Butt darts; White Supremacy; Ethnic Cleansing.

White Supremacy:

noun
1.
the belief, theory, or doctrine that white people are inherently superior to people from all other racial groups, especially black people, and are therefore rightfully the dominant group in any society.
Dictionary.com

Ethnic Cleansing:

noun
1.
the elimination of an unwanted ethnic group or groups from a society, as by genocide or forced emigration.
Dictionary.com

Butt Darts:

verb.
1.
To swiftly shove your thumb up someone’s ass while said person is still clothed. a variation of a wedgie.
Urban Dictionary.com

 

Butt Dart — A Step Backward for Cyclist Safety in the OC

A “game” has started in Orange County where people pretend to shoot cyclists with their hand positioned like a gun while yelling “Butt Dart.” It was introduced on the latest video published by Chad Stewart Towersey (aka ocinstanews) to his 7,000+ Instagram followers. While making a joke and an underlying point about his frustration with cyclists, it poses serious consequences.
Read more here.

Otherness is a diseased state of mind.

And it is the justification for Chad and his campaign against bicyclists in his local area. A campaign which he is hoping will spread across the nation.

There will always be people in our society who find Chad’s antics amusing. This isn’t written for them.

This is written for the people who must shoulder the responsibility of standing up to extremist bullies. This is for the people in the middle who have been inundated with stereotypes about bicyclists and subconsciously empathize with some of the tenets of Chad and his butt dart movement.

A bicycle is inherently different from a motorized vehicle. The people who operate bicycles come in all gender’s, ethnic backgrounds, and social classes. But they all have one thing in common. When they swing their leg over a bicycle, they become an ‘other’.

The automobile has become the dominant form of transportation. Not by natural selection in an evolutionary process. But rather through forced manipulation of the natural environment. Auto culture is a construct with parallels in white supremacy and ethnic cleansing. This was recognized by the Germans, and Hitler had great admiration for Henry Ford. And Henry Ford had great admiration for Hitler.

henry_ford_grand_cross_1938
Henry Ford receiving the Grand Cross of the German Eagle from Nazi officials, 1938. Via: Rare Historical Photos.

This doesn’t make all auto drivers Nazi sympathizers anymore than being black makes you a drug dealer. Those are stereotypes and what we are combating here is a deeply ingrained stereotype against bicyclists. More importantly we are discussing how that deeply ingrained stereotype is being used to abuse people who bicycle and where the root of this behavior stems from.

  1. Bicyclists don’t belong on roads.
    a. There are many paths of specious logic in this one stereotype. Most of them have to do with the inherent disadvantage bicyclists have when faced with their larger and stronger counterpart. It plays into the might makes right fallacy. Just because you’re operating a vehicle with the ability to cause more damage to those around you, doesn’t make you superior to them. And it doesn’t lessen their right to operate in a public space.
    b. Roads were designed for cars. While this may be true in some distinct locations, such as freeways. Roads themselves were not designed for any one road user and all vehicle types have equal right to use the roads. But for some vehicle types it has been determined that certain vehicles exercise the privilege of using the roads whereas other vehicle types are exercising their constitutional right to the roads.
    For further understanding see: Roads weren’t build for cars. By Carlton Reid
  2. Bicyclists don’t follow the rules.
    Bwahahahaha! When was the last time you saw a driver follow the rules of the road to a ‘T’. Literally no one follows every road rule every time. We are human and we make mistakes. Bicycles do have physical advantages that motorized vehicles don’t have. We take up less space (thought that doesn’t mean we need less space). We are lighter and can easily maneuver through area’s motorized vehicles can not. Even our state statutes recognize and have done so for decades, that not all vehicles are equal in how they operate. That is why it is legal for the driver of a tractor trailer to make a right while swinging their vehicle out into the left lane and then over to the right. They need the extra room to make that right turn. Sometimes there rear axle ends up on the sidewalk. It happens.

This prejudicial thinking is the exact same type of thinking which lead educated men to view Jews as morally and physically inferior to themselves. This is white supremacy. This is the channel which Chad and his butt dart crew are flowing down. They see themselves as keepers of the light and bicyclists as those darkies who need to be kept in their place.

