Should the word cyclist be BANNED? Scientists demand the word be abolished for ‘dehumanising’ them (and instead they should be called ‘people who ride bikes’)
- Scientists say car drivers often don’t see cyclists on the road as fully human
- They say term ‘cyclist’ dehumanises them and therefore encourages aggression
- Calls for it to be replaced with the term ‘people who ride bikes’ instead
- Say putting a face to a label is a good way of mitigating violence and accidents
The snowflake generation strikes again as scientists claim the term ‘cyclist’ should be banned.
Scientists at Australian universities say the term ‘dehumanises’ the hobbyists and makes car drivers more inclined to engage in deliberate acts of violence.
Now experts are backing a move to avoid the word cyclist all together and replace it with the lengthier phrase ‘people who ride bikes’.
Scientists at Australian universities say the term ‘dehumanises’ the hobbyists and makes car drivers more inclined to engage in deliberate acts of violence. Now experts are backing a move to avoid the word cyclist all together (stock)
Study co-author Professor Narelle Haworth said: ‘Let’s talk about people who ride bikes rather than cyclists because that’s the first step towards getting rid of this dehumanisation.’
The study by researchers at the universities of Monash, Queensland and Melbourne, in Australia, is the first to look at how one group of road users responded to another.
Researchers say drivers had reduced levels of aggression towards cyclists when they were able to put a face to the label.
The research, published in the journal Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, says cyclists have been conceptualised as a minority group and become a target of negative attitudes and behaviour.
The study, involving 442 respondents in Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland, identified people’s attitude to cyclists.
Participants in the study were given either the iconic image depicting the ascent of man or a similar one showing the stages of evolution from cockroach to human.
Lead author Dr Alexa Delbosc, said the insect to human scale was designed specifically for the study because of the many informal slurs against cyclists comparing them to ‘cockroaches’ or ‘mosquitoes’.
On both ape-human and insect-human scales, 55 per cent of non-cyclists and 30 per cent of cyclists rated cyclists as not completely human.
Acts of aggression towards cyclists by motorists were not uncommon, with 17 per cent saying they had used their car to deliberately block a cyclist, 11 per cent had deliberately driven their car close to a cyclist and nine per cent had used their car to cut off a cyclist.
Some outrage has ensued following the claims the term ‘cyclist’ should be banned. Piers Morgan voiced his disgust on Twitter
Researchers say drivers had reduced levels of aggression towards cyclists when they were able to put a face to the label (stock)
Dr Delbosc said: ‘When you don’t think someone is ‘fully’ human, it’s easier to justify hatred or aggression towards them. This can set up an escalating cycle of resentment.
‘If cyclists feel dehumanised by other road users, they may be more likely to act out against motorists, feeding into a self-fulfilling prophecy that further fuels dehumanisation against them.
‘Ultimately we want to understand this process so we can do a better job at putting a human face to people who ride bikes, so that hopefully we can help put a stop to the abuse.’
Professor Haworth said the study also revealed the problem of dehumanisation on roads was not just a case of car driver versus cyclist.
She said: ‘The bigger issue is that significant numbers of both groups rank cyclists as not 100 per cent human.
‘Among people who ride, among people who don’t ride, there is still people who think that cyclists aren’t fully human.
‘The dehumanisation scale is associated with the self-reporting of direct aggression.
‘Using your car to deliberately block or cut off a cyclist or throwing an object at a cyclist are dangerous acts of direct aggression.’ are dangerous.’