This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
note that applies only in areas without real bicycle infrastructure
note that some exercise is needed for humans for healthy life - and I consider silly to either end as a diabetic land whale or first spend time in bus/car and then again in gym
If something requires you to wear a helmet while you do it, then it's hardly safe.
Exercise is nice to have but unnecessary. Obesity is a dietary problem, not an exercise problem.
Exercise is an absolute must have for a quality life.
More options
Context Copy link
Cycling does not require wearing helmet.
At least commuting cycling on cycleways and low-traffic roads. If you do MTB/downhill then yes, you should have helmet. And if you drive on road where you have trucks and buses and cars going more than 30 km/h then helmet will not help so much anyway in case of a collision.
Zero exercise and eating little is better than zero exercise and eating enormous amounts. But zero exercise and sitting all day is not exactly health either.
Cycling absolutely requires a helmet. Biking in a nice American suburban neighborhood as a child, I got flung off my bike and came down hard on the front of my head. I smashed the front of a helmet and blacked out for some indeterminate period of time. I regained consciousness with a firetruck and a few firemen around me.
No cars were involved in this crash. Just a kid getting some cloth wrapped up in his front wheel. That helmet saved my life. If you get catapulted over your front wheel, you'll be wearing a helmet, or you'll likely get your head smashed open.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Most of the country lacks “real infrastructure” for bikes. At best the state will paint a few lines on existing roads and call the rightmost lane a bike lane with no real barriers against traffic. At worst, they paint a bicycle lane symbol on a road with a 35mph speed limit and stick up a “share the road” sign or two. It gives the state prestige “we’re supporting green infrastructure!” And cash from the Feds. But it’s not a safe way to ride.
And exercise is pretty easy to get if you do a little while watching TV in the evening.
I guess you mean Canada? Still, it would be "Riding a bicycle in Canada is dangerous" not "Riding a bicycle is dangerous" and is fixable relatively easily with some competence and effort.
In the same declaring "walking alone in city center during night is inherently dangerous and cannot be safe" is not true.
that is not a bicycle infrastructure, that is just pure incompetence
I’m in the Midwest actually. And I drive on one of these “bike routes” daily. The speed limit is 35 MPH, cars regularly hit 40-45 because the speed isn’t enforced. Not only is there no shoulder on the road, but there’s a revine right at the edge of the road. But yes, after the mayor hit a biker, they painted the bike path symbols on the road and stuck up a few signs. But they did get a grant from DC for having bike lanes.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link