I think more people should be encouraged to cycle. Finding out why they don't is a good place to start. Amazingly enough it is possible that the reasons why they don't have nothing to do with skin colour. I'm not sure why that's controversial.
What some people find tiresome is the way that everything is reduced to skin colour. It may be relevant. But equally it may not be. Maybe keep an open mind rather than start with a preconceived assumption, eh?
.
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
There are lots of reasons why and I'm sure you could get more of every type of person cycling.
In some places, much like with say various things with women after years of discrimination there did need to be an attempt to correct that which did involve concentrating on skin colour, the civil rights movement in America was very much about skin colour and rightly so. This is in terms of the general left concentrating on skin colour but in just this circumstance it isn't even about discrimination people have suffered in the past or anything like that it just seems like a sensible idea to get more people to cycle by going for a market with more unfulfilled potential and people on the right* have taken against the idea in some form.
*In terms of this argument at least I imagine the more right wing being more likely on that side but in general terms I'm not saying you are some kind of representative of the right.
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
I think more people should be encouraged to cycle. Finding out why they don't is a good place to start. Amazingly enough it is possible that the reasons why they don't have nothing to do with skin colour. I'm not sure why that's controversial.
What some people find tiresome is the way that everything is reduced to skin colour. It may be relevant. But equally it may not be. Maybe keep an open mind rather than start with a preconceived assumption, eh?
Okay but if we're keeping an open mind then why are you so pissed off that somebody is suggesting that it is?
I'm not.
I'm suggesting based on my experience as a cyclist over decades in London the sorts of factors which influence why people cycle. I hope the cycling tsar takes these into account.
Sometimes questionnaires designed to get information are based on assumptions which mean that relevant information is missed. To give another example: my local council regularly sent out questionnaires through my children's schools trying to find out why people drove kids to school rather than walk with them. That questionnaire never once asked an obvious (to me) question: namely, was the person driving children to school a working parent who needed to get into work and therefore did not have the time to walk children to school? They assumed that the parent who dropped the children off had all the time in the world to do so. The reality is that when you are a working mother you are fighting for every minute to do all the things you need to do and you are desperate not to be seen as the last person into the office in the morning because of your child care responsibilities.
Had the council been more aware of these concerns it might not have - repeatedly - brought in measures which, frankly, increased the stress on working mothers at the start of the day rather than actually help them. Then it wondered why its policies did not have the desired effect.
Why would May and the government interfere in a devolved issue?
Because there has been no power-sharing executive at Stormont for 15 months so there is no devolved administration.
Aren't the DUP the ones standing in the way of a new executive? Honestly, Northern Ireland is far more trouble than it's worth. Let the Irish have it back and spend an extra £350m a week on the NHS.
I don't want to interrupt the outrage cycle here but aren't the guys comments about getting more BAME people cycling rather than demanding less white people ride bikes?
Unless there is some kind of limit I am unaware of and his plans would involve stopping white people cycling as a result.
FEWER white people
NOT less white people.
It makes no difference to comprehending the point in this instance, therefore the distinction is meaningless in this instance.
Why would May and the government interfere in a devolved issue?
Because there has been no power-sharing executive at Stormont for 15 months so there is no devolved administration.
Aren't the DUP the ones standing in the way of a new executive? Honestly, Northern Ireland is far more trouble than it's worth. Let the Irish have it back and spend an extra £350m a week on the NHS.
I think those are Jezza's policies you have just pinched!
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
But if that's true, then why are there a fair few working-class hikers, and why can much of our (English) access legislation come out of the actions of working-class people from Manchester and Sheffield in the 1930s?
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
But if that's true, then why are there a fair few working-class hikers, and why can much of our (English) access legislation come out of the actions of working-class people from Manchester and Sheffield in the 1930s?
- _-
Places that are right in amongst the high lands we're talking about.
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
But if that's true, then why are there a fair few working-class hikers, and why can much of our (English) access legislation come out of the actions of working-class people from Manchester and Sheffield in the 1930s?
Because Brits have been steeped in a culture of things that happen in Britain. Immigrants less so.
As @Elliot notes there are things that are quintessentially British that it might take immigrants a generation or three to have the same attitude towards.
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
But if that's true, then why are there a fair few working-class hikers, and why can much of our (English) access legislation come out of the actions of working-class people from Manchester and Sheffield in the 1930s?
Because Brits have been steeped in a culture of things that happen in Britain. Immigrants less so.
