I'm a cyclist and it can be indeed a great way to travel. I also used to work in road traffic for TfL However this comparison between London and European cities is just doesn't work - or at least most of the commentators just don't see the very important detailed differences, although these ought to be quite obvious. Most European cities are much smaller than London and the distances more suitable for cycling. Also, many main roads there are much wider. It isn't really a problem to put in cycle lanes if you have wide boulevards; you can plant trees, have car parking spaces, bus lanes, pleasant footways and cycleways and still provide plenty of room for traffic. But this is not what we have in London. We have also often removed bus lanes to provide cycle lanes, which is ironically a profoundly anti-public transport policy. Buses are the vehicles most affected by road traffic congestion because of course they can't just go another way round. So we are usually down to one motor traffic lane in each direction. This means the emergency vehicles as well as buses have to mix it up all the time with a stream of barely moving traffic. Cars get given a bad rap but most the traffic in inner London isn't comprised mainly of private cars. What about all the taxis and delivery vehicles people depend on all the more as private car use is discouraged so much? (albeit in my view rightly). How do they get around? With difficulty and very slowly is the the answer! This by the way increases cost for everybody.
The other factor that is rarely commented on is that we use traffic signals very differently in Britain from most other countries. In most European countries turning traffic is expected to give way, so that you can often have just a simple two signal stage arrangement at many main junctions, say north south and east-west. By contrast in Britain we separately signal every single traffic, cycle and pedestrian movement. This creates a great deal of what the traffic engineers call 'lost time' caused by the cumulation of the necessary safety period time between different traffic signal stages. The more stages at the junction the less efficiently it operates. (The only exception to this is the common give way to oncoming traffic arrangement for right turns). Installing segregated cycle lane, especially on one side of the road, means very complicated traffic signal junctions and even more wasted time, frustration and delay for all road users. You can see this clearly on most of the cycle superhighways and this leads to cyclists often disobeying red signals when there is absolutely nothing moving at the junction. This isn't the mark of a well designed an engineered system.
In the London and UK context, it would generally make much more sense for cyclists to use bus lanes on main roads with bus stops wherever possible inset by a couple of meters to allow cyclists overtake safely within the bus lanes when buses are stopping. This would actually take up much less room and would be just as safe. Let's also be clear that there is no such thing as absolute safety and however much cycling infrastructure you put in cyclists still after cross other traffic and pedestrian movements from time to time.
I can't see much hope about making a wholesale change to our traffic signalling regime unfortunately, - the changeover would be too confusing and disruptive. However it is something that the Europeans do better than we do!
Most of the main thoroughfares could be fitted with segregated lanes - Piccadilly or Oxford St for example. Regent St has a sort of segregated lane but it then sort of just ends. The dream would be the whole stretch of A40 from Acton to the City entirely segregated.
Appreciate this conversation must be fascinating to people reading in Florida or Oregon.
Ed, I think the designers do things for a reason. They aren't thick morons who somehow forget to extend the cycle lanes! (Sometimes of course because any project has to have some limits so the funding may be a factor). We have been trying to do this for years now. However, as I stated, you can't just sterilise every inch of kerbspace for every other purpose to install a cycle lane. It's a little disappointing when people simply ignore every point one makes!
I'm not implying they are, obviously this is their area of expertise. I'm open to the idea I'm completely wrong about something and need to update my beliefs; it's the refusal to do this which makes so much commentary so maddening IMO.
And yet learning this about you gives me a strong urge to unsubscribe.
It is not the bicycle. It’s the Lycra. Dutch people dress normally on bikes. People riding bikes in clothes are all decent and jolly and include on occasion the delightful and charming me in their ranks
Really the difference is one of attitude. When driving a car or walking I know I am not going to be able to complete my journey in a straight line at desired speed. I will have to stop or slow down and move over for obstructions, for pedestrians, dogs, traffic signals, bad drivers, cyclists, etc and I should be considerate of others (not that all walkers and drivers are).
I find cyclists to be more selfish and inconsiderate. They are loathe to lose forward momentum or to change their line or speed amd aren’t bashful about riding several abreast on narrow lanes.
I have a home in a state where it is the law that motorists give a 4 foot margin to cyclists and pedestrians while passing. I know that sometimes on a 50 mph road I may have to spend a minute behind some 15 mph cyclists until there is clearance for me to move into the oncoming lane and pass safely and slowly. I adapt my course and speed to conditions.
