Philebrity.com likes to rail about Stu Bykofsky and anti-bicycle
columns, but it appears they are intent on becoming the hipster version of Stu.
Their most recent column, Reasonable
Humans Draw Up Pedestrian–Cyclist Armistice That Will Be Followed Everywhere
But Here Because Of, Well, You Know.
They allude that an article in Slate Magazine
which promoted a simple solution of mutual respect between cyclists and
pedestrians to end common misperceptions of each other. Philebrity’s response
was, it won't work here because “you
know”. The problem is, we don't know. Is Philebrity inferring that there is
something unique about Philadelphia cyclists and pedestrians that won't make this
work? Do they have to keep perpetuating the myth that all cyclists are bunch
lawless renegades. Terrifying little old ladies as they ride on the sidewalks
and running stop signs at will. Or a group of individuals
on the fringe who ride because they have no choice because of DWI/DUI or a environmental
extremist.
Why does Philebrity need to engage in the same type of pot
stirring that Stu Bykofsky does? Is this a ploy to increase the number of hits
on their website or do they truly feel that Philadelphia cyclists are a bunch
of renegades? It would be nice if Philebrity could explain why this won't work,
but only they know.
No comments:
Post a Comment