acknowledge that your behavior has consequences isn't not only not helping, but actively making things worse.

by Kate W on Jul 22, 2011 2:07 pm • link • report

@mph

Today's air quality will be terrible; vehicle emissions make it that way.

Propaganda!

The standards have been lowered to convince the public the air is bad when in reality isn't.

What is considered a bad air today wouldn't even register on the scales used 25 years ago.

25 years ago when it was said the air was bad I could feel it in my lungs as well as see it. After being a smoker for 25 I can nether feel it or see when I'm told it's a bad air day.

by Sand Box John on Jul 22, 2011 2:09 pm • link • report

movement,
Its not anyone's personal fault for driving if there aren't any viable solutions but it should be a wake up call for citizens to lobby for more transit options that serve the population.

by canaan on Jul 22, 2011 2:14 pm • link • report

@Sand Box -What is considered a bad air today wouldn't even register on the scales used 25 years ago.

So what? 160 years ago germs did not "even register" as a real threat to human health.

by Tina on Jul 22, 2011 2:23 pm • link • report

Just go to any bicycle infrastructure planning meeting in the USA - or DC for that matter- and the great majority of those who show up will be the skinny white guys in lycra- basically they have over-dominated the cycling culture in this country to the complete detriment of just about all "other" demographics- and this is why little effort has been pushed for protected bikeways as opposed to bike lanes or just outright denial- in other words- the same suicidal mantra "share the road"...

by w on Jul 22, 2011 2:30 pm • link • report

Sand Box John, I wonder if that is even true. What makes you say that? The reason I ask is that it seems we are having bad air partially because of the extreme heat. I don't think it's been this hot in quite a while, and therefore *would* have been remarked upon 25 years ago. I have been here nearly that long, and I can't remember feeling the air is so bad as I do today. And as far as I know, we don't have a lot of heavy industry in the area, do we? And didn't used to, either.

by Jazzy on Jul 22, 2011 2:32 pm • link • report

@Jazzy-its true that etiology and epidemiology of pulmonary and cardiac diseases has advanced in the past 25 years and once unknown associations between fine particulates and other air pollutants and fatal events has been discovered. Thankfully these data have informed policies, such as when to warn the populace that the air quality is dangerous.

by Tina on Jul 22, 2011 2:49 pm • link • report

Just go to any bicycle infrastructure planning meeting in the USA - or DC for that matter- and the great majority of those who show up will be the skinny white guys in lycra- basically they have over-dominated the cycling culture in this country to the complete detriment of just about all "other" demographics- and this is why little effort has been pushed for protected bikeways

So, remember kids: even though the token infrastructure like the L & M bike lanes are being pushed back, if only we had more fat guys in cotton shorts (instead of skinny white guys in lycra) we'd have a comprehensive* network of fully segregated bike infrastructure not just in DC, but all over the country.

The fundamental "wrongness" of this position staggers the imagination. And if it weren't so rudely made, it might deserve a more comprehensive rebuttal.

* By "comprehensive" here, I mean that it's possible to go from any Point A to any Point B on segregated bike-only facilities.

by oboe on Jul 22, 2011 2:54 pm • link • report

Thanks Tina. I'm not sure how your comment plays into what I said to Sandbox John. My point is that, to me, today the air quality is really bad, noticeably bad. And though I was not here twenty-five years ago, I was here 20 years ago, and I would never think to say the air quality we have today would not have been anything remarkable 20 years ago. DC has had only light industry as far as I know. Cars, coal, burning of trash - yes all these things contributed to bad air. But nothing like other regions, not even close, at least I don't think so. My point is, there IS something remarkable about today.

by Jazzy on Jul 22, 2011 2:55 pm • link • report

w, it's like you're sending your comments through a time machine from 1988 (if so, see the first Matrix, but skip the other two - ugh!). That isn't how things are anymore. If you ever bothered to show up at a bicycle infrastructure planning meeting you'd know that. I go and I don't see you and yes I know what you look like and what you do for a living. I have some of your artwork with me now.

So go to a meeting. Take photos and notes and come back and try to show us how the actual events that took place match up with what you've described. DDOT had a cycletrack meeting last year and hundreds of people showed up to...(wait for it)...support cycletracks.

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 2:56 pm • link • report

@w
Man, you are just spitting out stereotype after stereotype today, now "skinny white guys in lycra" are "over-dominating" urban cycling. Sorry, I just don't see it. Maybe in your particular neck of the woods that's the case, but I bike from Columbia Heights to downtown every day. This morning I passed, or was passed by a couple of white guys wearing suits (!) on bikeshare bikes, an African American guy on a hbrid, a couple of Latino guys on mountain bikes, a young woman in a dress, another young woman in a tee shirt and shorts, and an older woman on a hybrid. Not a single person was wearing lycra, or riding an expensive road bike. I don't see anything wrong, or gender discriminatory about on-road bike lanes (my personal preference) or sharing the road.

by MrTinDC on Jul 22, 2011 2:57 pm • link • report

There are poor white people living in DC? (And no, interns working for low pay don't count.)

by LaShawn Hannity on Jul 22, 2011 3:03 pm • link • report

http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/30/in-urban-cycling-a-gender-gap-persists/

by w on Jul 22, 2011 3:14 pm • link • report

the friends of John Forester's vehicular cycling are certainly alive and well on this blog

by w on Jul 22, 2011 3:18 pm • link • report

That is some lazy commenting w, what exactly is your point?

According to the article women make up 25% of cycling trips instead of 50%. So, they're underrepresented, but 25% is more than a drop in the bucket. It's 25% of the bucket in fact. And it does nothing to support any of your other crazy assertions.

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 3:20 pm • link • report

the friends of John Forester's vehicular cycling are certainly alive and well on this blog

Seriously? Give it a rest. No one is opposing the idea of cycletracks, only your twisted view that has you thinking everyone is opposing cycletracks. Perhaps you'd like to point to the comment that you think backs up your assertion?

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 3:22 pm • link • report

w: Not all bicyclists are skinny white guys. The one that almost ran into me on the metro platform didn't fit that description.

They say they can ride anywhere they want.

by Bob See on Jul 22, 2011 3:23 pm • link • report

@Jazzy-I think you're right -even with standards (the "scale") from 1986 today would be considered a "bad air qaulity" day.

I was responding to SBJ's assertion that the (majority) scientific concensus of what are harmful levels of air pollution is "propoganda". (For who? Who benefits with more precise knowlege of the risks associated w/ types and levels of air pollution exposure?)

yes heat contributes to certain types of air pollution and thus today is special.

by Tina on Jul 22, 2011 3:30 pm • link • report

The Wal-Mart in Laurel is the worst Wal-Mart in the entire country. I remember my 4 or 5 attempts at shopping there. All abysmal failures. Once I was trying to buy a new lightbulb. Every pack I picked up I'd shake and here the filaments rattling around. A guy was stocking next to me so I told him and got "Yeah that happens" as a response. No it doesn't! It had never happened to me at any lightbulb selling store before or since. Another time asked if they had a certain DVD. They point to a 4' tall by 8' x 8' cube of unsorted DVDs like some kind of bizarre ball pen and say dive in and look. WTF? Don't you have a computerized inventory? Or at least shelf space in your 5 acre store?

by Brian White on Jul 22, 2011 3:37 pm • link • report

@Kate W
If I didn't have to be outside for an extra half an hour (between walking and waiting) I'd consider the bus. Most people just shouldn't be outside today.

by movement on Jul 22, 2011 3:46 pm • link • report

@David C:

DDOT had a cycletrack meeting last year and hundreds of people showed up to...(wait for it)...support cycletracks.

Little did you know that seconds after you "civilians" left, John Forrester and I rolled up on a Pinarello tandem, wearing matching full Landis/Hamilton-era Phonak team kits, and put the kibosh on the whole deal.

Heh heh heh. Ha ha HAH! BWAAHAHHAHAHAA!

*ahem*

by oboe on Jul 22, 2011 3:51 pm • link • report

David C
perhaps you need to read the article in the NY Times and maybe you will then realize that there is an acknowledged problem around the USA- that women are not cycling in the USA- and it is clearly the lack of protected bike infrastructure. Oh- I do realize that DC is ahead of NYC in that we now have more women cycling here- but not nearly enough . In case you have not noticed- we have a new anti- bike/transit/streetcar Mayor and a new guy in place of Gabe Klein who obviously is not in favor of bikeways on L & M streets. Or maybe you do not know about this?

by w on Jul 22, 2011 3:53 pm • link • report

@Bob See:

Not all bicyclists are skinny white guys. The one that almost ran into me on the metro platform didn't fit that description. They say they can ride anywhere they want.

A pedestrian stepped on my toe one time.

by oboe on Jul 22, 2011 3:53 pm • link • report

John Forrester cancelled "My So Called Life"

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 3:55 pm • link • report

w, I did read it. It did not back up any of your claims. In fact it contradicted them. (Cycling by women is more than a drop in the bucket. It is not a mere pittance. It is 25% of all trips).

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 3:58 pm • link • report

@David C:

John Forrester cancelled "My So Called Life"

If this is true, he will be hearing from me on that account at our next meeting of the "He-Man Cycletrack Haters' Society", believe you me.

by oboe on Jul 22, 2011 4:08 pm • link • report

@ Tina,

It's perfectly fine to discuss well documented differences in behavior between sexes, so certainly it's not sexist to cite these statistics.