I also walk and cycle on these roads. Yes there is some percentage of drivers (perhaps 25 percent) who do not give pedestrians and cyclists a wide berth or who do not slow down while passing them. Note when I am walking or cycling I always switch to single file and move as far onto the shoulder as is safe to allow vehicles to overtake (sometimes stopping if necessary or prident).
However, while I am out walking I find that 100 percent of cyclists do not move over for me. Many pass within inches of my elbow traveling 3x-4x my walking speed. They just don’t want to change their line or their speed. In fact, many are out on our local roads trying to beat a certain time or top speed or improve stats on Strava. This does make for considerate navigation.
Cyclists in the countryside treat the world as their gym - as if they are on an exercise bike with ear buds in. In my area there are lot of wannabe racers in “Prance Armstrong” kit (as well as real athletes training for Ironman). There is usually an official race held on my country roads about twice a month during the summer (Ironman, half Ironman, lots of charity races, a gran fondo). We residents are used to inconveniencing ourselves for cyclsits (while driving our cars or while confined to our homes for an hour as a race goes by) - whether racers, wannabe racers or wobbly tourists.
I don’t cycle as much anymore due to bad hips/knees and the hilly terrain locally. I know how inconsiderate some motorists can be on country roads and how dangerous an urban commute can be on bicycle (something I did for years while younger).
On balance, however, cyclists are the most inconsiderate and selfish road users. With the mindset too many of them have they should be on an exercise bike or Peloton machine rather than on the roads. They are concerned for their own safety but not the safety of others and are too lazy and selfish to give up forward momentum except in extreme circumstances.
As a motorist I'm sympathetic to cyclists, but as a pedestrian, yes, I kind of hate them. Funny thing is, I grew up in a town that had a robust cycling culture, and the cyclists there were generally considerate. They'd slow down if they were approaching you from behind, ring a bell or say "On your left", and give you some elbow room as they went around you. I had very positive feelings about cyclists until I moved to a town where maybe 5-10% of the cyclists behave that way; the rest are very much of the "shoot past pedestrians at 20 mph, with no warning, a hair's breadth away" mindset you've described. I guess there's some critical mass of polite cyclists which, when reached, establishes a consideration-for-pedestrians norm which the rest of them fall in line with, but the I'm-going-to-act-like-walkers-aren't-even-there attitude seems way more common.
The real burning issue in modern transportation, I would say, is not cars vs. bike but rather why we no longer have the option of travelling by hovercraft across the English chanel.
But I'm a pedestrian/public transport user in London and to me cyclists pose a greater hazard than car drivers. Many of the cycle lanes in my area are at pavement level between the pavement proper and the road, so crossing roads is more complicated and buses have had to introduce safety announcements warning passengers to check for cyclists before getting off the bus. And they are certainly needed - cyclists hurtle down their lanes, not always stopping at pedestrian crossings or slowing when they pass a stationary bus.
Also, cars tend to stay on the roads and obey traffic signals - a significant minority of cyclists do neither. Every day at a busy junction I used to cross on my commute, cyclists regularly took absolutely no notice of red lights when pedestrians had right of way. A significant number also ride on pavements, even when cycle lanes are provided. And this isn't just in town - I've also been out on country walks on public footpaths and encountered cyclists thrashing along. Even on bridleways and canal towpaths some can endanger pedestrians by their aggressive riding style.
So, while I agree that cycling should be a better way to get around London, perhaps we need to introduce some of the measures practised by more cycling-friendly nations, such as better training, before creating even more cycle lanes and car-free zones.
I’m fine with cyclists having their spaces to cycle safely. What I’m not fine about is their taking over my space as a pedestrian i.e. the pavement, which they do with impunity, and nobody does anything about it. Almost everyday walking in the capital I experience a cyclist whizzing past me at great speed, coming from behind so I can’t hear them, and missing me by a whisker, such that if I had deviated from my direction by a few inches I could have ended up in hospital. This was supposed to be against the Highway Code but it seems that the desire to encourage cycling has meant that the safety of pedestrians has been ignored. That’s how it looks to me.
Is it the constant riding on the pavement? Boris bikes dumped everywhere? Not being able to wear headphones in public parks because people speeding through them. People taking bikes into offices
Electric scooters manage to be worse
Also I have noticed much more bad tempered driving of late
I agree with you about riding on the pavement though this is much worse in Japan. There you can't take a quick step to one side (for example, to avoid someone coming the other way) without first checking behind that no bike is coming). It's annoying. But then I find many things annoying.