The biggest concern I’ve seen from male dominated white channels in the media are that someone will get killed. I believe that this is the natural and intentional consequence of Chad’s butt dart campaign. He has exhibited every other text book example of white supremacy and his final solution will be to get people killed.

I have heard his lame ass excuse about wanting to keep people safe. But to understand what he means by ‘keeping people safe’, we have to understand the coded language of white supremacy.

You start out in 1954 by saying, “Nigger, nigger, nigger.” By 1968 you can’t say “nigger”—that hurts you, backfires. So you say stuff like, uh, forced busing, states’ rights, and all that stuff, and you’re getting so abstract. Now, you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is, blacks get hurt worse than whites.… “We want to cut this,” is much more abstract than even the busing thing, uh, and a hell of a lot more abstract than “Nigger, nigger.”
Southern Strategy

When Chad says he want’s to keep people ‘safe’, to whom is he referring? It is my opinion that Chad views bicyclists as threat to the safety of auto culture and when he speaks of keeping people safe, he is using the coded language of the ‘Southern Strategy’.

If you watch any of his video’s which he proudly posts to Instagram. You’ll see that his behavior is not safe, doesn’t follow state statutes on road rules, and creates an environment of fear for bicyclists. So again, who is Chad trying to keep safe?

Silence is compliance and finding humor in Chad’s actions is being complicit in Chad’s actions. And yes, that means you’re a white supremacist too.

So I hope you didn’t laugh when you first saw his butt dart campaign. If you did, then you need to re-evaluate your own internal bias’.

Someday bicyclists will be designated as a protected class. But until that day, anyone who say’s that what Chad is doing isn’t illegal, is plain wrong. Because we already have laws on the books about assault. If you’re not familiar with it, here it is:

Assault
Definition

The definition of assault varies by jurisdiction, but generally falls into one of these categories:

1. Intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Intent to cause physical injury is not required, and physical injury does not need to result. So defined in tort law and the criminal statutes of some states.

2. With the intent to cause physical injury, making another person reasonably apprehend an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Essentially, an attempted battery. So defined in the criminal statutes of some states.

3. With the intent to cause physical injury, actually causing such injury to another person. Essentially, the same as a battery. So defined in the criminal statutes of some states, and so understood in popular usage.

Apprehension v. Fear

In this context, “apprehension” does not mean “fear.” Rather, to experience apprehension, the victim must believe that the tortfeasor’s conduct will result in imminent harmful or offensive contact unless it is somehow otherwise prevented. It isn’t necessary that the victim believes the conduct will be effective in making such contact, only that he believes the conduct is capable of making such contact.

Illustrative Case Law

The classic 1349 English case I de S et ux v. W de S exemplifies the necessity of apprehension in an assault claim. When the tortfeasor banged on the door the first time, it was not assault because he did not cause apprehension. When, however, he struck at the plaintiff with a hatchet when she looked out the window, it was assault, because his conduct caused apprehension of harmful contact.

For a modern analysis of assault in action, see Raess v. Doescher.

See Also

Aggravated assault
Assault and battery
Criminal law
Tort (specifically, intentional tort)
Damages
Last updated in June of 2017 by Stephanie Jurkowski.

Chad and his crew are red handed guilty of assault and I’d really like to see more licensed attorney’s address that angle.

 

Advertisements

UK social media bicycle advocates are actually trolls. Here’s why.

An appeal to emotion.

z

See original tweet thread here.

Appeal to emotion or argumentum ad passiones is a logical fallacy characterized by the manipulation of the recipient’s emotions in order to win an argument, especially in the absence of factual evidence.

Indeed Moose, there are certain roads your 7 yr old can’t bicycle on. Why would you want them to?

Even if all roads were designed with the intention that a 7 yr old could bicycle on it, would it still be ‘safe’? Your premise is that they would certainly be safe.

I disagree. Here’s why.

A 7 yr old is somewhere between a kindergartner and a 1st grader. (depending on your local school requirements for age placement in their respective grade).

