Originally Posted by Helmet Head
I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were looking for an explanation of inferiority.
When you asked, "Inferiority?? Can you please explain this to me?", I thought you were asking what I was referring to when I wrote to Brian, "First your tribute to cyclist inferiority, ...". An explanation for what I was referring to can be found in Brian's post #18.
For an explanation of inferiority, I suggest a dictionary.
Main Entry: in.fe.ri.or
...of little or less importance, value, or merit
Main Entry: inferiority complex
2 : a collective sense of cultural, regional, or national inferiority
The reason I refer to post #18 as a tribute to cyclist inferiority is because of the last two paragraphs, in particular the bolded sections:
If you still have trouble recognizing the language of inferiority in Brian's words, replace "cyclists" with "Greenies" (or any other minority of your choosing), motorists with "Others", a few minor edits, and see what you get:
Greenies are hard to see, and are slow.
On a facilities designed for Others, who travel at a speed much faster than most Greenies can travel, a Greenie is out of place.
This situation puts Greenies and Others in conflict and competition.
In this situation, Civil Rights is merely a technique of using positioning as a weapon to win this competition, to make an Other respond to the nimble and bold Greenie, to give the Greenie confidence that the competition can be won, to normalize the relations so that the Others, again, can behave in a way which doesn't involve thinking.
But it is a forceful and competitive position, and the Greenie is out of place, so emotions flair.
Others are mostly cooperative when the facility is designed for both Greenies and Others, and Others are mostly uncooperative when the facility is designed solely for Others (but Greenies dare to use the Others-only facility anyway).
I think Others feel the same way about Greenies too. Designing a facility for both Others and Greenies is difficult, and there will always be some points of conflict, but rulemaking, education, and good design can make up for the shortcomings of such a dual usage system.
But the alternative, designing the system for only Others and neglecting space for Greenies will always put Others and Greenies in competition and conflict.
See what I mean?
Ok, now I'm clear on what the two of you are talking (arguing?) about. But...
By the definition that you gave for inferiority:
...of little or less importance, value, or merit I can see where he is coming from, really. The roads nowadays are mostly designed for motor traffic and little thought is given for anything else, I've stated that before, but if you will allow me to examine my own statement a bit further, especially in regards to the rules of the road and what is taught to motorists because after all, this whole discussion is about motorists and cyclists being mixed together.
In the motor vehicle code there is a statement that somewhat goes "
bicycles are allowed full use of the road". Granted, that is not verbatim, but you get the point right? But nowhere in the vehicle code does it state
"motor vehicles are allowed full use of the road", it is just implied and obvious. People are licensed to use the roads with a motor vehicle, whereas people on bicycles are not licensed. This also leads to "illusion" that roads are meant for motor vehicles. Bicycles have no governing body on safety necessities for the road, motor vehicles do. along purt-near
every road in the US you find service stations for motor vehicles. But if you are out on the road and need to have your bicycle worked on by someone other than yourself, you are for the most part SOL.
Speed limits are mostly set higher than bicycles are capable of traveling by regular people.
There is a multitude of parking for motor vehicles, whereas sanctioned bicycle parking is few and far between.
People think of bicycles mostly as toys that *some* people use for transportation, whereas motor vehicles are seen as transportation that *some* people use as toys.
All of this and more lead to the widespread belief that bicycles are inferior, and by the definition you have provided, especially the words
less importance, value, or merit this pretty much holds true, just by the lack of facilities (accessible service centers, parking, etc) alone.
Granted, the
fact is, bicycles have as much merit on the road as any other vehicle... technically. But the lack of great masses of them leads to people believing otherwise. To to deter this discussion any further from where it already is, but 150 years ago in America, the black man was an inferior form of human. Of course we all know that is horse **** now and that whole episode of american history should never have happened, but your great-ancestors in America (assuming you had any) knew it for fact... and by law.