Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Feminism: chat

Original poster

Domestic Violence and Cycling analogy - has limitations.

68 replies

unhombre · 30/08/2012 19:09

I've just posted this on a cycling thread in 'Chat' - it's an analogy that I've often pondered upon over the years whilst pedalling along, but never articulated it. I'd be curious about how far this 'runs' re an understanding of cyclists experience and the experience of DV. It isn't perfect, for obvious reasons, (eg lots of cyclists are women, as a simple starter) but I'd thought it was at least slightly interesting for those who have thought about it. Any contributory thoughts?

Domestic Violence and Cyclist/drivers analogy:

ok. Chucking some obs. out, and they could be controversial in some quarters:

  • approx. 2 cyclists per week are killed on roads. (this year that's slightly up), about the same as women being killed by ex- or current partners
  • we are warned about what we wear will make us more risky. ( I always wear bright stuff with lights but still get hit as a quick eg.)
  • we have as much right to share a common space with other road users, but the other road-users often fail to recognise that fact. ( female 'rights' in the home)
  • a driver/ poster above somewhere used the phrase ' I am kind to cyclist's generally', a common thought process that indicates ' I am more powerful than you but I will make allowance' when in fact, in law, we are equal on the road. ( and legally for women in the home).
  • at points of physical 'conflict' we are much more likely to come off worse.
  • the culture of society and transport policy is skewed in favour of drivers. Similar to a patriarcal society for males.
  • we are open to being abused because of 'who we are' by a more powerful, competing lobby.
  • when we die, or get seriously injured, there is likely to be only one witness i.e the perpetrator.

This is just a quick analysis, and as I say the analogy isn't perfect at all and has limitations, but it does provide some reflection as I cycle along.

OP posts:
Original poster
unhombre · 30/08/2012 20:43

Foot - 'mansplaining' - I don't understand.

OP posts:
Original poster
unhombre · 30/08/2012 20:41

Well, no it isn't 'crass' - it's rooted in a power imbalance, and how that is acted out in a space which is limited and 'contested' and congested, especially where one section is maligned and less powerful.
Of course the intentionality element is strong and critical, but the other stuff about it being a random analogy (chibi) is weak.

Accidents? Well, not so. Accidents are preventable. As are DV and sexual assaults, IF the rights of the potential and actual victims are recognised.

But ,yes it has limitations!!

OP posts:
FootLikeATractionEngine · 30/08/2012 20:39

You know the mansplaining thread? Bingo!

FootLikeATractionEngine · 30/08/2012 20:34

Your analogy might come close to being valid if the alternative to cycling meant giving up your job, uprooting your family, living in one room for a time with your kids, surviving on benefits, watching your back at all times, modifying your behaviour for the bulk of your daily life, going through a court case only to see the one driver that had it in for you get community service and be waiting for you after court and a hundred other things that are vastly different.

If there was one driver out to get one cyclist, your analogy would have some merit. As it is, you are just demonstrating your lack of understanding of dv.

pictish · 30/08/2012 20:32

OP - its a crap analogy, and a crass, oblivious one at that. Do stop being so silly.

DaniCalifornia · 30/08/2012 20:28

I don't understand it either chibi.

The only way it works is if car drivers are deliberately engaged in stalking one specific cyclist, intimidating them, and then physically assaulting them before killing them.

One, generally speaking, being an accident. The other being a deliberate policy of violence.

chibi · 30/08/2012 20:26

or is this like thing where everything gets measured in london buses 'this stadium is the equivalent of 36 london buses laid end to end'

what other yardsticks shall we use - 1/8 a transatlantic slave ship crossing?

yuck yuck yuck

TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 30/08/2012 20:26

I have explained and Plenty has enlarged upon why I find the whole analogy flawed, because of the intentionality. I don't think you can get past that.

