Bicycling Gender gap?

I’m mostly a get from here to there biker who loves to go for rides from time to time to burn off energy and get some sunshine. I’m a mom and I basically dragged my family into biking. I took my kids on Kidical mass rides on the back of a cargo until they could ride themselves. We are a one-car family so having everyone up on bikes is very helpful. I’m just wary of careless drivers more than anything else.

I’m fortunate to live in a college town with decent infrastructure like multi use paths, wide bike friendly streets and bike lanes here and there. Even with all that, I still feel intimidated from bike riding groups. Most are made up of dudes and some of the are extremely cold and crunchier-than-thou. But the LBS has female employees and an annual women workshop about maintenance. There’s an annual bike ride for women (50 miles on trail) that I’d like to do sometime. Our local bike coalition does host a lot of cool events so perhaps I’ll get up my courage and try one this summer.

I loved mtn biking and really got into downhill after attending a meet in Vail and got to watch Missy Giove dominate. I never learned to love road biking, but forcing myself to over the last year trying to get better results in multisport.

I don't really concern myself with representation - just don't see the point. I just want to ensure that anyone who has the desire to also has the ability to....at least get exposed to a new activity. I'm a long time firearms instructor and never had exclusionary courses, but noticed a dramatic increase of women in my courses and been asked to run a women only course. Where for years I would only have one woman in the class it is now about evenly split.

I've been hit on three separate occasions by a car - twice in a marked bike lane no less and once in a crosswalk. Walked away with a bit of road rash, but never a serious injury. Not sure if this is a factor, but the data certainly suggests that men have a higher risk tolerance.

Our preferred bike trail just had two sexual assaults committed in the past month - both in daylight and in populated areas. Again, not sure how much this actually impacts, but my wife is now concerned about running there and always carrying.

Zodikosis wrote: »

I'm pulling this out of my butt, but I feel like women tend to think a bit more about safety. I don't feel safe riding on the streets here in America, and there aren't many other places to ride a bike conveniently. Drivers aren't used to cyclists out on the road here as much as they are in Euro countries, and especially where I am, drivers are also extremely aggressive, bordering on reckless. I'm also not THAT great of a cyclist (I learned how to ride a bike fairly late), so there's that added risk of messing up and injuring myself as well. There are a lot of other activities I could do where I don't have to worry about road rash.

Not at all - there's decades of psychological evidence supporting this.

I don't bike much anymore, I used to lots, I think my biggest reason for not riding as much is because as others have said, drivers don't pay attention, it's rather unnerving to have a car go flying past you and not move over at all.

I would bike more places if I didn't get all sweaty and gross and then have to take a shower. I find men can bike to work and look just fine, but personally as a women, in order to look presentable and not have matted down sweaty hair I need a good shower and locker room before work. If I was a guy, I wouldn't have to worry about hair. Most of the guys at work are fine with biking to work and just a quick change and comb through their hair. Because of this I don't bike to work, only for leisure.

I have never felt unsafe or worried about being raped or attacked. I have been almost hit numerous times though because even though there is clearly a "BIKE CROSSING YIELD TO PEDESTRIANS" sign across the on and off ramp of the thruways around town, NO ONE yields and I always have to stop or else I will be hit. It is kind of annoying they speed through there even if I am starting to go through. But I just stop and wait until they pass and have to be careful on the busy streets because cars don't yield or even seem to be careful around bikes.

I would love to be able to ride my bike more often, but there are several reasons I don't. Number one is for sure safety, my state has the distinct pleasure of holding the highest fatality rate for cyclists. I live in a very urban area, so lots of traffic and yet very few bike lanes; and I have personally witnessed multiple bikes forced off the road by people in large vehicles screaming profanities for being on the road. The last time I was riding well ahead of my spouse during a busier time (Saturday morning) I had a car throw something at me for not responding to the driver who wanted me to get in their car. Now my wife really doesn't want me riding alone so there goes my idea of commuting to work. Plus, it's pretty intimidating to try to get into serious biking. The running groups are a lot friendlier IMO, especially for newbies who don't have the more expensive equipment and accessories yet. So I just use my bike for fun/leisure rides on less busy roads and stay in the gym or run on sidewalks for exercise.

Zodikosis wrote: »

I'm pulling this out of my butt, but I feel like women tend to think a bit more about safety. I don't feel safe riding on the streets here in America, and there aren't many other places to ride a bike conveniently. Drivers aren't used to cyclists out on the road here as much as they are in Euro countries, and especially where I am, drivers are also extremely aggressive, bordering on reckless. I'm also not THAT great of a cyclist (I learned how to ride a bike fairly late), so there's that added risk of messing up and injuring myself as well. There are a lot of other activities I could do where I don't have to worry about road rash.

A lot of this depends on where you live in the US. My city is pretty bike friendly and has many miles of dedicated trails and dedicated bike lanes on many roads. There's a 25 mile loop I do around the city of which I'd say about 95% of that loop is on dedicated recreation paths. The city is currently in the process of linking up 100 miles of dedicated recreational paths...so you could do 100 miles and never hit the actual rode if you wanted to.

There are definitely roads that I won't ride here and one would surely be taking their chances as those particular roads do not have a bike lane and are fast.

My favorite ride is right out my front door...I can do a big loop on the road just down the street and it's a perfect 20K flat time trial with bike lanes and the speed limit is 25 MPH...I live in a small village outside of the city and it's perfect for riding as long as you're not on the main street through the village.

amandaeve wrote: »

It looks like the responses here mostly match the articles linked- safety/fear is the primary factor keeping women off bikes. The gender gap closes in countries that have infrastructure keeping bikes and cars separate. Fear of attack/assault is a concern, but (in general) not so much as fear of vehicles, or else we'd probably see more of a gender gap in walking/running too (we don't) and less gap correlated with infrastructure. It makes sense to me that women (in general) would have stronger safety concerns than men for myriad reasons. This leads me to wonder, of the men who don’t ride, is safety also the major factor (and just being a minority in their gender), or do men choose not to ride for some other reason?

The conversation is conflating user of bikes for commuting, with casual use and more serious sports use. From a purely commuting perspective there had been a lot of research in London on adoption, with perception of traffic safety being the biggest issue. Limited facilities at workplaces is an issue, but that seems to be developing.

What has been found is that the majority of fatal and serious accidents are women, with a difference in the nature of the accident being gender biased. Women are more affected by nearside crush, men more often tail-ended. That seems to reflect different ride styles.

A lot of the investment is better cycle infrastructure reduces the risk of crush incidents.

Reporting bias is an issue, the numbers of incidents are fairly low as a proportion of total commute rides.

I don't think the gender gap is inherently a bad thing. It can be caused by risk preferences, physical anatomy, or helmet head. The more important question is "are women wanting to bike and unable to do so."

I would ride a bike if I had roads with bike lanes or wide shoulders near home. We have only narrow twisty 2 lane roads with no shoulders.
I have many female friends in more accessible areas who ride a lot and do tris,

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

amandaeve wrote: »

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

amandaeve wrote: »

It looks like the responses here mostly match the articles linked- safety/fear is the primary factor keeping women off bikes. The gender gap closes in countries that have infrastructure keeping bikes and cars separate. Fear of attack/assault is a concern, but (in general) not so much as fear of vehicles, or else we'd probably see more of a gender gap in walking/running too (we don't) and less gap correlated with infrastructure. It makes sense to me that women (in general) would have stronger safety concerns than men for myriad reasons. This leads me to wonder, of the men who don’t ride, is safety also the major factor (and just being a minority in their gender), or do men choose not to ride for some other reason?

The conversation is conflating user of bikes for commuting, with casual use and more serious sports use. From a purely commuting perspective there had been a lot of research in London on adoption, with perception of traffic safety being the biggest issue. Limited facilities at workplaces is an issue, but that seems to be developing.

What has been found is that the majority of fatal and serious accidents are women, with a difference in the nature of the accident being gender biased. Women are more affected by nearside crush, men more often tail-ended. That seems to reflect different ride styles.

A lot of the investment is better cycle infrastructure reduces the risk of crush incidents.

Reporting bias is an issue, the numbers of incidents are fairly low as a proportion of total commute rides.

Whoah! There are so many reasons for women to be more cautious; from preservation of society by our ancestors (less expendable as caregivers and mothers) to physiology to social conditioning…but I never thought cycling could actually BE more dangerous for women. I know for cyclists in the US, the most fatal collision is being hit from behind, but I don’t know of any gender data. What is the nearside crush? What riding styles contribute to which collision?

The sample sizes are reasonably low, but large enough to reach conclusions.

Road position is a significant contributor. The nearside crush is where someone sits in the nearside third of the lane. That makes it more likely that a driver will risk a less safe pass, because they're not being forced to give safe distance. So you end up with closer passes, increasing sideswipes. If that's a larger vehicle then it becomes more likely that the rider gets trapped.

There are several different aspects of Large Goods Vehicles and Public Service Vehicles that help that, with a lot of advocacy for improved driver visibility.

Cyclists should dominate the road space, not cower in the gutter. The former gets you shouted at, the latter gets you injured or worse.

But does the former help driver/cyclist relations? Is that being a good cycling advocate?

People need to not be *kitten*. Both drivers and cyclists.

I am from Namibia.On the moment it is fairly safe to ride.But safety is becoming worse.The roads that we can ride women alone,is getting less.Even for men.Cyclists have been mugged ,attacked and beaten even on our main roads,which is very busy.Luckily i ride with my husband and son,they are always not to far from me and i have a little gas canister to protect me.Here the cyclist are more men.Also the bike fit means a lot.When my saddle and setup was not correct,i was not fun riding.And a decent bike here really cost a lot of money.

jjpptt2 wrote: »

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

amandaeve wrote: »

MeanderingMammal wrote: »

amandaeve wrote: »

It looks like the responses here mostly match the articles linked- safety/fear is the primary factor keeping women off bikes. The gender gap closes in countries that have infrastructure keeping bikes and cars separate. Fear of attack/assault is a concern, but (in general) not so much as fear of vehicles, or else we'd probably see more of a gender gap in walking/running too (we don't) and less gap correlated with infrastructure. It makes sense to me that women (in general) would have stronger safety concerns than men for myriad reasons. This leads me to wonder, of the men who don’t ride, is safety also the major factor (and just being a minority in their gender), or do men choose not to ride for some other reason?

The conversation is conflating user of bikes for commuting, with casual use and more serious sports use. From a purely commuting perspective there had been a lot of research in London on adoption, with perception of traffic safety being the biggest issue. Limited facilities at workplaces is an issue, but that seems to be developing.

What has been found is that the majority of fatal and serious accidents are women, with a difference in the nature of the accident being gender biased. Women are more affected by nearside crush, men more often tail-ended. That seems to reflect different ride styles.

A lot of the investment is better cycle infrastructure reduces the risk of crush incidents.

Reporting bias is an issue, the numbers of incidents are fairly low as a proportion of total commute rides.

Whoah! There are so many reasons for women to be more cautious; from preservation of society by our ancestors (less expendable as caregivers and mothers) to physiology to social conditioning…but I never thought cycling could actually BE more dangerous for women. I know for cyclists in the US, the most fatal collision is being hit from behind, but I don’t know of any gender data. What is the nearside crush? What riding styles contribute to which collision?

The sample sizes are reasonably low, but large enough to reach conclusions.

Road position is a significant contributor. The nearside crush is where someone sits in the nearside third of the lane. That makes it more likely that a driver will risk a less safe pass, because they're not being forced to give safe distance. So you end up with closer passes, increasing sideswipes. If that's a larger vehicle then it becomes more likely that the rider gets trapped.

There are several different aspects of Large Goods Vehicles and Public Service Vehicles that help that, with a lot of advocacy for improved driver visibility.

Cyclists should dominate the road space, not cower in the gutter. The former gets you shouted at, the latter gets you injured or worse.

But does the former help driver/cyclist relations? Is that being a good cycling advocate?

People need to not be *kitten*. Both drivers and cyclists.

Well the advice on the highway code is to use the middle third of the lane. The advice for drivers is also to give a bike as much space as they'd give a car, hence the road positioning.

It's worth highlighting that a great many drivers haven't read the highway code since passing their tests, and aren't are that it gets reissued. The fiction of "road tax" gets trotted out by the ill informed with monotonous regularity, as do rants about high via, and helmet use.

Fwiw about 18 months ago the Met Traffic Division did some work on education. They took cyclists and stick them in the cab of a rigid LGV and a 74 passenger PSV, and also took commercial drivers and stuck them on bikes. An eye opener for both communities.