I say this as someone who lives in the Netherlands and cycles everyday, but British cyclists are aggressive, immensely self centred, dangerous and entitled.
I don't agree with Ed. It isn't simply a matter of putting in traffic reduction schemes, the density of development is very different. The south east might be densely populated but people often live several miles away from work and school, which isn't the case in places like NL. I'd also argue the geography just doesn't work (and e-bikes are both dangerous and very expensive). The Dutch story of changing over cities misses that cycling was still very common. You're not going to get 60yr people that are out of shape to start doing their weekly shopping on a bike.
Yes, they're responsible for a significant increase in accidents here in NL and increase in fatalities particularly for those over 60. There are now particular courses to try to improve safety for this specific reason
I love the way they cycle in Amsterdam, but I'm just not sure that comparison makes any sense. Paris does though - and central Paris is also great for cycling, as a tourist. They have the cycles with the little electric motors so it's just very easy to do and you feel you're at one with the city. You can race up to Montemarte from the Louve in 20 minutes. Could London be as good as that?
As a fellow cyclist who lives in the even more car-centric U.S., I heartily agree with all of this.
In Massachusetts where I currently live, enough people ride bikes that we are not universally loathed. However, when I lived in South Carolina in the early 90s, I was unprepared for the amount of hate I would get for daring to ride a bike. A bike lane had recently been installed connecting my town to a barrier island beach; and while riding in said lane I was honked at, cussed at, and had beer cans hurled at me. And this was when I was a cute 25 year old woman! I was totally astounded by how much cyclists were hated.
A lot of this hatred of cyclists seems to be based in London, where there is a high concentration of bike users, and a high amount of bad behaviour.
We all mess up sometimes, but just treat other road (etc.) users the way you’d want to be treated. Or the way you’d want your Mum to be treated. Don’t be a dick.
(As an aside: Lycra and padded shorts are essential for road cycling. If you like saddle sores, chafing (in sensitive places), and damp, flappy clothes that slow you down, feel free to dress in whatever you want. I’ve been wearing Lycra for over 30 years, and my one piece of advice is to buy the most expensive bib-shorts you can afford.)
I very much enjoy your articles on urban issues, such as mobility pricing etc...
Have you considered the cultural aspect, specifically Protestant work ethic? I think subconsciously a lot of Brits perceive that cycling is a fun pastime meant for kids. And that once kids grow up, they should not be playing with bikes anymore. Adults should be working, being productive and not wasting time biking around having fun.
In a British conservative mindset, proper adults should raise families, buy SUV's or minivans, and graduate to more adult hobbies such as golf, chess or tennis. Even motorcycling is more acceptable adult activity than biking.
Cycling is one of those few activities which kids and adults alike enjoy, I can't think of any other activities like it, which may explain the perception that it is an activity meant for kids. I'd imagine the hate would be the same if a conservative saw an adult playing with legos, video games or toy cars (rather than driving real cars).
The same logic would infer that conservatives should be much more willing and be supportive of kid-friendly bike paths, such as inside parks. A dad and his kid cycling would be fine in the mind of a Tory, as long as it is not on the road thus occupying space meant for cars.
Such was the mindset of Rob Ford (mayor of Toronto) who hated cyclists but supported a few separated bike lanes.
I'm a cyclist and it can be indeed a great way to travel. I also used to work in road traffic for TfL However this comparison between London and European cities is just doesn't work - or at least most of the commentators just don't see the very important detailed differences, although these ought to be quite obvious. Most European cities are much smaller than London and the distances more suitable for cycling. Also, many main roads there are much wider. It isn't really a problem to put in cycle lanes if you have wide boulevards; you can plant trees, have car parking spaces, bus lanes, pleasant footways and cycleways and still provide plenty of room for traffic. But this is not what we have in London. We have also often removed bus lanes to provide cycle lanes, which is ironically a profoundly anti-public transport policy. Buses are the vehicles most affected by road traffic congestion because of course they can't just go another way round. So we are usually down to one motor traffic lane in each direction. This means the emergency vehicles as well as buses have to mix it up all the time with a stream of barely moving traffic. Cars get given a bad rap but most the traffic in inner London isn't comprised mainly of private cars. What about all the taxis and delivery vehicles people depend on all the more as private car use is discouraged so much? (albeit in my view rightly). How do they get around? With difficulty and very slowly is the the answer! This by the way increases cost for everybody.