It is interesting that 2 cyclists die a week and that's roughly equivalent to number of women killed by expartners - it gives a feel for the scale of both problems. But it isn't an analogy because all or almost all of cyclist deaths are accidents.

An analogy is good if it helps people see one of the problems more clearly eg I don't think I can take £10 out of the wallet of someone who lent me £20 earlier because they are already "in the lending game". George Galloway might disagree..Which of the points you raise do you think is enhanced by your analogy?

LemarchandsBox · 30/08/2012 20:25

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
unhombre · 30/08/2012 20:24

Maat - I have noooo idea! Sounds like a bit of victim-blaming to me. I've been 'hit' 7-8 times, come off 3-4 times as a result - never where I have been at fault at all. So I can only answer your question from ime.

OP posts:
chibi · 30/08/2012 20:23

can't the deaths of cyclists be terrible in and of themselves without having to analogise them to deaths of women at the hands of their partners?

i agree that it feels crass - when i read the op i winced

i just don't understand what the point of making this analogy is, can anyone explain please?

Maat · 30/08/2012 20:22

How many cyclists who have been hit do you think blame themselves or don't admit they have been hit because they feel ashamed?

Original poster
unhombre · 30/08/2012 20:21

Dani - you should get out more.

OP posts:
DaniCalifornia · 30/08/2012 20:19

You know, I don't think I've read anything quite so crass and asinine in a very long time.

Original poster
unhombre · 30/08/2012 20:18

Plenty - yes to most of what you say..BUT the difference is the 'desire to control' i.e. by virtue of size and power, 'I' will control what other road users (cyclists) can do, though legally I have no such power. I'll just exercise it through force'.

OP posts:
Original poster
unhombre · 30/08/2012 20:12

Ennis - partly yes, but it's much more than that. It's a question of attitude, recognition of 'rights to be there and protected by law', victim-blaming (you're all the same - I had a bad experience with one cyclist so you are all the same), and prob. mostly those who do everything to avoid being a 'victim' (lights, defensive riding, clothing, lights etc) still get hit and damaged at a rate comparable to DV stats.

OP posts:
TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 30/08/2012 20:05

Thanks, Plenty.

Original poster
unhombre · 30/08/2012 20:04

no, that isn't going to happen I don't think. It'll probably just make him more (understandably) annoyed, which isn't good.

OP posts:
TheDoctrineOfEnnis · 30/08/2012 20:03

Unhombre if your analogy was "women may feel vulnerable in a crowd of men like a cyclist does on a crowded road, because of the imbalance of physical power and non-transparent intent" I'd think it was closer to the mark.

PlentyOfPubeGardens · 30/08/2012 20:03

What Ennis said - But the main problem is intentionality. On the whole, no driver is intending to hurt a cyclist, thougn there may be somr culpability through inattention etc.

On the whole, someone who hits their partner does intend to hurt them.

You're comparing accidents with deliberate violence.

This is not just 'one strong limitation'. If your analogy is supposed to be 'about how society views cyclists and the evident attitudes toward them' then it just doesn't work. There is a world of difference between the attitudes of (some) motorists towards cyclists - carelessness and inattention - and the attitudes of men who are violent towards women - hatred, rage and a desire to control.

It is trivialising because it implies that DV is something that can just kind of happen when people are not paying attention. Given the way women explain away their injuries as 'accidents' or 'being clumsy', it's a pretty grim analogy when you stop to think about it.

LemarchandsBox · 30/08/2012 19:59

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

pictish · 30/08/2012 19:52

I should add a Grin - seeings as I am chuckling at this thread, even though I probably shouldn't.

pictish · 30/08/2012 19:51

You cyclists are just thinkers are you?
Ok then.

TheFidgetySheep · 30/08/2012 19:50

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Original poster
unhombre · 30/08/2012 19:49

Lemarch - well it still IS a choice re biking to work and remaning in an abusive relationship. And of course I was saying it isn't a perfect analogy. Just a potentially interesting one.

OP posts: