Egon [they/them]

Yes we agree. So the response is not “its not an issue” the response is that there are alternatives to bikes. I perceived your response as a sort of sarcastic dismissal and I see now I misread the tone and content, sorry.

Good thing that’s not what they’re saying

How do elders deal with …

Skill issue.

Being elderly or physically handicapped is not a question of “being out of shape”.

Also your dismissal of the fact that overweight people exist and also need to get around is indicative of a poor understanding of good urban planning.

“obviously the exceptions that make it so my comments aren’t fitting and showcase ableism don’t count. Everyone know that. You are the stupid one. I have depicted myself as the streamer for a third time to hammer this home.”

The initial question is about those who are too physically unfit to scale a steep hill. Responding with “skill issue” is ableist specifically because we’re talking about the “exception”

Consider people who are physically impaired instead of dismissing real problems?

Yeah the bikes are super cool, there’s lots of different ones too. I once got overtaken by a guy who pedalled with his arms, made me feel like a scrub.

It is a big issue when we don’t plan for those that don’t fit into our ideal of a “normal” person, because when we default to that we default to planning for men - and really planning for no one.
If you’re interested you should look up “gendermainstreaming”. Vienna has a very good manual on it.

I think people here get defensive about bikes because they’re used to arguing against carbrained folks all the time. It should also be noted a city designed for bikes and walkability will be easier to travel in for those who have trouble walking, than a city designed for cars, even if concessions aren’t made.

There’s wheelchair accessible bikes, but you are actually correct. Good urbanism requires us to take into account not just those who conform to society, but all it’s people. Interestingly an inclusive and accommodating city is also an economically strong one - in the long run more productive potential is freed and less resources are spent on patch-fixing a broken structure (this isn’t why its good to do, but it’s a nice argument to have when you’re talking to people who are afraid that wed be making a better world for no reason other being good people).

This is your reminder to read Invisible Women by Criado Perez

how do you travel to another city?

Train, bus, electrical bike, rideshares for the last mile maybe.

What do you do if the city has high slopes making walking and biking too hard?

Get off and walk, use a bike with electrical assistance, use a different type of mobility assistance if i am very physically impaired.

how do elders deal with what other citizens would take for granted in terms of mobility?

See above + Elders are typically more physically able due to having lived a life of regular everyday exery + their everyday destinations are not several miles away + “car free” doesn’t paradoxically mean free of cars, just almost all cars - ambulances are still needed for example - as such if a person is so impaired that no mobility assistance is enough to get them to their destination, then they can still be taxied by help.

True, but a bike costs a fraction of a car, so it’s also much less of an issue if it happens.

I’m gonna say I disagree. The only reason a bike is easier to steal is because the cops give even less of a shit about it.

Your parents failed in raising you

If you’re interested in theory on this subject I’d recommend looking into “theory of practice”. It’s all about this and, like with every single other good urban planning thing, it’s not at all new. We just pretend like it is so that politicians might finally do something other than build a fucking road.

Thank you very much for your advice!

Thank you!

Thank you! Do you have any online resources you would recommend for learning more? For example how to evaluate the chain - I’ve just bought this bike used, so I don’t know it’s mileage really

@7bicycles@hexbear.net pinging you because I know you know a lot about bicycles, and I hope you can help. I understand if you’re too busy or don’t want to though - no pressure!

Eh, China has been collapsing or about to collapse since the 60’s. I’ll believe it when I see it. Meanwhile the US isn’t doing so hot, which we can actually observe without the need to make the financial troubles of one part of one sector in one region into some sort of sign of an oncoming apocalypse.

Regarding making use of capitalism: Yeah, that’s what dengism is all about. Capitalism has its uses, we’ve just outgrown it.

:pigpoop:

You get what you give

you referenced what happened in 2014, as if that provoked or justified Russia’s current actions.

I’m not the user that referenced it. Once again: I’ve literally only asked you to answer the question. Had I been the one to state the question initially, you still wouldn’t be able to make that conclusion, it is a huge assumption that that would be the line of reasoning, angle of argument or anything else. It could just as easily have been a way to see where we disagree, create a common basis from which to have an argument, to help illustrate a point of larger context or something else entirely. It is common for a discussion to create a basis of shared understanding from which we can then diverge or argue.

Im open to actually discussing it with you if you’ll actually explain what you mean and why you feel that way.

No thanks. Its pretty clear you’re not capable of pleasant or good faith discussion, instead choosing weird debate tactics, condescention and strawmanning me. I’ve literally only asked you to answer a question, and you haven’t been able to fulfill this simple request. It’s pretty clear any extended conversation would just be even worse.
Maybe when you’re less of an antagonistic debatelord.