How much do words matter when it comes to bike safety?
Photo by:
Peter Flax @Pflax1
Could changing words used in signage change attitudes to bikes on the road? Lately, there’s been many people on the Internet fighting for proper language when there is a collision between a car and a cyclist. The argument is: cars don’t kill cyclists, people do.
You know the scenario. A driver is reckless and doesn’t check their mirror, is speeding, or simply not paying attention. The argument is that instead of a media or police report saying that a “car has hit a cyclist” it should be a “driver hit a cyclist,” since, of course, vehicles are not (as of yet) sentient beings. If we lived in a world where Optimus Prime was running over cyclists, sure. But we are not. In fact, some argue even using the word “accident” is misleading, as it was a crash, or a collision, not an accident.
Many argue that the choice of words is important as by saying a “car” hits a cyclist, we are removing responsibility and blame on the guilty driver. As Tara Goddard and Kelcie Ralph explain, “The first problem was pervasive victim-blaming through language that specifically focuses on the victim, omits an actor, and gives agency to vehicles rather than people.”
Peter Flax recently pointed out that a seemingly subtle difference in language used in signs can affect the way in which cycling road safety can be interpreted.
Both of these signs are *trying* to say the same thing. Which do you think is more effective? Which do you think is more common? pic.twitter.com/NaxW58UF4O
— Peter Flax (@Pflax1) November 7, 2021
The first sign “share the road,” can be interpreted two ways. One, that bicycles are being given “permission” to use a public roadway. Or is it a warning to vehicles that slower-moving and vulnerable cyclists will be on the road? It could also highlight a lack of cycle tracks?
The second sign, “may use full lane” seems to indicate that cyclists are allowed to use the full lane. The word “may,” some argue, could be “should” to create a stronger meaning for both cyclists and drivers. The debate on words continues, but unfortunately it often is galvanized by a tragedy involving a cyclist being killed by a driver.
