Jeremy Vine tells cyclists to "cycle in anything you like" — wants media portrayal of cyclists to move away from Lycra and race bikes

Chris Boardman's NL vs. UK video from 7+ years back bears repetition.  ("I've spend a couple of days now cycling riding around the streets of Utrecht and seen tens of thousands if not hundreds of thousands of bikes - but I haven't seen a single 'cyclist'.  I've just seen just normal people in normal clothes doing normal things...").  Although everyone will go on ignoring that "because it's not like that round here / that's not how it works in the UK".

Of course once there are numbers of "normal" people cycling* those same people will then happily tell you that you'd be weird to drive some journeys when they're more convenient to cycle.

* Which will only happen if we facilitate it by making cycling feel safe and convenient.  (After all - it is safe in the UK, right now...). The lesson from everywhere is that won't happen just by "encouraging cycling" with nice ads, warm words, providing a bit of training (although there's nothing wrong with that).  Or "promoting safety" with more ads ("share the road"...), handing out lights or hi-vis.  Not even building "exceptional" infra if that exists in isolation.

Or bring motor vehicle speeds down to similar to casual cyclists. 

Actual average speed in cities can be as low as 7mph which is a pretty casual cycling pace. If cars did that speed all the time instead of going fast and then stopping everyone could feel safe to cycle. It would make carists feel inadequate though if they weren't passing something. Maybe we could install a 4mph hare system on the side of the road like at the dog track so drivers would always feel like they were passing something?

Starley wrote:

Most councils/media just don't know how to promote cycling, probably because they just don't understand why people would choose to cycle when they could drive everywhere like a 'normal' person would. Maybe in the influencer led world of ostensibly clever marketing campaigns, they've lost sight of how to get a simple message across. Most of the people I see riding bikes everyday, going to work or the shops, are in their normal clothes. It's accepted that most people do what's normal and easy. To my pea brain that's one of the ways to get more people riding - show them people who they can identify with, not members of an alien species in their technical clothing or safety gear. The health benefits of regular cycle commuting are moot until you can actually get people on a bike.

When I worked for a council, we employed an advertising agency, one with a track record in promoting cycling, to tell us how to do it, so at least some councils know, and one of the major things was cyclists in normal clothes.

It is quite difficult to get non-cyclists to ride a bike, and they will come up with all kinds of excuses not to; dangerous, sweaty, hard work, rain etc, etc so it isn't quite as easy as you think it is to get them on a bike.  If it was, the message would have got through by now.  People don't make rational decisions, and even when you point out that it will make them slimmer, healthier, fitter and wealthier, they still cling to their car, despite complaining about being over-weight, being ill, not being able to climb stairs and not having enough money.  It's far more complex than just putting out a few pictures of cyclists in jeans.

eburtthebike wrote:

Starley wrote:

Most councils/media just don't know how to promote cycling, probably because they just don't understand why people would choose to cycle when they could drive everywhere like a 'normal' person would. Maybe in the influencer led world of ostensibly clever marketing campaigns, they've lost sight of how to get a simple message across. Most of the people I see riding bikes everyday, going to work or the shops, are in their normal clothes. It's accepted that most people do what's normal and easy. To my pea brain that's one of the ways to get more people riding - show them people who they can identify with, not members of an alien species in their technical clothing or safety gear. The health benefits of regular cycle commuting are moot until you can actually get people on a bike.

When I worked for a council, we employed an advertising agency, one with a track record in promoting cycling, to tell us how to do it, so at least some councils know, and one of the major thinks was cyclists in normal clothes.

It is quite difficult to get non-cyclists to ride a bike, and they will come up with all kinds of excuses not to; dangerous, sweaty, hard work, rain etc, etc so it isn't quite as easy as you think it is to get them on a bike.  If it was, the message would have got through by now.  People don't make rational decisions, and even when you point out that it will make them slimmer, healthier, fitter and wealthier, they still cling to their car, despite complaining about being over-weight, being ill, not being able to climb stairs and not having enough money.  It's far more complex than just putting out a few pictures of cyclists in jeans.

I cycle in all sorts of clothing, lycra, jeans, cookie monster onesie, office dresses. These are the things I have learned:
-Jeans are terrible if it's raining, the denim holds the water. Cycling is also terrible gor your jeans, it wears the inner seam.
-fit and flare office dress, not pencil fit. Otherwise the oncoming motorists see a middle aged woman's gusset encased in 80 denier. Sorry not sorry.
-converse are harder to cycle in than heels.

JustTryingToGetFromAtoB wrote:

-converse are harder to cycle in than heels.

Wow