The other factor that is rarely commented on is that we use traffic signals very differently in Britain from most other countries. In most European countries turning traffic is expected to give way, so that you can often have just a simple two signal stage arrangement at many main junctions, say north south and east-west. By contrast in Britain we separately signal every single traffic, cycle and pedestrian movement. This creates a great deal of what the traffic engineers call 'lost time' caused by the cumulation of the necessary safety period time between different traffic signal stages. The more stages at the junction the less efficiently it operates. (The only exception to this is the common give way to oncoming traffic arrangement for right turns). Installing segregated cycle lane, especially on one side of the road, means very complicated traffic signal junctions and even more wasted time, frustration and delay for all road users. You can see this clearly on most of the cycle superhighways and this leads to cyclists often disobeying red signals when there is absolutely nothing moving at the junction. This isn't the mark of a well designed an engineered system.
In the London and UK context, it would generally make much more sense for cyclists to use bus lanes on main roads with bus stops wherever possible inset by a couple of meters to allow cyclists overtake safely within the bus lanes when buses are stopping. This would actually take up much less room and would be just as safe. Let's also be clear that there is no such thing as absolute safety and however much cycling infrastructure you put in cyclists still after cross other traffic and pedestrian movements from time to time.
I can't see much hope about making a wholesale change to our traffic signalling regime unfortunately, - the changeover would be too confusing and disruptive. However it is something that the Europeans do better than we do!
Most of the main thoroughfares could be fitted with segregated lanes - Piccadilly or Oxford St for example. Regent St has a sort of segregated lane but it then sort of just ends. The dream would be the whole stretch of A40 from Acton to the City entirely segregated.
Appreciate this conversation must be fascinating to people reading in Florida or Oregon.
Ed, I think the designers do things for a reason. They aren't thick morons who somehow forget to extend the cycle lanes! (Sometimes of course because any project has to have some limits so the funding may be a factor). We have been trying to do this for years now. However, as I stated, you can't just sterilise every inch of kerbspace for every other purpose to install a cycle lane. It's a little disappointing when people simply ignore every point one makes!
Sorry!
I'm not implying they are, obviously this is their area of expertise. I'm open to the idea I'm completely wrong about something and need to update my beliefs; it's the refusal to do this which makes so much commentary so maddening IMO.
Way too hot and humid in Miami for cycling and bikes are stolen in the blink of an eye.
I’ve cycled there, but often used the sidewalk because the roads are not always wide enough.
Reading about other cyclists on sidewalks I quant to be clear I always slowed for walkers, rang my bell & called out.
And yet learning this about you gives me a strong urge to unsubscribe.
It is not the bicycle. It’s the Lycra. Dutch people dress normally on bikes. People riding bikes in clothes are all decent and jolly and include on occasion the delightful and charming me in their ranks
Cyclists in Lycra: assholes. It is what it is.
The Lycra is a joke! Sorry I should make these things obvious, I would never wear that. Sorry to put that thought in your head.
Whew thank heavens because I do enjoy your Substack but a person has to have some principles 😄
Become lycrapilled, Ed!
I struggled against the stigma but it is just so convenient!
(Although only if you cycle for sport, for commuting it would be ridiculous)
Really the difference is one of attitude. When driving a car or walking I know I am not going to be able to complete my journey in a straight line at desired speed. I will have to stop or slow down and move over for obstructions, for pedestrians, dogs, traffic signals, bad drivers, cyclists, etc and I should be considerate of others (not that all walkers and drivers are).
I find cyclists to be more selfish and inconsiderate. They are loathe to lose forward momentum or to change their line or speed amd aren’t bashful about riding several abreast on narrow lanes.
I have a home in a state where it is the law that motorists give a 4 foot margin to cyclists and pedestrians while passing. I know that sometimes on a 50 mph road I may have to spend a minute behind some 15 mph cyclists until there is clearance for me to move into the oncoming lane and pass safely and slowly. I adapt my course and speed to conditions.
I also walk and cycle on these roads. Yes there is some percentage of drivers (perhaps 25 percent) who do not give pedestrians and cyclists a wide berth or who do not slow down while passing them. Note when I am walking or cycling I always switch to single file and move as far onto the shoulder as is safe to allow vehicles to overtake (sometimes stopping if necessary or prident).