Certainly it is sexist to call men stupid because they die at younger ages than women. FYI, "stupidity" was not a measured metric in the study you linked. Similarly it may be sexist to conflate the behavior of female cyclists with any number of co-factors, based on preliminary data and presumptuous analysis.

Other questions?

by CJ on Jul 22, 2011 4:19 pm • link • report

lots and lots of hostility here on this blog-it is very sad to see this- and also there is no acknowledgement of the problems we face in both DC & the USA in general- trying to improve cycling for everyone-not just a few - just a lot of juvenile bickering and personal attacks whenever any issues like this are mentioned.A lot of trolling going on here- and clearly no one is being a referee .

by w on Jul 22, 2011 4:26 pm • link • report

w, A lot of trolling going on here

Yes. I do wish you would stop it.

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 4:27 pm • link • report

Aside: men dying in more accidents. That is not necessarily a measure of stupidity, but rather risk-taking. Businesses started by women succeed more often, but women are less likely to start businesses to start with. So, it may be read that they only try when success is guaranteed. And they don't push the company to expand. Very few billion dollar companies are started by women. It tends to be small businesses.

Which makes sense. Men have more to gain from success than women do. A man can have hundreds or even thousands of offspring (and some have - the chief of my village in Peace Corps had a couple hundred kids). Women top out at around 30. So for men, life is a winner-take-all tournament and taking risks is more valuable. There are more men who will never have children than there are women who won't. Men need to succeed, and women just have to stay alive. Hence the risk taking in men, and risk aversion in women.

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 4:35 pm • link • report

Did you see Seinfeld last night? Elaine was saying that women have fewer partners because they are so disgusted by male genitalia that they have to be in love with the man.

by Jazzy on Jul 22, 2011 4:50 pm • link • report

CJ-I think its obvious that "stupidy" was a suggested subjective interpretation of the data, not a measured predictor variable. The use of parens, question marks, and the phrase "one might say" reinforced this concept. But you were confused anyway. My fault for not communicating more clearly, or simply.

Because we already have data indicating women are less likely to behave in ways that lead to unintentional injury when compared to men, its perfectly reasonbale to hypothesize that women would, as a group, be more likely to prefer riding in cycle tracks than men.

If you re-read my previous comment you will see I did not comment on or attempt to interpret the study presented. I merely stated the above hypothesis in a different way.

I think its unreasonable to claim its sexist to formulate that hypothesis, or that any study trying to test that hypothesis, no matter how preliminary, is sexist; b/c the hypothesis is reasonably founded on exant data.

by Tina on Jul 22, 2011 5:02 pm • link • report

@David C and all the other men - men dying in more accidents. That is not necessarily a measure of stupidity, but rather risk-taking. Of course. I knew I was taking a risk that someone would be offended by my apparently undetectable humor when I wrote it. Vive la difference!

so, the point is, the hypothesis that women will increase in proportion to all bicyclers if cycle tracks are more widely avialable. I think this is a sound hypothesis given what we already know about the differences in men's and womens' behaviors with regards to risk-taking that leads to unintentional injury.

I think its reasonable to hypothesize that greater numbers of men will bicycle too if cycle tracks are more available.

We could hypothesizr that a greater proportion of the population (made up of men and women) would choose biking if there was better biking infrastructure, and we would have examples on which to found that hypothesis!

by Tina on Jul 22, 2011 5:25 pm • link • report

I wasn't offended. Greater risk-taking is often indistinguishable from stupidity.

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 5:34 pm • link • report

David C you seem to have it in for me- what is your problem here? You tell me that you know me and that sounds kind of like a threat to me. Maybe you should just give me a call and tell me what the deal is . Obviously Alpert does not seem to care if people who comment on his blog make idle threats to other bloggers.

by w on Jul 22, 2011 5:53 pm • link • report

David C - who ever you are- all you have to do is call and we can talk out anything on your mind - why the mystery?

by w on Jul 22, 2011 5:59 pm • link • report

The one line take-away on the stories about nuclear-family and same-sex unions in Virginia strike me as being based on prejudice rather than a reading of the stories. What's interesting here is that the percentage of nuclear families is actually much higher in northern Virginia than in the rest of the state, and that northern Virginia is also the area of the state that is generally supportive of same-sex unions.

by Ben on Jul 22, 2011 6:05 pm • link • report

http://www.streetsblog.org/2011/07/13/to-close-the-gender-gap-separate-cyclists-from-cars/

by w on Jul 22, 2011 6:31 pm • link • report

@David C 'Men need to succeed, and women just have to stay alive. Hence the risk taking in men, and risk aversion in women.

Wow! ... That's not my experience at all. I think you're doing one of those things that many of the so-called smarthgrowthers do ... think your experience is everyone's experience. Do you realize that up till the 20th century (and well into it) that childbirth was such a risky proposition that there was a high chance of women dying of it. I think I read something about that in colonial times in the country something like 1 in 3 women died in childbirth. I'd say that's risk taking ...

by Lance on Jul 22, 2011 8:00 pm • link • report

*in this country

by Lance on Jul 22, 2011 8:02 pm • link • report

w, no threat meant, I was just trying to establish that I would know if you came to meetings. Sorry if it sounded like a threat. That was not my intent.

I do get tired of your script though. It seems like you say the same thing EVERY TIME, but you don't listen to anyone. If anyone disagrees with you, they're a Forrester acolyte.

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 10:55 pm • link • report

Lance, your argument doesn't make any sense. There are mountains and mountains of evidence about the relative risk comfort between men and women, so it is not based solely on my experience.

Evolutionarily speaking, I don't think childbirth necessarily qualifies as risky behavior. If the goal is to continue your genes into the next generation, childbirth is how you do it - not having children is a definite loser. Plus we have a pretty strong instinct to procreate.

But nice job of tying your nonsense argument to a slam on smartgrowthers.

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 11:01 pm • link • report

David C - if this is so why are you so closed mouthed about who you are? Sounds rather hostile to me- you insult me big time and yet you claim to know me. Not cool at all. I am not a mean person as all who know me can attest to. I really do not bite- except towards dishonest or weird types- Sorry- but I despise racers and road warriors because these people all drive cars and do not live cycling as a real way of life. How can a bike racer carry a load of groceries on HIS skinny wheeled bike? You need a bakefeits or a German bike not a silly silk tired prissy racing bike. You are an idiot for not revealing yourself and taunting me in public whoever you are. Grow a pair.

by w on Jul 22, 2011 11:46 pm • link • report

I am not a mean person as all who know me can attest to...I despise racers and road warriors

So, there is nothing mean about despising whole classes of people just because of what kind of bike they ride? Because you mistakenly believe they all drive cars (which in and of itself isn't worthy of hatred) or that they can't carry groceries on their bike (they can).

Why don't you get to know some actual racers (I'm not sure what a road warrior is) and I think you'll find they are not deserving of your hatred. Get over your hatred, and I think you'll find your mind open a bit.

I know who you are, because you've been covered in the Washington Post, but you don't know me. You're semi-famous - me, not so much. So if I told you my name, I'm not sure how that would help. What would you do if you knew my full name?

by David C on Jul 22, 2011 11:58 pm • link • report

why do you use the word "hate"?
I have never used this word in my dialogue...
and why are you such a wimp about meeting me face to face or actually talking or revealing who you are ?
sounds like you enjoy assaulting and insulting people without actually trying to learn the truth- are you afraid of your own identity?

by w on Jul 23, 2011 12:57 am • link • report

despise = hate

send your email to me at davidc@ggwash.org and I'll tell you everything you want to know about me. But you'll have to apologize for calling me a wimp and an idiot and accusing me of assaulting you. [I'm also unclear where I insulted you].

by David C on Jul 23, 2011 1:32 am • link • report

I find it extremely bad manners when people say they know something about you and will not come forward or hide away, and throw bolts of insults around.
I am also not very impressed with David Alpert's monitoring of his blog. David- you need to look out for people like this a little better.

by w on Jul 23, 2011 7:32 am • link • report

@Jazzy-I think you're right -even with standards (the "scale") from 1986 today would be considered a "bad air qaulity" day.

I was responding to SBJ's assertion that the (majority) scientific concensus of what are harmful levels of air pollution is "propoganda". (For who? Who benefits with more precise knowlege of the risks associated w/ types and levels of air pollution exposure?)

yes heat contributes to certain types of air pollution and thus today is special.

by Tina on Jul 22, 2011 3:30 pm

I would love to see this or any blog talk about pollution in DC. I'm very unclear myself about how much we have, whether it's worse or better than other cities. On the one hand, as I say, we don't have heavy industry (not many places do anymore in this country), on the other hand, it does seem like there is an inordinate amount of residents with sinus and asthma issues. But that's just my walking around observation. Who knows if it bears out.

On another matter, whenever I feel attacked unnecessarily on the internet, what I most often try to do is ignore the person so that it does not go on and on, pointlessly.

by Jazzy on Jul 23, 2011 8:09 am • link • report

@David C. -- Me: I knew I was taking a risk that...

You: Greater risk-taking is often indistinguishable from stupidity.

..what are you saying...? ;-)

by Tina on Jul 24, 2011 6:08 pm • link • report