Spatial Awareness

Spatial awareness is the ability to be aware of oneself in space. It is an organised knowledge of objects in relation to oneself in that given space. Spatial awareness also involves understanding the relationship of these objects when there is a change of position. Occupational Therapy for Children

For the sake of argument, we’ll assume that your child is developing appropriately for their age group.

Question: How spatially aware are 7 yr olds?

Pre-operational Stage 2-7 years

Children begin to represent spatial features through drawing and modelling. Their topological thinking is evident in their drawings. For example, in the drawing of a duck below, done by a five-year-old, the sky and the ground are represented as separate objects – there is no comprehension of the horizon. Both eyes are drawn on one side of the head because, to the child, the important feature is that they are inside (enclosed within) the head shape (McNally, p.29). As is typical around this age, the child does not yet possess the type of thinking that can be described by Projective Geometry, and which would allow him/her to imagine the other side of the duck.

Concrete Operational Stage 7-12 years

Gradually, between the ages of about 4 and 9 years, the child begins to perceive and represent objects from different points of view and incorporates ideas of perspective. The placement of features or objects in relation to each other and taking account of vertical and horizontal relationships becomes part of the child’s way of viewing the world. These sorts of ideas can be classified as belonging to the type of geometry called Projective Geometry. In the drawing of ‘Dogs playing soccer’, done by a 7 year old, evidence of this type of thinking can be found. When asked why the dogs had only one eye she replied, “The other one’s on the other side but we can’t see it”. When questioned about the numbers of legs drawn for each dog, she explained that the dogs on the left were running so we could see all their legs, but the dog on the right was standing still so two legs were hidden from view (the third appendage is a tail!).
Dogs

The child also begins to use the ideas associated with Euclidean Geometry such as distinguishing between straight and curved lines, specific shapes (like squares and circles), the length and number of sides and angles. These ‘measurement’ concepts allow children to bring objects and parts of object into relative proportion in their drawings.

The development of the co-ordination of horizontal and vertical planes is illustrated in the sequence of drawings below (McNally pp.45-46). Children ranging from 4 years to 10 years were asked to draw liquid in a tilted jar on a table, and to draw people or trees on a hillside. The youngest drawer clearly demonstrated Topological thinking, with the liquid simply shown inside the jar, and the people enclosed by the hill. Gradually, as spatial thinking matures, the co-ordination of vertical and horizontal can be seen.

Hills
Answer: Not very.Why is spatial awareness important to this topic?

Spatial awareness, for those who don’t already know, is the difference between a child recognizing another bicyclist on the road as a potential hazard or not.

It’s certainly possible for a child to be taught how to recognize hazards and how to avoid them. But that does require education. And Moose and her merry band of infra only advocacy trolls don’t like education.

To them, education is that thing ‘vehicular’ cyclists do because they don’t have infrastructure and thus need to know how to operate around cars. While bicyclists on separated bicycle specific infrastructure don’t have to worry about anything. Because they’re totally safe and will never experience an injury because ‘No Cars’!

Again, for arguments sake, we’ll presume that all roads are designed with 7 yr olds in mind and that no motorized vehicles will ever travel on these specially designed roads.

Does Moose Jr/Miss present a hazard to other bicyclists and do those bicyclists present a hazard to Moose Jr/Miss?

Here are a few examples of bicyclists being injured or killed on bicycle specific infra i.e. no cars allowed.

f
Read more here.

Did the bicyclist encounter a 7 yr old and swerved to avoid them? It’s what people do when a small child is weaving all over the road. They try to avoid them.

Most likely not. I suspect the bicyclist hit debris on the trail and lost control. Or even more likely, was going too fast and lost control.

Which then flips the script. Do other bicyclists present a hazard to a 7 yr old?

The following article is descriptive of an electric bicycle. But anyone who rides road bikes knows that you can achieve impressive speeds even without an assist. Those speeds prevent you from safely navigating a path where children are tooling around unsupervised. It could be argued that adults on bikes should behave sensibly around children on bike paths. But it could also be argued that adults in cars should behave sensibly around bicyclists.