However, while I am out walking I find that 100 percent of cyclists do not move over for me. Many pass within inches of my elbow traveling 3x-4x my walking speed. They just don’t want to change their line or their speed. In fact, many are out on our local roads trying to beat a certain time or top speed or improve stats on Strava. This does make for considerate navigation.
Cyclists in the countryside treat the world as their gym - as if they are on an exercise bike with ear buds in. In my area there are lot of wannabe racers in “Prance Armstrong” kit (as well as real athletes training for Ironman). There is usually an official race held on my country roads about twice a month during the summer (Ironman, half Ironman, lots of charity races, a gran fondo). We residents are used to inconveniencing ourselves for cyclsits (while driving our cars or while confined to our homes for an hour as a race goes by) - whether racers, wannabe racers or wobbly tourists.
I don’t cycle as much anymore due to bad hips/knees and the hilly terrain locally. I know how inconsiderate some motorists can be on country roads and how dangerous an urban commute can be on bicycle (something I did for years while younger).
On balance, however, cyclists are the most inconsiderate and selfish road users. With the mindset too many of them have they should be on an exercise bike or Peloton machine rather than on the roads. They are concerned for their own safety but not the safety of others and are too lazy and selfish to give up forward momentum except in extreme circumstances.
If I could like this 1000 times I would
Cyclists will whizz around blind corners on paved trails, any dogs or small children or old folks who might be ambling along be damned
As a motorist I'm sympathetic to cyclists, but as a pedestrian, yes, I kind of hate them. Funny thing is, I grew up in a town that had a robust cycling culture, and the cyclists there were generally considerate. They'd slow down if they were approaching you from behind, ring a bell or say "On your left", and give you some elbow room as they went around you. I had very positive feelings about cyclists until I moved to a town where maybe 5-10% of the cyclists behave that way; the rest are very much of the "shoot past pedestrians at 20 mph, with no warning, a hair's breadth away" mindset you've described. I guess there's some critical mass of polite cyclists which, when reached, establishes a consideration-for-pedestrians norm which the rest of them fall in line with, but the I'm-going-to-act-like-walkers-aren't-even-there attitude seems way more common.
I think we live in the same state and I agree heartily! The only thing worse than the cyclists in my state are the Tesla drivers!!!
The real burning issue in modern transportation, I would say, is not cars vs. bike but rather why we no longer have the option of travelling by hovercraft across the English chanel.
correct
Interesting on the cyclist v car debate.
But I'm a pedestrian/public transport user in London and to me cyclists pose a greater hazard than car drivers. Many of the cycle lanes in my area are at pavement level between the pavement proper and the road, so crossing roads is more complicated and buses have had to introduce safety announcements warning passengers to check for cyclists before getting off the bus. And they are certainly needed - cyclists hurtle down their lanes, not always stopping at pedestrian crossings or slowing when they pass a stationary bus.
Also, cars tend to stay on the roads and obey traffic signals - a significant minority of cyclists do neither. Every day at a busy junction I used to cross on my commute, cyclists regularly took absolutely no notice of red lights when pedestrians had right of way. A significant number also ride on pavements, even when cycle lanes are provided. And this isn't just in town - I've also been out on country walks on public footpaths and encountered cyclists thrashing along. Even on bridleways and canal towpaths some can endanger pedestrians by their aggressive riding style.
So, while I agree that cycling should be a better way to get around London, perhaps we need to introduce some of the measures practised by more cycling-friendly nations, such as better training, before creating even more cycle lanes and car-free zones.
I know cyclists that were incensed when the police ticketed them for going through a red light. They didn’t feel they had to obey the traffic rules! 😡
I’m fine with cyclists having their spaces to cycle safely. What I’m not fine about is their taking over my space as a pedestrian i.e. the pavement, which they do with impunity, and nobody does anything about it. Almost everyday walking in the capital I experience a cyclist whizzing past me at great speed, coming from behind so I can’t hear them, and missing me by a whisker, such that if I had deviated from my direction by a few inches I could have ended up in hospital. This was supposed to be against the Highway Code but it seems that the desire to encourage cycling has meant that the safety of pedestrians has been ignored. That’s how it looks to me.
