Now, from time to time I get emails from people in Australia. Usually, it's safe to ignore them, since they're generally just unsolicited outbursts of Australian jingoism along the lines of "I love kangaroos and Paul Hogan;" "The guy from the Fyxomatussin website took another picture of a bike;" or "Cadel Evans has won the Tour de France." (Seriously, Cadel Evans winning the Tour de France?!? Not in this lifetime!) However, once in awhile more than one Australian will email me on the same subject, and that's when I know I should actually pay attention. That's what happened this morning (or three days from now if you're in Australia) when a number of people (two, I think) alerted me to this morning show segment that was broadcast on ABC:
ABC is apparently the Australian national broadcaster, though judging from this segment it's what would happen if the BBC and Rupert Murdoch were to get drunk and conceive a child out of wedlock. The story is about a campaign to increase the fines on motorists who "door" cyclists in Melbourne, and in it a reporter interviews Gary Brennan of the Bicycle Network Victoria;
At one point during the interview, the reporter asks:
"Are you worried that by increasing penalties that might be sending a message that it's always the motorist's fault?"
To which Mr. Brennan replies:
"Well it is always the motorist's fault. The law makes no allowances for drivers in this case. If you open a door into the path of a rider it's always your fault."
Simple enough. You fling a car door open without looking and somebody hits it, it's your fault. Sounds right to me. However, shortly after that they cut back to the studio, and that's when these idiots once again prove that the movie "Anchorman" was indeed a documentary and that TV talking heads are vapid numbskulls who should never, ever be allowed to say anything that isn't written down for them beforehand:
"It's not the case," declares Bruce on the left.
"I would say that you probably need to take that comment with a little bit of caution," ejaculates the Bruce on the right moronically.
"A sackload of salt, not just a grain," quips left Bruce, and then goes on about how "...we've all seen our fair share of reckless cyclists as well so I think it's very unfair to purely blame motorists 100% of the time."
"More education and more awareness on both sides is what's needed," quips the Bruce on the right, making it clear that she has no firsthand experience with either.
Right, we've all seen our fair share of reckless cyclists who ride into opening car doors on purpose. If anything, it's probably the reckless cyclists who don't get doored, since when you're salmoning the door angle works in your favor. Actually, as a cyclist and as a driver, it's very difficult for me to envision a situation in which a cyclist could possibly be at fault in the event of a dooring. I suppose if a cyclist were actually riding in your private driveway you might have a case, but other than that it's on you.
Of course, because some cyclists are too stupid to fasten a quick release skewer properly, the law punishes the rest of us by requiring our fork dropouts to have safety tabs. Given this, and given the fact that so many motorists are obviously too stupid to open their car doors properly, shouldn't there at least be some sort of "door safety tab" that requires a step beyond simply pulling the door handle? Like, maybe you could pull the handle, the door would only open an inch, and then you'd have to pull it again. Or, maybe all cars need to be outfitted with sliding minivan-style doors. Sure, people would still exit their cars without looking, but in that case at least we'd hit them instead. Not only are people softer than doors, but also maybe that way they'd finally start getting the message.
Sadly, I don't see any of this happening any time soon, and in Australia and elsewhere I'm sure moronic motorists will keep flinging their doors open heedlessly and treating doorings as an irritating natural inevitability, like "bird strikes" on airplanes. They'll also maintain that the real problem is that cyclists are reckless, and that the solution to all cycling-related problems is to make cyclists wear helmets.
Speaking of helmets, a reader recently forwarded me the following apology published by Bicycle Indiana:
We apologize for our error
Please accept our apology for the picture displayed at the close of the May 2012 E-News. This image was a stock photo of a family bicycling. The use of this image in Bicycle Indiana's e-news was the wrong choice because none of the riders are wearing bicycle helmets. We understand that our members expect Bicycle Indiana to lead by example. Bicycle Indiana recommends and encourages helmet use for all bicyclists and the image displayed provided the incorrect perception that we endorse riding a bicycle without a helmet. We will be more judicious in our choices in the future.
Oh no! A family enjoying their bicycles while not wearing helmets?!? They're all going to die!!!
Fortunately though, Bicycle Indiana addressed the problem via the judicious application of Photoshop:
Of course, by this point you may be wondering why they just don't pee in the water during the swimming part, but applying logic to an event as absurd as a triathlon is like trying to apply a sticker to an oily surface.
-3.jpg)
-1.jpg)
.jpg)
-2.jpg)






























Here we see the guy from "Boys on the Side" getting ready for some tri training






Monotonous actor David Duchovny, formerly of the “X-Files” and now star of “Californication,” could be just what we need. His soporific mumbling can tranquilize even the most excitable among us, and the fact that he does triathlons means we can all make fun of him instead of each-other. After all, Messiahs are supposed to suffer for all mankind. And triathlons are like cyclocross without the skill, or like alleycats without the fun. We should be able to revile the hell out of him.
The deceased Chabad-Lubavitch rabbi is already considered by many to be the Messiah. Were he to return to Earth astride a Rivendell, I think few of us would disagree. Why the Rivendell? It goes great with the beard. Why Schneerson? Well, his sect is based in Brooklyn, and Brooklyn is second only to Portland in terms of being a cycling community at war with itself and in need of saving.
I don’t know who this would be exactly. All I know is he or she would be the living embodiment of the spirit of cyclocross. Kind of like how Greek gods were the embodiment various virtues and aspects of life. The God of Cyclocross would be affable to a fault, wear Crocs with wool socks, and drink beer brewed in small batches. He would also wield a pit stick like a sceptre and get on and off his bike more often than Courtney Love gets on and off heroin.
