If I Die While Biking

Another of us was lost a few weeks ago. Another ghost bike placed. Another voice silenced. And it got me to thinking. I'll try not to let this get too depressing. As bleak as the statistics are, it's an unlikely scenario.

I don't even know if I'll ever bike again. I'm having some pretty significant health challenges. I'm just not sure it's in my future, but I remain hopeful.

I don't want some gaudy floral display beside the road. I don't want a modest wooden cross to mark the spot. If I die while biking, get a ghost bike and chain it near the spot. It better be a pretty, girly thing, not a nondescript road bike. Stick a basket on the front and put a couple colorful fake flowers in it. I want everyone who sees it to know not just "some cyclist died here," but "lady cyclist died here." I want them to think, "that could've been my sister, my wife, my mother, my friend."

Something like This. Girlier, if Possible.

To my loved ones: Attend whatever shindig the cycling community puts together. Let them support you, and support them in return. When one of us dies, we all think of our mortality, even if we didn't know the person. We're all thinking, "that could be me."

It may be hard, but do what you can to encourage more cycling. The more of us there are, the safer we all are. Remember that cycling didn't kill me; poor infrastructure, poor driving, or both probably did. Yes, serious crashes can happen without a person driving being involved. But if I'm actually dead, it's probably because I collided with a person driving (only 16% of  fatal or serious crashes reported to the police in England don't involve a collision with a person driving).

Support efforts to create infrastructure that prioritizes safety for vulnerable road users, even if you think it could add minutes to your commute or inconvenience others who drive. (Actually, most measures don't add significant vehicle delays). Isn't my life worth your inconvenience?

There'll almost certainly be video evidence. Use it. Sue the everliving fuck out of whatever jackass killed me. Or work to change the thing that led to my demise.

Lastly, no matter how I go, throw yourselves a bitchin' party. Get the good food. Get the good booze. Hire a good band. Party like it's my last day on earth. I'd be there if I could.

On the Narrow-Highway Exception to Maryland's 3-Foot Law

This is the letter I just wrote to Senator Jim Rosapepe and delegates Barbara Frush, Ben Barnes, and Josaline Pena-Melnyk about the need to get rid of the narrow highway exception to Maryland's 3-foot law. BikeMaryland's article outlines it pretty well, but it's important for individuals to speak out, in addition to the wonderful work being done by BikeMaryland and BikeAAA.

Dear Senator Rosapepe,

Getting rid of the narrow-highway exception to the 3-foot law will protect bicyclists in the short and long term, and help to defuse the tension between the bicycling community and the driving community.

My route to almost everywhere requires me to ride on Annapolis Rd between Arundel High and the traffic circle, then on Odenton Rd between the traffic circle and the MARC station.

Both of these roads fall under the "narrow highway" exception for bicyclists. Vehicles aren't obligated to give me a safe passing distance, and usually don't. Both the high school and the MARC station are destinations one would expect for bicyclists traveling to school or work.

As a motorist, I am aware of the inconvenience to motorists by the presence of a bicyclist. As a result, I prefer to ride to the right of the lane, so that motorists can pass when it is safe. When motorists pass too close - as the current law allows - I ride in the middle or left portion of the lane. Preventing motorists from passing too close is safer in the short-term, but I worry about the ill-will it engenders.

As a cyclist, I need the protection of the 3-foot law. I need to know that motorists will respect my need for safety by waiting until they can leave a safe passing margin, and that I don't have to take actions which would seem aimed at angering drivers in order to achieve my short-term safety.

Getting rid of the narrow-highway exception to the 3-foot law will protect bicyclists in the short-term and in the long-term, as motorists learn that leaving a safe passing margin is not the "polite" thing to do, but the legal thing to do.

When motorists understand that laws prioritize bicyclists' safety, they will be less likely to take cyclists' presence on the roads as a personal affront. They will be less likely - I think - to succumb to rage against an individual cyclist. Getting rid of the narrow-highway exception will be good for motorists and cyclists.

Thank you for your consideration of this important issue.

In peace,

Jennifer A. Carson

4 Things The Wiz - Live! Got Right

I watched NBC's The Wiz - Live! last night (most of it - I missed the first hour). I had never seen any version of the play. If you missed it, you should go see it - it's still available on NBC's website.

Here are four places this version really nailed it.

1. It Boosted New Stars

The lead was played by Shanice Williams. Don't feel bad if you don't recognize her name. According to IMDB, she's best known for her role in The National Dog Show Presented by Purina. Yeah, I didn't see that, either. She got the role that was previously played by Ashanti and Diana Ross in other versions, and she killed it.

Other talented, but little-known actors include Amber Riley (Glee and a made-for-TV movie), Elijah Kelley (The Butler and a few other movies), and Uzo Aduba (OITNB, mostly).

