Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles • Hacker News Board

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#81

Post by bronson » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 10:38 PM UTC

mattrices wrote: post #79

Fricken wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I picked up a portage bag, which is a heavy duty waterproof backpack big enough to hold a dead body, but I use it mostly for groceries and other big hauls on a bike. It's basically just a big bucket you wear on your back. I suppose it's less comfortable than a trailer, but it doesn't require setup time, stores away nicely, and can hold 2 week's worth of groceries for 2.

Would you link the portage bag youre refering to?

My family called them Duluth Bags: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duluth_pack

They're just giant bags with straps: no frame, no padding. They might be hard to find online but you should be able to find one in pretty much any outdoor shop. Maybe look for a 120L duffel with straps. Love 'em.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#82

Post by btrettel » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 10:41 PM UTC

monkeywork wrote: post #78

btrettel wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone who has read the law in multiple states, your reading of the law seems to be selective. You state that there are "very few very specific exceptions", when in California I count 7 exceptions that cover a lot: 1. When the cyclist is going at or near the speed limit. 2. When the cyclist is overtaking or passing. 3. When the cyclist is preparing for a left turn. 4. When the cyclist deems it necessary for safet…

In general terms I find that: 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 = all rare (or only valid for brief moments in time). You seem to be lumping #4 in for all cases which is a subjective view and I would argue isn't at all close to 95 or 99% of the time. Thus I maintain that "very few very specific exceptions" applies and is not selective reading. I'd further suggest that you're pushing an agenda instead of being pragmatic and honest. It…

On what basis do you say these are rare? My experience as a cyclist differs strongly with your statements.

Many drivers don't seem to realize that cyclists take very different paths than drivers do. You might be thinking "where I drive, these exceptions usually don't apply" but you should instead be thinking about where cyclists ride. Yes, these paths do intersect, but a cyclist will typically pick lower stress paths.

Let's take my commute as an example, starting at my home:

1. Bike lane until I have to make a left turn. I take the travel lane to make the turn. Note that as far as I'm aware, using the left turn lane (i.e., taking the lane) is required by law, not merely allowed for cyclists. This is because turning left from the far right is obviously dangerous. Do you think left turns are rare? I don't.

2. Short road segment leading to a stop light. I take the lane here because the speed is low.

3. Right turn onto a road with signs and road markings saying that cyclists can take the lane. Despite the signs, I get harassed by road raging drivers here much more frequently than I'd like. (The reason for the signs seems to be a reminder of the previous #4 to drivers. The single lane is perhaps 9 feet wide and there are parked cars on the right. Definitely unsafe to ride far to the right. I've been nearly doored riding in the center of the lane here. But all of this is irrelevant, as I don't need to invoke #4 to ride in the lane center here.)

4. Three stop lights in a row. Again, I take the lane because I'm no slower than anyone else.

5. 15 mph speed limit for about 3/4 of a mile until the destination. I take the lane because I'm usually going faster than that. This path includes both left and right turns.

Often during my commute I'll pass other cyclists who are going slower than I am. It's not uncommon for me to pass motor vehicles too, especially in the 15 mph part.

So my commute includes all of these aside from 4, 5, and 6. I can't be "lumping #4 in for all cases" here.

I don't take the lane for my entire commute. But for the 2/3 of my commute that doesn't have bike lanes, it's easy to legally justify taking the regular travel lane.

And to be clear, here's my agenda: Cycling safely on the road. The main obstacle I see is dangerous drivers, and sometimes the solution is to take the lane. If you don't like that, encourage your fellow drivers to treat cyclists nicer.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#83

Post by Obi_Juan_Kenobi » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 10:43 PM UTC

Fricken wrote: post #74

mturmon wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OTOH, if you use panniers, the heavy load is borne on the bike rather than your back.

I'm a hipster who rides a stripped down fixie, I don't want to bolt a bunch of crap onto my bike. Minimalism is my thing. Really what prompted me to get it was this big sketchbook I have that I wanted to be able to ride around with, and there was no regular bag of any sort capable of holding it except the portage bag. I've done lots of backcountry hiking so I'm not afraid of carrying a big heavy bag on my back for a…

You don't hike on your taint.

A bit of weight on your back while biking is fine, but it gets untenable surprisingly quickly.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#84

Post by ghaff » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 10:45 PM UTC

bronson wrote: post #81

mattrices wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you link the portage bag youre refering to?

My family called them Duluth Bags: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duluth_pack They're just giant bags with straps: no frame, no padding. They might be hard to find online but you should be able to find one in pretty much any outdoor shop. Maybe look for a 120L duffel with straps. Love 'em.

