|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Mary Wakefield in The Spectator
write thus
"After Wednesday’s Tube strike, most Londoners will have decided again that the only solution is a bicycle. But there’s a dark side to cycling in the city. Since I bought my first bike a year or so ago I have been astonished by the outbursts of spittle-flecked fury pedestrians unleash upon cyclists. Any minor deviation from the letter of the law — a quick pedal on the pavement, a whizz through Hyde Park — induces instant Tourette’s syndrome in passers-by: ‘You stupid f—–ing cow! Get off your f—–ing bike!’ etc., etc., followed by a furious rant about how, literally, lethal bicycles are. Last week I crept cautiously through a red light on Oxford Street, craning left and right to make sure the coast was clear — no traffic, no pregnant shoppers, no old ladies pushing tartan wheelie-bags. I had, however, been spotted. About 15 feet further on, a man stepped into the road in front of me and shouted, ‘C—–, I saw you! C—–!’ ‘What’s wrong with you? Why do you care?’ I asked, hopelessly. ‘C—–,’ he said again. It’s the by-law enthusiasts’ expletive of choice. I recently wrote a short piece asking why we react with such violence to minor affronts, giving as an example a man who saw me biking on the pavement and spat in my face. I received several letters in reply. The latest, from Anonymous in Hemel Hempstead, begins, ‘Dear bubble-brained c—–. You make me sick. Frankly you got off lightly. If it had been me, I would have broken your jaw.’ I spent Friday on the phone to the Metropolitan Police, who have promised to find out if any pedestrians are ever injured by cyclists..." I'm rather suprised that the Spectator is so coy as to delete expletives. Probably well deserved in retaliation for pavement cruising and red light running, IMO. The article later goes on to recount a visit to the writer's favourite place of worship; the Anglican, and appropriately named for a cyclist I thought, Holy Trinity Brompton. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Mary Wakefield in The Spectator
[Not Responding] wrote:
Any minor deviation from the letter of the law - a quick pedal on the pavement, a whizz through Hyde Park - induces instant Tourette's syndrome in passers-by: I'm with the pedestrians (although not in such a forthright manner). If the author was in a car, would she drive in the same way as she cycles? If not, why not....obviously the highway code is completely optional for her. Regards, Pete. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Mary Wakefield in The Spectator
"[Not Responding]" wrote in message
news I'm rather suprised that the Spectator is so coy as to delete expletives. Probably well deserved in retaliation for pavement cruising and red light running, IMO. Since we weren't there, we can't say to what extent her actions caused any alarm or inconvenience to anybody, although it seems she feels they didn't cause any. Whatever the case may be, two wrongs make a right. I don't find the use of aggressively foul language, spitting in the face of a woman or threatening brutality for minor infractions suggestive of a civil mentality on the part of those who did it. To find such behaviour acceptable in the name of 'well-deserved retaliation', while knowing nothing more about the circumstances than what she has written, seems to me to only to encourage the brutalisation of society, and would appear to put you on a par with those who do such things. Rich |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
24 hours of Temecula report from a spectator - lots o pics | Michael Paul | Mountain Biking | 3 | April 28th 04 04:07 AM |
Spectator comments | gpickett00 | Unicycling | 5 | March 10th 04 11:32 PM |
Trans Pennine Trail - Chesterfiled to Wakefield | MSeries | UK | 1 | March 6th 04 01:04 PM |
Spectator Article | [Not Responding] | UK | 19 | January 19th 04 10:18 AM |