As @Elliot notes there are things that are quintessentially British that it might take immigrants a generation or three to have the same attitude towards.
It would surely not be beyond us to set up safeguards for those vulnerable people who might need protection. I honestly don't see at as argument for maintaining the status quo. Where assisted dying is permitted I have not seen any evidence to suggest that the the abuses that you hypothesise are occurring.
I don't believe in Gods of any type but have no problem with people who do. My gripe is with organised religions that have sought to impose their own beliefs on people that do not share them, it has occurred throughout history and continues to do so now. I had the same discussions during the same sex marriage debate - I can see that someone with, say strong Catholic views, would not themselves want to marry someone of the same sex, what I have never understood is why they go beyond that and want to stop anyone else doing it. Freedom of religion certainly but provided we can also have freedom from religion if we don't buy into "faith".
I am assuming that as a generally left wing party they are pro abortion.
But presumably they are against Westminster intervening in devolved matters?
I would think that they favour letting the devolved body decide, but also that they think it ridiculous that a party refuses to represent its voters in the relevant government. Basically, people who vote for parties who don't represent them need to suck it up, just like anti-Tory Sinn Fein voters have to accept a Tory government.
Oh dear. I've been reading some of the wibble about BAME (non-)cyclists, which has now expanded into walking/hiking too.
Have any of the posters pontificating asked anyone black or Asian why they might feel excluded from certain leisure activities? No? Thought not.
Oh, don't be a silly sausage. I was not complaining about it: just noting my observation. I even asked if it was a problem or not. As I am an individual and only have what I have seen, it may even be incorrect.
So why would anyone who is black or Asian feel excluded from hiking? I've no effing idea - we're generally friendly folks. Would you care to opine a reason, or are you just going to fap off pathetically over your keyboard all evening?
I expect as part of any Irish reunification deal the EU will demand we pay the Irish republic £9bn a year so they can continue the current UK subsidy to NI - along with another top up so NI can keep the NHS and ensure its residents don't need to pay £50 to see a GP or £100 to go to casualty or £70 a night to stay in hospital as they do south of the border.
And if we don't pay up - the troubles will return! Mrs May will put up a fuss for about a week and then completely cave in and agree to hand over £15bn a year to that nice Mr Veradkhar.
Places that are right in amongst the high lands we're talking about.
And places that have higher than average proportions of ethnic minorities.
I'm not saying it's a problem, or that there needs to be some forced route-marches to make up the difference. I just get so much joy out of walking I think everyone should be doing it, regardless of gender, race or creed.
Edit: another point. The cost of entry to walking is low: you do not need any special equipment to get started except for a sturdy pair of boots, and you can download good maps off t'Internet. Cycling also has low costs, unless you want a decent bike. Some other sports and activities can cost a fortune to do, e.g. swimming, tennis, golf.
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
But if that's true, then why are there a fair few working-class hikers, and why can much of our (English) access legislation come out of the actions of working-class people from Manchester and Sheffield in the 1930s?
Because Brits have been steeped in a culture of things that happen in Britain. Immigrants less so.
As @Elliot notes there are things that are quintessentially British that it might take immigrants a generation or three to have the same attitude towards.
Only on PB could a reasonable observation on demographic differentials by the bloke charged with increasing cycling rates cause such outrage. Several of the comments below induced much LOLing on a gruelling day for me, for which I give thanks!
Try making a "a reasonable observation on demographic differentials " when commenting on recent child exploitation legal cases and see where it gets you.
I’m sure that a survey of those who use Mobikes would yield a mix closer to the average.
I recall that you are based in Ealing? I too live in the borough, and am getting heartily sick of tripping over abandoned Mobikes wherever I go.
It is undoubtedly very convenient to be able to pick them up and drop them at will but yes I foresee a stronger nudge in future than just having designated parking zones.
That said they have been tricky to find these past few weeks so not sure they constitute a problem just yet.
Places that are right in amongst the high lands we're talking about.
And places that have higher than average proportions of ethnic minorities.
I'm not saying it's a problem, or that there needs to be some forced route-marches to make up the difference. I just get so much joy out of walking I think everyone should be doing it, regardless of gender, race or creed.
Edit: another point. The cost of entry to walking is low: you do not need any special equipment to get started except for a sturdy pair of boots, and you can download good maps off t'Internet. Cycling also has low costs, unless you want a decent bike. Some other sports and activities can cost a fortune to do, e.g. swimming, tennis, golf.
If you have grown up in the inner cities and are of whatever racial flavour you might find the countryside a forbidding place.
< Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
There's something in that - personally I've always lived in cities until this year, mostly abroad. I've never been in a beer garden (and vaguely assumed that they mainly exist in Bavaria), and don't even know what pub cricket is. But one can acquire a taste too - I've never liked the countryside, but I've got to know people who do, and they're showing me that I've been missing something.
< Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
There's something in that - personally I've always lived in cities until this year, mostly abroad. I've never been in a beer garden (and vaguely assumed that they mainly exist in Bavaria), and don't even know what pub cricket is. But one can acquire a taste too - I've never liked the countryside, but I've got to know people who do, and they're showing me that I've been missing something.
Places that are right in amongst the high lands we're talking about.
And places that have higher than average proportions of ethnic minorities.
I'm not saying it's a problem, or that there needs to be some forced route-marches to make up the difference. I just get so much joy out of walking I think everyone should be doing it, regardless of gender, race or creed.
Edit: another point. The cost of entry to walking is low: you do not need any special equipment to get started except for a sturdy pair of boots, and you can download good maps off t'Internet. Cycling also has low costs, unless you want a decent bike. Some other sports and activities can cost a fortune to do, e.g. swimming, tennis, golf.
If you have grown up in the inner cities and are of whatever racial flavour you might find the countryside a forbidding place.
Indeed, and you might be correct. However I have met lots of working-class hikers / ramblers, and I have done a fair amount of urban walking.
Places that are right in amongst the high lands we're talking about.
And places that have higher than average proportions of ethnic minorities.
I'm not saying it's a problem, or that there needs to be some forced route-marches to make up the difference. I just get so much joy out of walking I think everyone should be doing it, regardless of gender, race or creed.
Edit: another point. The cost of entry to walking is low: you do not need any special equipment to get started except for a sturdy pair of boots, and you can download good maps off t'Internet. Cycling also has low costs, unless you want a decent bike. Some other sports and activities can cost a fortune to do, e.g. swimming, tennis, golf.
If you have grown up in the inner cities and are of whatever racial flavour you might find the countryside a forbidding place.
Indeed, and you might be correct. However I have met lots of working-class hikers / ramblers, and I have done a fair amount of urban walking.
There are plenty of working class people who live and whose families always have lived in the countryside, Josias!!!
< Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
There's something in that - personally I've always lived in cities until this year, mostly abroad. I've never been in a beer garden (and vaguely assumed that they mainly exist in Bavaria), and don't even know what pub cricket is. But one can acquire a taste too - I've never liked the countryside, but I've got to know people who do, and they're showing me that I've been missing something.
Nick, a warning: I know you like animals, but if someone wants to take you dogging in the countryside, think twice ...
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
But if that's true, then why are there a fair few working-class hikers, and why can much of our (English) access legislation come out of the actions of working-class people from Manchester and Sheffield in the 1930s?
Indeed, Elliott can speak for himself, I definitely love green spaces. It's one of the reasons I'm looking around either Hampstead Heath or Regent's Park for somewhere to live.
< Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
There's something in that - personally I've always lived in cities until this year, mostly abroad. I've never been in a beer garden (and vaguely assumed that they mainly exist in Bavaria), and don't even know what pub cricket is. But one can acquire a taste too - I've never liked the countryside, but I've got to know people who do, and they're showing me that I've been missing something.
You have never been in a beer garden?!? They also have beer gardens in cities!
Oh dear. I've been reading some of the wibble about BAME (non-)cyclists, which has now expanded into walking/hiking too.
Have any of the posters pontificating asked anyone black or Asian why they might feel excluded from certain leisure activities? No? Thought not.
Oh, don't be a silly sausage. I was not complaining about it: just noting my observation. I even asked if it was a problem or not. As I am an individual and only have what I have seen, it may even be incorrect.
So why would anyone who is black or Asian feel excluded from hiking? I've no effing idea - we're generally friendly folks. Would you care to opine a reason, or are you just going to fap off pathetically over your keyboard all evening?
Saying as I'm married to an Asian woman who enjoys walking in the countryside I think that I am reasonably well informed in this area.
Just look at the typical depiction of people in a walking group, or visiting an RSPB reserve or National Trust site. It just screams out 'This isn't for the likes of you!'
Some interesting comments on this thread. I'm only half-way through catching up, but two themes have surfaced:with an interesting contrast. 1) People should be allowed to end their lives if they wish to do so. 2) People should be discouraged from behaving in ways that decrease their life expectancy/ encouraged to behave in ways that increase their life expectancy.
(On two, it occurs to me that a marker for high cycle usage may be flat terrain. Can anyone comment on this?)
edited to add: assuming the comments haven't already appeared & I just haven't reached them yet!
It doesn't ruffle my feathers. I'm keen on cycling. I think the reasons - based on my experience - for why people do and don't do it are quite subtle and change depending on circumstances. If the cycling tsar wants to encourage cycling I would suggest he focus on finding out those reasons.
I don't speak for the right. But maybe, just maybe, some on the right focus on white skin colour in a way which is tiresome is in reaction to the way some on the left have in an equally tiresome way focused on skin colour.
It would be nice if we could get past it, I agree with you on that.
Anyway thanks as always for the debate.
Not cycling, but on my many and varied walks it's noticeable how few ethnic minorities I see out and doing recreational walks. Yes, I see a few dog walkers, but the number of 'serious' walkers / hikers I've met is very low - and far under the proportion of ethnic minorities in the country.
Why does this occur? Well, ethnic minorities tend to clump around towns and cities rather than the countryside, so perhaps it is lack of access. Then again, I've done plenty of urban walking and have not seen many. Perhaps walking/hiking is a middle-class activity, and working-class people cannot afford the time - then why were the great access marches led by working-class people (e.g. the Kinder Trespass) from the cities? Or perhaps it is cultural - but I fail to see why that might be.
The next question is whether it matters, and I'm torn on this. On one hand, it's great exercise and a superb away of getting to know the country and its people. On the other - well, it's just hiking ...
Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
But if that's true, then why are there a fair few working-class hikers, and why can much of our (English) access legislation come out of the actions of working-class people from Manchester and Sheffield in the 1930s?
Because Brits have been steeped in a culture of things that happen in Britain. Immigrants less so.
As @Elliot notes there are things that are quintessentially British that it might take immigrants a generation or three to have the same attitude towards.
Some interesting comments on this thread. I'm only half-way through catching up, but two themes have surfaced:with an interesting contrast. 1) People should be allowed to end their lives if they wish to do so. 2) People should be discouraged from behaving in ways that decrease their life expectancy/ encouraged to behave in ways that increase their life expectancy.
(On two, it occurs to me that a marker for high cycle usage may be flat terrain. Can anyone comment on this?)
edited to add: assuming the comments haven't already appeared & I just haven't reached them yet!
For recreational cycling it’s the opposite; for commuting it might well be true.
Oh dear. I've been reading some of the wibble about BAME (non-)cyclists, which has now expanded into walking/hiking too.
Have any of the posters pontificating asked anyone black or Asian why they might feel excluded from certain leisure activities? No? Thought not.
Oh, don't be a silly sausage. I was not complaining about it: just noting my observation. I even asked if it was a problem or not. As I am an individual and only have what I have seen, it may even be incorrect.
So why would anyone who is black or Asian feel excluded from hiking? I've no effing idea - we're generally friendly folks. Would you care to opine a reason, or are you just going to fap off pathetically over your keyboard all evening?
Saying as I'm married to an Asian woman who enjoys walking in the countryside I think that I am reasonably well informed in this area.
Just look at the typical depiction of people in a walking group, or visiting an RSPB reserve or National Trust site. It just screams out 'This isn't for the likes of you!'
So:
Do you think this is a problem? What would you do about it?
< Growing up in urban areas with parents that grew up in urban areas affects your mindset of what you look to do in your spare time. Very few ethnic minority Brits long for green spaces, beer gardens and pub cricket because they've never known it and have little sentimental attachment to it.
There's something in that - personally I've always lived in cities until this year, mostly abroad. I've never been in a beer garden (and vaguely assumed that they mainly exist in Bavaria), and don't even know what pub cricket is. But one can acquire a taste too - I've never liked the countryside, but I've got to know people who do, and they're showing me that I've been missing something.
There's no shortage of beer gardens in urban areas Nick.
Its basically a pub with a back garden in which customers eat and drink outside when the weather is nice.
Comments
In some places, much like with say various things with women after years of discrimination there did need to be an attempt to correct that which did involve concentrating on skin colour, the civil rights movement in America was very much about skin colour and rightly so. This is in terms of the general left concentrating on skin colour but in just this circumstance it isn't even about discrimination people have suffered in the past or anything like that it just seems like a sensible idea to get more people to cycle by going for a market with more unfulfilled potential and people on the right* have taken against the idea in some form.
*In terms of this argument at least I imagine the more right wing being more likely on that side but in general terms I'm not saying you are some kind of representative of the right.
Thank you for the debate as well.
Because there has been no power-sharing executive at Stormont for 15 months so there is no devolved administration.
I'm suggesting based on my experience as a cyclist over decades in London the sorts of factors which influence why people cycle. I hope the cycling tsar takes these into account.
Sometimes questionnaires designed to get information are based on assumptions which mean that relevant information is missed. To give another example: my local council regularly sent out questionnaires through my children's schools trying to find out why people drove kids to school rather than walk with them. That questionnaire never once asked an obvious (to me) question: namely, was the person driving children to school a working parent who needed to get into work and therefore did not have the time to walk children to school? They assumed that the parent who dropped the children off had all the time in the world to do so. The reality is that when you are a working mother you are fighting for every minute to do all the things you need to do and you are desperate not to be seen as the last person into the office in the morning because of your child care responsibilities.
Had the council been more aware of these concerns it might not have - repeatedly - brought in measures which, frankly, increased the stress on working mothers at the start of the day rather than actually help them. Then it wondered why its policies did not have the desired effect.
However....
Aren't the DUP the ones standing in the way of a new executive? Honestly, Northern Ireland is far more trouble than it's worth. Let the Irish have it back and spend an extra £350m a week on the NHS.
Edit: No charge for fixing the blockquote
Places that are right in amongst the high lands we're talking about.
Have any of the posters pontificating asked anyone black or Asian why they might feel excluded from certain leisure activities? No? Thought not.
As @Elliot notes there are things that are quintessentially British that it might take immigrants a generation or three to have the same attitude towards.
@ Cyclefree re Assisted Dying.
It would surely not be beyond us to set up safeguards for those vulnerable people who might need protection. I honestly don't see at as argument for maintaining the status quo. Where assisted dying is permitted I have not seen any evidence to suggest that the the abuses that you hypothesise are occurring.
I don't believe in Gods of any type but have no problem with people who do. My gripe is with organised religions that have sought to impose their own beliefs on people that do not share them, it has occurred throughout history and continues to do so now. I had the same discussions during the same sex marriage debate - I can see that someone with, say strong Catholic views, would not themselves want to marry someone of the same sex, what I have never understood is why they go beyond that and want to stop anyone else doing it. Freedom of religion certainly but provided we can also have freedom from religion if we don't buy into "faith".
So why would anyone who is black or Asian feel excluded from hiking? I've no effing idea - we're generally friendly folks. Would you care to opine a reason, or are you just going to fap off pathetically over your keyboard all evening?
And if we don't pay up - the troubles will return! Mrs May will put up a fuss for about a week and then completely cave in and agree to hand over £15bn a year to that nice Mr Veradkhar.
I'm not saying it's a problem, or that there needs to be some forced route-marches to make up the difference. I just get so much joy out of walking I think everyone should be doing it, regardless of gender, race or creed.
Edit: another point. The cost of entry to walking is low: you do not need any special equipment to get started except for a sturdy pair of boots, and you can download good maps off t'Internet. Cycling also has low costs, unless you want a decent bike. Some other sports and activities can cost a fortune to do, e.g. swimming, tennis, golf.
That said they have been tricky to find these past few weeks so not sure they constitute a problem just yet.
I was talking about the urban/rural divide.
Just look at the typical depiction of people in a walking group, or visiting an RSPB reserve or National Trust site. It just screams out 'This isn't for the likes of you!'
NEW THREAD
Some interesting comments on this thread. I'm only half-way through catching up, but two themes have surfaced:with an interesting contrast.
1) People should be allowed to end their lives if they wish to do so.
2) People should be discouraged from behaving in ways that decrease their life expectancy/ encouraged to behave in ways that increase their life expectancy.
(On two, it occurs to me that a marker for high cycle usage may be flat terrain. Can anyone comment on this?)
edited to add: assuming the comments haven't already appeared & I just haven't reached them yet!
My prediction for Lewisham East (versus 2017)
Lab 54 (-14)
Con 18 (-5)
LD 23 (+19)
Whether or not there is a devolved administration does not effect whether a matter is devolved or not.
Westminster should only get involved for important AND urgent matters. This is important but not urgent.
Do you think this is a problem?
What would you do about it?
Its basically a pub with a back garden in which customers eat and drink outside when the weather is nice.
https://www.timeout.com/london/bars-pubs/londons-best-beer-gardens