Amber Riley as Addapearle

She was framed by some major names, too - Ne-Yo, Queen Latifah, Common, David Allen Grier, and Mary J. Blige. They provided draw, boosting viewership, and lending exposure to Williams and her fellow actors.

Hollywood needs this. Hollywood needs more African American actors earning money, making great films, and supporting each other. Those awards shows are still awfully predictable. That can change. This is part of that change.

2. It Portrayed Successful African Americans

Take a deep breath and stick with me through this point, okay?

While movies are more likely now to star African Americans, the actors often don't speak or dress any differently than their white counterparts (Annie, I'm looking at you). Aside from the color of their skin, they may as well be white.

The Wiz - Live! might engender criticism for having the characters speak in slang, but these characters are African American. They aren't African Americans striving to conform to the dominant culture in order to achieve success - by dressing like successful white people, or by talking like successful white people, for example. They find success not despite their identity, not because of their identity, but within their identity. And it's glorious.

Ne-Yo as Tin Man

Queen Latifah is the successful ruler of the Emerald City as the Wizard. Aduba and Riley (as Glinda and Addaperle) are successful Good Witches. Dorothy, Tin Man, Lion, and Scarecrow face challenges and rise above them. They don't conform to the (non-existent, in this film) dominant white culture in order to do so. They do it slang, clothing, and stereotypes included. They do it as they are.

This is what acceptance looks like.

3. Positive Body Image

Shanice Williams was adorable in her little plaid skirt. Mary J. Blige looked amazing in her costumes, and Uzo Aduba and Amber Riley looked beautiful in their dresses. None of these women are exactly tiny. And I loved seeing that.

Shanice Williams as Dorothy, Uzo Aduba as Glinda the Good

I love it that the show's producers didn't choose super-skinny women to play these characters - they chose women who could act and sing and dance to play these characters.

The women appeared comfortable in their appearances. Williams never tugged her skirt down in an attempt to hide her thighs. Aduba and Riley never tugged at their costumes in an attempt to hide their lovely curves. No one commented about diets or exercise regimens.

Williams, giving a pep-talk to David Allen Grier as the Cowardly Lion

I know - that stuff wouldn't have fit in that play. It was written about characters who wouldn't have worried about those things. But gosh. It was so refreshing to see stars on stage who, I felt, sort of looked like me.

4. It Passed the Bechdel Test

The Bechdel test presents a series of wickets for a movie (or book, or video game, etc.) to hit: it has to have at least two female characters who talk to each other about something other than a man.

With Queen Latifah playing a definitely feminine Wizard (though she doesn't necessarily look very feminine at first), and Aduba and Riley as the good witches, there were a few scenes where the women spoke to Dorothy.

Dorothy (and cast) discuss the meaning of success
with Queen Latifah as the Wizard

They didn't even discuss hair, or nails, or clothes, much less diet plans and exercise routines. They talked about big stuff - identity. They talked about the meaning of success and the meaning of family.

It was women acting like women. (Mostly) supporting each other. It passed the test with flying colors.

Bonus Point: Excellent Conflict

That scene when Dorothy confronted Evillene was one of the best scenes I saw. Dorothy starts hurling insults about Evillene, and Evillene responds with, "If I'm wicked, what does that make you?"

She launches into a list of Dorothy's offences. She killed the other witch and then stole her shoes before the body was even cold. Dorothy didn't have a good comeback for that.

Mary J. Blige as Evillene, not taking Dorothy's hypocrisy

I wish the moment had been more powerful. There was potential for Dorothy to have self-doubt or defensiveness... but she kind of glossed over it.

The other point was made by the Wizard. The Wizard explained that things in Oz worked before Dorothy came. There was balance. Everyone knew their place. Then Dorothy went witch-killing and upset everything. Again, Dorothy never addressed that accusation, or even seemed to acknowledge it.

Stop Using That Hashtag

Victim Equaling

You probably already know what a "topper" is. Whatever you say, they've done it better, gotten a bigger one, done it more, or had it worse.

Victim-topping is this thing I see on the internet lately, and it's not so much topping, as it is "equaling." If you were at a party, it'd go like this: You say, "Thank God someone brought a veggie platter. I'm deathly allergic to peanuts, and they are in everything!" And they say, "Yeah, I'm a vegan. We should all demand more choices from our grocer."

The way it plays out in the internet, is there's some movement and a counter-movement. The thing is, we have movements for a reason: The status quo isn't getting it for some people. In order to change the status quo, a movement is born.

The #BlackLivesMatter movement is a good example of a movement with a counter-movement. This movement draws attention to "the ways in which Black people are intentionally left powerless at the hands of the state."