Northwest River Supplies is one common source.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#85

Post by st26 » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 10:48 PM UTC

anonacct37 wrote: post #62

noelwelsh wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you haven't considered it already, a bike trailer is likely to be a cheaper alternative to a cargo bike. I've had a bike trailer for years. Mine is a Croozer 2. I transported my kids to nursery in it, and did supermarket runs etc. The tradeoff is it is an extra thing you have to worry about. It's much less convenient to park / lock-up than just the bike on its own. Regardless, I'm looking forward to getting it out…

I have a trailer for grocery store runs. I feel like a total hipster, probably because I am. But I have so much shit to do and so little time to exercise I have to multitask and game myself into doing things. A good grocery store recently opened up near me and I committed to riding my bike there whenever possible. It literally takes 5-10m more but in return I get 20-30m of good exercise. Seems like a good trade.

FWIW, a good pannier bag will fit a day or two's groceries just fine. I have both a trailer and a pannier, but the pannier is less hassle for small trips.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#86

Post by whatsstolat » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 10:53 PM UTC

rgrieselhuber wrote: post #18

st26 wrote: post #17

Does anyone know why dads riding these are called "soft"? I've never ridden a cargo bike, but it takes strong legs & constitution to regularly tow a kid or utility trailer more than a few miles. Is it just that whole notion that fathers who are involved with their children are not masculine?

I'd imagine it has to do with symbolically giving up the role of predator to nurture children.

Yep seems like pecking at a keyboard is the alpha thing to do.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#87

Post by jacquesm » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 11:04 PM UTC

kaitai wrote: post #4

This is a really interesting read for me, as I'm considering the purchase of a cargo bike. Apparently, I fit the stereotype pretty well -- highly-educated urban coffee-drinker (no yoga, no vegetarianism, though). The cargo bike would solve the problem of hauling hardware-store purchases home with kid and sans car. But they're expensive! 1.5 or 2 thousand dollars! So for now we're making do with the bus and the stroll…

> 1.5 or 2 thousand dollars!

There is such a thing as a second hand bike.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#88

Post by sharpercoder » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 11:11 PM UTC

cullenking wrote: post #27

sharpercoder wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A bike trailer has the dangerous property of not being in your peripheral vision. I personally would never transport kids in a bike trailer; I have seen my sister (her daughters) get into hurtful situations and potentially dangerous situations. Whenever you can spend more for a front-load cargobike, I would highly advise to do so.

I'm a long term cyclist, run a cycling business, ride tons of bikes. I can definitely say the bike with a trailer is easier to ride, and is safer by far. Full harness, roll cage, head whiplash protection etc. Just putting this comment out there so other people reading see another perspective and don't dismiss trailers as unsafe. They are great!

This bike trailer of my sister was with all that. My 3 year old niece managed to rip apart a cover and stuck her hands outside. The bike rode near some poles, causing potential hurt. My 4 year old nephew in the same trailer was close in "trying out what happened if I stick my finger there" (the wheel). I had to make a yell to impress him enough to stop. Luckily, I was cycling behind.

Likewise, if your kid gets acute illness (throwing up, dizzy, etc), you're not going to notice it right away.

I would go as far as outright banning these things for transport of living beings, with hefty fines for it. Please stop selling these things for living being transport, you will make the world a better place and have better margins on cargobikes.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#89

Post by jacquesm » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 11:13 PM UTC

justinator wrote: post #30

noelwelsh wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you haven't considered it already, a bike trailer is likely to be a cheaper alternative to a cargo bike. I've had a bike trailer for years. Mine is a Croozer 2. I transported my kids to nursery in it, and did supermarket runs etc. The tradeoff is it is an extra thing you have to worry about. It's much less convenient to park / lock-up than just the bike on its own. Regardless, I'm looking forward to getting it out…

Check out this invention my buddy made - it turns ANY bike into a cargo bike! https://argobikes.com/

I absolutely love the Argo but would caution to make sure your bike plays nicely with it before committing to purchase. Argo claims it should work with Aluminum bikes but I would be very wary of that combination, most AL bikes are near the edge of their engineering parameters and the Argo loads the frame in ways that I'm not 100% comfortable with. If I were to use one - almost bought it but then settled on a 2nd hand Christiania - I'd use it on a steel bike, not an aluminum one. (The bike it was supposed to go on was an aluminum one and that is why we ended up abandoning the Argo.)

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#90

Post by brewdad » Sun, Jul 08, 2018, 11:25 PM UTC

jacquesm wrote: post #87

kaitai wrote: post #4

This is a really interesting read for me, as I'm considering the purchase of a cargo bike. Apparently, I fit the stereotype pretty well -- highly-educated urban coffee-drinker (no yoga, no vegetarianism, though). The cargo bike would solve the problem of hauling hardware-store purchases home with kid and sans car. But they're expensive! 1.5 or 2 thousand dollars! So for now we're making do with the bus and the stroll…

> 1.5 or 2 thousand dollars! There is such a thing as a second hand bike.

At least in the US, the cargo bike market is still tiny. There are very few used cargo bikes to be had and the likely purchaser of one is the type who will ride it for decades until it finally costs more to repair than it was ever worth in the first place.