Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

tandfonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 115 posts

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#91

Post by analog31 »

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'm an avid cyclist. Every style of bike is accompanied by stereotypes about the rider. Most of the stereotypes are harmless. For instance, one of my bikes is "hipster." To some extent, bike styles are also marketed according to demographics -- like most other consumer products -- so the stereotypes are not unexpected.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#92

Post by jacquesm »

brewdad wrote: post #90
jacquesm wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

The main reason cargo bikes are up for sale where I live is either because the kids get too big and have their own bikes or because the cargo bike ends up not being used after a spell of 'green thinking' and then people end up in bad weather or have a near miss with a car. (A near hit, according to Carlin.)

The one I ended up buying needed some tightening up of the main support bearing for the box (the weak point in any cargo bike with three wheels), adjustment of the brakes and shifter cable and it needed new lights. Since then it's seen a year of heavy service and it still rolls along just fine (took it for a 30km spin just today with a lot of gear and two kids in it).

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#93

Post by stevenwoo »

rokhayakebe wrote: post #43
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…

Re:Expensive I guess it is an opportunity to buy a few from China and start a rent-by-the-hour service.

This seems unlikely right now. Most major manufacturers of bicycles are in Taiwan and China (all brands around the world use them), but this is for bicycles built for a single person. Most of the frames are carbon fiber, a mold is built for various sizes and is used 1000's of times. For some reason cargo bikes are a different story and welded together from steel or aluminum (there might be a few carbon fiber ones, but I assume cost of r&d/manufacturing to be prohibitive to be competitive with metal for small lots). Alibaba has lots of generic bicycle frames but no cargo bikes.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#94

Post by woah »

Obi_Juan_Kenobi wrote: post #83
Fricken wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I feel like OP knows what it’s like to have a heavy backpack on a bike

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#95

Post by u801e »

Obi_Juan_Kenobi wrote: post #83
Fricken wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

> You don't hike on your taint.

In general, you shouldn't be putting weight on your perineum (taint) when in the saddle. You should be putting weight on your ischial tuberosities (sit bones) instead. The former can result in blood circulation problems, and possible damage to the nerves and urethra.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#96

Post by u801e »

seniorsassycat wrote: post #49
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 my windsurf. It's a great way to get around and it doesn't affect my bikes handling. I have an electric bike so I don't notice the weight either. My windsurf is more than three meters long so I am worried about the tail end swinging out when I turn. A rear view mirror would make me more comfortable. The trailer is low so I'm also worried about a car passing behind me driving into it.

> The trailer is low so I'm also worried about a car passing behind me driving into it.

I wonder if this concern is really valid. I have a Burley Bee trailer and I've tested out approaching my bike with the trailer attached from behind both in my minivan and sedan vehicles and had no problem seeing the trailer. I've also noticed that vehicles tend to give me more space and are more conservative when passing when I'm riding with the trailer attached, so I don't think they have a problem seeing it. I don't bother using a flag though.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#97

Post by u801e »

sharpercoder wrote: post #88
cullenking wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I ride with a Burley Bee trailer with my 2 and 5 year old inside to and fron their daycare (3 miles each way). After probably 700 miles of riding with them, I haven't had the problems like you describe. Also, with the handlebar rearview mirror, I have no problem checking up on them while riding.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#98

Post by u801e »

TomK32 wrote: post #8
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…

yes, they are expensive, but once you have a cargo bike you can carry home a tig welder, alu pipes and all the other stuff to build a cargo bike :D No seriously, they are expensive but if you look at craigslist and similar, they keep their value if you take care of your bike. and regarding road safety, ride in the right tire-mark left by the cars. you'll be safe from dooring and cars have to slow down and change lane…

It's actually better to ride slightly to the left of center (between the center and left tire track). Some cars, will try to squeeze themselves between you and oncoming traffic when you ride in the right tire track. Riding further to the left will make it clear to those behind you that they must change lanes to pass you.

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#99

Post by u801e »

monkeywork wrote: post #33
whatshisface wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ride in the right tire-mark left by the cars. If you're going to do that, why not just ride in the center of the lane like a motorcycle?

This is often very illegal to do on a bicycle. On a motorcycle lane position is very situational... however very very rarely if you are in motion is being in the middle of the lane a good idea. Generally speaking you should only be in the middle of the lane when you are fully stopped at a stop sign or light to keep cars from trying to squeeze by you. On a normal two lane road (one each direction) you want to stay in…

> This is often very illegal to do on a bicycle.

Most states, in the USA, base their vehicle laws on the uniform vehicle code (UVC). Though they state that those riding bicycles at less than the normal speed of traffic must ride as far right as practicable, they will list a number of exceptions for that requirement. One of those exceptions is if the lane is of substandard width which is defined as a lane that is too narrow for a car and cyclist to travel safely side by side [1]

Since a cyclist is about 2.5 feet wide[3] and many states have a 3 feet distance passing lane, the cyclist, even if they're riding further to the right will still need 2 feet to their right, their width, and 3 feet to their left. That adds up to 7 to 7.5 feet. Given that most surface street lanes are 10 feet wide[2] and passenger vehicle are about 6 feet wide[3], then it's not possible for a car and cyclist to safely travel side by side within the lane.

So the lane positioning you describe when driving a motorcycle also applies to bicycles.

[1] http://iamtraffic.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/UVC2000.pdf (section 11-1205 Position on Roadway item 3 -- page 185 of the pdf)

[2] https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/stre...

[3] https://nacto.org/publication/transit-street-design-guide/tr...

Re: Cargo bikes as symbolic markers of egalitarian gender roles

#100

Post by u801e »

monkeywork wrote: post #58
kevinschumacher wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> [riding in the middle of the lane] is often very illegal to do on a bicycle. Where are you from? In the few major US cities I've lived, this is legal. The road laws here typically treat bicycles the same as other cars (with exceptions). IME, in urban, US east-coast cities, if you are toward one side of the lane, cars will try and pass you (even on the right... and yes that pushes the cyclist into oncoming traffic).…

I would suggest actually looking into the traffic law - MOST - places explicitly state that bicycles should (with very few very specific exceptions) remain to the right side of the lane. The Cyclist community disagree's with this in most places I've seen it mentioned but that doesn't change what the laws are. I'm not arguing safety I'm simply stating what is written. Obviously this varies from area to area but again…

> In my opinion a cyclist should not be purposely using an entire lane and backing up traffic for faster moving vehicles

What is your opinion about drivers of cars lane-splitting when passing cyclists (when, in almost all states, it's illegal for motorcycles to lane-split when passing cars)?

Post reply on HN