That Other Hashtag is a Straw Man Argument

The counter-movement, All Lives Matter, is a straw man argument that seeks to reinforce the status quo. In this day and age, we can pretty much agree that all lives matter. Hence the straw man part. No one is going to disagree with you on that one. No one was even making that argument.

By saying "all lives matter," you're seeking to diminish the power of the request for change by changing the focus of the argument. You're working to halt the change others depend on by reinforcing the status quo.

A Constructionist Reading

When you use that other hashtag, you're using the same well-recognized format as #blacklivesmatter, which draws a comparison between the two. "All lives matter" would have no meaning without the association to Black Lives Matter. By saying "all lives matter," you aren't drawing attention to a specific problem, you're just muddying the water. Because of this association, you're drawing a comparison which brushes aside the problem Black Lives Matter tries to address; you're making room at the party for a lesser problem.

Let me just clarify here. You're probably enraged, so let me clarify. When I say "lesser problem," I'm talking about the size of the problem in terms of number of victims and the rate of victims. When compared to white people, African Americans have it much worse in the justice system. They suffer more at the hands of the state and within the system in which we all live. I'm not interested in arguing statistics. That's not what this post is about.

Lastly, I'd like to remind you that Black Lives Matter is not a zero-sum game. A system that treats black people fairly won't suddenly turn on white people. More fair treatment does not necessitate the displacement of injustice from one group onto another group.

So, stop using that hash-tag. You're not helping anyone, and you're hurting some.

20151108 Update: edited to fix a typo.

The Big Deal About Some Washington, D.C. Bike Lanes

If you're following me on Facebook, you've already seen most of this. This post lays out the background information, both sides of the argument, and my stance in it.

The Current Situation:

There are bike lanes all around this piece of Washington, D.C., but few that connect the areas with a lot of bike lanes to the areas with few bike lanes, and fewer continuous north-south bike lanes nearby. The marker is for New York Ave. and 6th street, northwest. Solid lines are bike lanes, dotted lines are "bike-friendly streets" - places where Google has noted there are bicyclists, though I question their equation of large numbers of cyclists to "friendliness." 6th street is like a bike-lane desert.

In 2014, 12 bicyclists and 16 pedestrians were hit along the stretch of 6th street under consideration, and 14 bicyclists and 7 pedestrians were struck along the portion of 9th street under consideration, according to FOIA data cited by the Washington Area Bicyclist Association (WABA). So, bicyclists and pedestrians do use the street, but not safely.

On 6th street and M street (jut north of the marker on the above map) is a large church of long-time congregants, the United House of Prayer. The New Bethel Baptist Church is at 9th and S. Northwest D.C. has seen a lot of gentrification.

The United House of Prayer enjoys street parking, where about 75 cars can park diagonally on Sundays. The proposed changes to 6th street would allow only parallel parking, meaning the loss of an unknown number of parking places.

The Proposals:

There are four proposals for adding bike lanes to either 6th or 9th streets in northwest Washington, D.C. They all allow for some street parking, at least at "non-peak" times, which would presumably include Sunday mornings.

Here's my favorite proposal, which provides for protected bike lanes in each direction, two or four lanes of travel (four in peak times), and 2 lanes of parking during non-peak times. The plan for 6th street north of New York Avenue looks the same as this, which shows 6th south of New York Avenue:

The Conundrum:

Gentrification has forced many of the congregants to the suburbs. The churches may see a concerning situation where congregants are far from their church and have trouble parking once they get there. They are arguing that this loss of parking impinges on their freedom of religion.

The city has adopted Vision Zero, which aims to eliminate traffic deaths. Protected bike lanes are a major portion of this vision.

The Washington Area Bicyclist Association (WABA) asserts in their post on the recent public meeting that while concerns about gentrification are valid, using the proposed bike lanes as a proxy for this argument is inappropriate.

My Stance:

As Christians, we are told to protect the vulnerable. This extends to vulnerable street users, such as bicyclists and pedestrians. The benefit of being "strong" (in the majority, supported by your environment, and physically secure) is that you can afford to help the weak. As Christians, we are commanded to do so, even at the expense of our comfort.

As Christians, we are told that we are the stewards of our environment. While biking isn't free from environmental harm (tires are a petroleum product), it is more responsible than driving. As Christians, we should be encouraging bicycling and walking as means of transportation.

As Christians, we are told to love one another, above all else. The importance of community and inclusiveness is reinforced through scripture. Our public policies and behaviors should reflect these values.

Unfortunately, the behavior of the those representing the churches at the public meeting did not represent Christian values. Besides holding their right to park above others' right of physical safety, they shouted down and cat-called opposing viewpoints.

I hope that should my church find itself in a similar situation, that we will demonstrate the Christian values we claim as our own.