Sexism? Bicycle Infrastructure

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/national/sexism-behind-overinvestment-in-cycling-infrastructure-report-20130111-2cl7q.html
According to a article that was published on the weekend on Brisbane Times cycling infrastructure can be seen as sexist. The validation of this claim is due to the fact that the majority 75-80% of all cyclists are male just like the majority of elected officials. I have to say while I do not agree with the statement I can understand the premise of the argument.

There is no doubt that men out number women on bikes but I like many believe this is due to the type infrastructure that is being provided not cycling itself. Naturally this relies on some assumptions based on the behaviour of the different sexes. The (generalised) fact is men are more risk taking and have less of concern of personal safety. Then there is the (generalised) fact that men see many activities as a competition, women may not have this opinion. While this is a generalisation the two sexes behaviours do differ and as such women are more likely to ride flat bar bikes designed more for comfort on there commutes then drop bar bikes (see upcoming bikeways count post). This means what some male policy makers may see as good will be scene in more of a discerning image by a female.

A good example of good and moderate to bad on the same corridor (western) is the Bicentennial Bikeway and the Sylvan Rd Bike lanes. These two pieces of infrastraure link the Western Freeway Bikeway to the Brisbane CBD and form the Western Cycling Corridor.

The Bicentennial Bikeway is separated segregated Bicycle Arterial that allows anyone riding along it to ride at there own pace in complete safety without fear of a oncoming car or random car door carelessly slung open in front of you.

This is in contrast with Sylvan Rd (that is still part of the main corridor) which has bikelanes that sometimes are hard up against cars and have cars turning across the bikelanes at the lighted intersection. On this Bikelane you can not ride at your own pace you feel like you have to go flat out as there is not space for another bike rider to overtake you without them having it to mix it up with motor vehicle traffic. This need naturally leads people desiring to ride a faster type of bike, not the kind of bike (flat bar) that is favoured by females.

The fact is cycling is not sexist but the infrastructure does needs to be more designed around people being able to ride at the speed they wish to travel at. This means on major corridors segregation is the key to getting more females in the saddle. The former Floating walkway was an excellent example of separated (from cars), encouraging females on to bikes. Basic observations would guess that women made up far more than 20% of people riding along it. This is because it allowed anyone to ride at a speed that they felt was comfortable. It also meant that the bike shop serving the area has next to no drop bar bikes in the store but is populated by flat bar and city bikes.

So why is the existing separated infrastructure not performing better. For this just look to the example I gave, an arterial is as only as good as the feeder/link. Without this link/feed relationship it stands out and the potential effect is limited. This does not mean each feeder route needs to be to the same standard as the arterial but it does mean treatments such as traffic calming that make the feeders safer and more comfortable to on ride be installed. Arterial and feeder system is how motor vehicle artierals work and so it should be for bicycle infrastructure.