Living on the border with Canada, I tell you now that I bike during the winter. It is in fact as simple as wearing the right layers. Even some of the coldest regions in the world have bike commuting.
I don’t think the second part is a criticism. It’s pointing out that you live in a place who’s infrastructure has been completely fucked by car-centrism. Were it designed with walking, biking, or even just public transit of any kind as a priority, the distance between points would actually be short (public transit benefits from shorter distance between stops by having shorter routes Which cuts fuel and maintenance costs).
In order for cities to have changes in their structure, mixed-use zoning needs to be allowed, along with various other reforms to current infrastructure law - laws which disinsentivise driving (car-centric people label it as ‘punishment’ when it’s more just revokal of massive amounts of privilege). It takes several decades, but overtime city footprints would shrink and become much more walkable - and safer - and more quiet.
Not sure what you’re meaning by “… blaming the victims of car-centric city designs.” Is this going back to the comment before saying it’s a “weird thing to criticise someone for.”
Since you didn’t quote a portion of my comment, I have no idea which portion you are saying is blaming people for car-centric city design.
I think you’ve misenterpretted these convos. I am not blaming those people for not riding a bike, I literally pointed out the amount of effort and time needed to make their cities more walkable. That’s not coming from a place of judgment, I’m just disseminating information I’ve gathered over time.
The post explicitly states “if entire cities were designed around [bikes] the way they are with cars, everyone would be fine with it”, and I think it’s important to keep that in mind.
The top of this comment thread states bikes don’t protect you from the cold, among other things. The following comment says just to wear a jacket. There’s a reply stating the guy saying ‘wear a jacket’ hasn’t lived in cold climate. I then chimed in stating that in-fact, you just need the proper layers to bike in winter.
All of that above is one convo going on parallel to the other.
During this, the original comment also says bikes don’t get you anywhere. The second person points out that the original commenter must live in the middle of nowhere, away from anywhere important. That’s why I stated I don’t think the comment was criticism. I think its just observation.
The reason someone can be in the situation is because A) they live rurally, which is a minority of people globally - or B) they live in/near a car-centric city. I detail the work they’d need to do to change that, and they changes they would have to allow. That isn’t blaming them, it’s giving a roadmap.
This reads like someone who doesn’t live somewhere that it gets cold
What a weird thing to criticize someone for
Living on the border with Canada, I tell you now that I bike during the winter. It is in fact as simple as wearing the right layers. Even some of the coldest regions in the world have bike commuting.
I don’t think the second part is a criticism. It’s pointing out that you live in a place who’s infrastructure has been completely fucked by car-centrism. Were it designed with walking, biking, or even just public transit of any kind as a priority, the distance between points would actually be short (public transit benefits from shorter distance between stops by having shorter routes Which cuts fuel and maintenance costs).
In order for cities to have changes in their structure, mixed-use zoning needs to be allowed, along with various other reforms to current infrastructure law - laws which disinsentivise driving (car-centric people label it as ‘punishment’ when it’s more just revokal of massive amounts of privilege). It takes several decades, but overtime city footprints would shrink and become much more walkable - and safer - and more quiet.
Except that youre blaming the victims of car-centric city designs. Good one.
Not sure what you’re meaning by “… blaming the victims of car-centric city designs.” Is this going back to the comment before saying it’s a “weird thing to criticise someone for.”
Since you didn’t quote a portion of my comment, I have no idea which portion you are saying is blaming people for car-centric city design.
“You should ride bikes, bro”
“It sucks”
“Well yeah, your infrastructure is designed for cars!”
That about sum it up?
I think you’ve misenterpretted these convos. I am not blaming those people for not riding a bike, I literally pointed out the amount of effort and time needed to make their cities more walkable. That’s not coming from a place of judgment, I’m just disseminating information I’ve gathered over time.
The post explicitly states “if entire cities were designed around [bikes] the way they are with cars, everyone would be fine with it”, and I think it’s important to keep that in mind.
The top of this comment thread states bikes don’t protect you from the cold, among other things. The following comment says just to wear a jacket. There’s a reply stating the guy saying ‘wear a jacket’ hasn’t lived in cold climate. I then chimed in stating that in-fact, you just need the proper layers to bike in winter.
All of that above is one convo going on parallel to the other.
During this, the original comment also says bikes don’t get you anywhere. The second person points out that the original commenter must live in the middle of nowhere, away from anywhere important. That’s why I stated I don’t think the comment was criticism. I think its just observation.
The reason someone can be in the situation is because A) they live rurally, which is a minority of people globally - or B) they live in/near a car-centric city. I detail the work they’d need to do to change that, and they changes they would have to allow. That isn’t blaming them, it’s giving a roadmap.