I am incapable of driving or riding a bike
Why do I dislike cyclists
Is it the constant riding on the pavement? Boris bikes dumped everywhere? Not being able to wear headphones in public parks because people speeding through them. People taking bikes into offices
Electric scooters manage to be worse
Also I have noticed much more bad tempered driving of late
I agree with you about riding on the pavement though this is much worse in Japan. There you can't take a quick step to one side (for example, to avoid someone coming the other way) without first checking behind that no bike is coming). It's annoying. But then I find many things annoying.
I say this as someone who lives in the Netherlands and cycles everyday, but British cyclists are aggressive, immensely self centred, dangerous and entitled.
I don't agree with Ed. It isn't simply a matter of putting in traffic reduction schemes, the density of development is very different. The south east might be densely populated but people often live several miles away from work and school, which isn't the case in places like NL. I'd also argue the geography just doesn't work (and e-bikes are both dangerous and very expensive). The Dutch story of changing over cities misses that cycling was still very common. You're not going to get 60yr people that are out of shape to start doing their weekly shopping on a bike.
Do you have any evidence whatever that "e-bikes are very dangerous"?
Yes, they're responsible for a significant increase in accidents here in NL and increase in fatalities particularly for those over 60. There are now particular courses to try to improve safety for this specific reason
https://www.bnnvara.nl/zembla/artikelen/grote-stijging-aantal-ernstige-ongevallen-met-e-bikes
https://www.fietsersbond.nl/nieuws/voorlopige-cijfers-laten-meer-verkeersongevallen-met-e-bikes-zien/
I love the way they cycle in Amsterdam, but I'm just not sure that comparison makes any sense. Paris does though - and central Paris is also great for cycling, as a tourist. They have the cycles with the little electric motors so it's just very easy to do and you feel you're at one with the city. You can race up to Montemarte from the Louve in 20 minutes. Could London be as good as that?
As a fellow cyclist who lives in the even more car-centric U.S., I heartily agree with all of this.
In Massachusetts where I currently live, enough people ride bikes that we are not universally loathed. However, when I lived in South Carolina in the early 90s, I was unprepared for the amount of hate I would get for daring to ride a bike. A bike lane had recently been installed connecting my town to a barrier island beach; and while riding in said lane I was honked at, cussed at, and had beer cans hurled at me. And this was when I was a cute 25 year old woman! I was totally astounded by how much cyclists were hated.
Cyclists are like smokers (back when public smoking was more common). A few give the rest a bad name.
And don't get me started on Van Erp the twerp.
Bored of your wife but don't want to have an affair.
Give cycling a go.
https://www.instagram.com/reel/CszCwqTgpmK/
I know about 37 men who look like the men in that video.
Have you ever looked into the history of "jaywalking"? The auto industry invented a whole category of crime in order to take over the American street.
Man if you dislike car-centric living then you would REALLY hate America, Ed.
“Why can’t we all just ... get along”
A lot of this hatred of cyclists seems to be based in London, where there is a high concentration of bike users, and a high amount of bad behaviour.
We all mess up sometimes, but just treat other road (etc.) users the way you’d want to be treated. Or the way you’d want your Mum to be treated. Don’t be a dick.
(As an aside: Lycra and padded shorts are essential for road cycling. If you like saddle sores, chafing (in sensitive places), and damp, flappy clothes that slow you down, feel free to dress in whatever you want. I’ve been wearing Lycra for over 30 years, and my one piece of advice is to buy the most expensive bib-shorts you can afford.)
I very much enjoy your articles on urban issues, such as mobility pricing etc...
Have you considered the cultural aspect, specifically Protestant work ethic? I think subconsciously a lot of Brits perceive that cycling is a fun pastime meant for kids. And that once kids grow up, they should not be playing with bikes anymore. Adults should be working, being productive and not wasting time biking around having fun.
In a British conservative mindset, proper adults should raise families, buy SUV's or minivans, and graduate to more adult hobbies such as golf, chess or tennis. Even motorcycling is more acceptable adult activity than biking.
Cycling is one of those few activities which kids and adults alike enjoy, I can't think of any other activities like it, which may explain the perception that it is an activity meant for kids. I'd imagine the hate would be the same if a conservative saw an adult playing with legos, video games or toy cars (rather than driving real cars).
The same logic would infer that conservatives should be much more willing and be supportive of kid-friendly bike paths, such as inside parks. A dad and his kid cycling would be fine in the mind of a Tory, as long as it is not on the road thus occupying space meant for cars.
Such was the mindset of Rob Ford (mayor of Toronto) who hated cyclists but supported a few separated bike lanes.