Ultimately what we end up with is a the same situation that we say we want to avoid on public roads. It all boils down to education.

g

A 10-year-old child was seriously injured in a crash involving an adult on an electric bicycle in Fadden on Thursday morning.

Police are investigating the collision on a shared pathway near a primary school in the area about 8.45am.  Read more here.

Unsupervised and uneducated children present a hazard to themselves and other road users. Period.

Which is why you don’t see Dutch children bicycling unsupervised.

bv

And when the children are bicycling, they are under direct supervision of an adult.

d

x
Notice that the bicycle path is wide enough to accommodate side by side bicycling. Something which is not seen in the UK or America as the standard for bike lanes and paths. 

I’m a certified bicycle instructor. But I didn’t always used to be. When I first started bicycling for transportation, like the Dutch do, I didn’t (and still don’t) have first class bicycle infrastructure. My child was significantly older than a 7 yr old. She was 15 yrs old. And very nervous about bicycling on a heavily trafficked public road. Having bicycled with her on low speed residential roads, I learned two things.

  1. If she was ahead of me she was totally exposed to anyone else around her. There is a YouTube video where we are being harassed. And in the video she is angry about the harassment and cycles fast and ahead of me. The driver then corals her against the curb with his car. When she was directly by my side she was protected from this maniac. After that incident we had a long conversation about staying by my side.
  2. When people are bicycling two abreast they can have an easy and relaxed conversation. As we navigated hostile roads, we discussed the way we would manage portions of the road before we arrived at them. This helped ease both our fears and provided safe and predictable passage. Not only for ourselves but also for those around us.

Predictability, even on a bike path, is crucial to road safety. And yes, bike paths are roads.

What makes these social media advocates trolls?

I’m so glad you asked.

w

 

DIi_jS_W4AAdPv_
This is a photo shopped picture of Dutch children and in the original photo, they’re bicycling on a school designated path.
l
Here are the same children. 

No one is advocating for children to bicycle independently on roads with trucks or lorries. Literally NO ONE!

Trolls love memes. Especially false one’s that lead to wrong thinking.

The first tweet in this blog is the beginning of the thread. Moose was trolling someone who was arguing for or against something. We’ll never know because they deleted their tweet. Which I don’t blame them. Dealing with troll’s is exhausting.

I saw through her crap and called her out on it. Which then prompted the trolls to come crawling and scurrying out from under their rocks. They resorted to name calling, logical fallacies, specious logic, and everything else trolls do. Except actually have a conversation about why we don’t actually design roads for the exclusive use of 7 yr olds.

Jesus FUCKING Christ! Use some common fucking sense.

What makes someone a troll?

A troll is defined as someone who is trying to give you an emotional jerk. They often use logical fallacies and/or use specious ‘logic’ (such as the ‘logic’ used in the Google memo.) Specious logic has the appearance of logic, but isn’t logic. In the same way that ‘Creation Science’ isn’t actually Science. They make it sound good and give you interesting pictures to look at, but when you break down their argument, you see that it doesn’t hold water.

The presumption with the UK trolls is that everyone who advocates for education in bicycling is anti-infra. Or as they term them, a ‘Vehicular cyclist’.

Education is the foundation of all community action. People don’t know what they don’t know. And giving everyone a free for all on public roads doesn’t increase safety. Why do you think the Dutch have mandatory bicycling education? Do you think it’s because their infrastructure is so terrible?

But more importantly, the people we need to persuade, the movers and shakers in the public realm of transportation planning, aren’t going to be swayed by specious logic and logical fallacies.

UK social media cycling advocates are not doing bicycle advocacy any favors by behaving like trolls. You aren’t winning friends or persuading anyone, who isn’t already there, to your side.

Your pugnacious and repugnant behavior is giving the media fodder to make bicycling and bicyclists look bad.

The idea behind advocacy is to win friends and influence people. Not call them names or try to make yourselves appear superior to others.

Moose, Evo Lucas, Sw19cam, you’re common garden variety trolls and you’re ruining cycling.

You’re welcome. Assholes.