Having returned from Newfoundland to Montreal, and having finished my vacation, I am now slowly settling back into my Montreal habitat.
This involves commuting by bike, which I could not really do in Newfoundland.
It therefore involves dealing with motornormativity – a term coined by Professor Ian Walker to describe the way our society has incorporated, often unconsciously, the priorities given to motor vehicles over all other forms of existence.
Motornormativity normalizes certain behaviours, and excuses nuisances, for cars, whilst refusing equivalent behaviours or excuses to other species, including cyclists. It is a value system skewed towards prioritizing motor vehicles, thereby underestimating the problems they cause, whilst imposing restrictions and nuisances on all other users of public space.
Two motornormative examples from this morning’s commute
a- The city obstructing cycle path and forcing bikes into oncoming traffic
Would the city close a road, in both directions, by parking its vehicles on it, thereby forcing cars into oncoming traffic or onto sidewalks with no attempt at traffic management?
No. But they will do so on a cycle path.
Note that two full-size trucks (one on cycle track besides white truck, one on cycle track to right of photo), plus a pick-up (also on cycle track), seem to be required to trim a modestly sized tree. The white delivery truck (unconnected with the city) is not parked on the cycle lane, but further constricts the road-way.
Note also that this is a two-lane one-way street (but a narrow two-way cycle path). So the cyclists moving away from the photographer (me) would be heading into oncoming traffic with or without the white delivery truck.
Finally, note that some cyclists choose the sidewalk.
b- Motonormative cyclists: a cyclist blocking a cycle lane, checking phone
It is not only city trucks that exhibit motornormativity. Many cyclists are motornormative too.
Would this cyclist sit in the middle of a road, obstructing cars (note that the light is green for the cyclist, red for cross-traffic), calmly consulting their phone?
Maybe, but this type of behaviour, if observed by police, would be strictly sanctioned as a violation of the highway code. Why? Because obstructing motor vehicles is considered problematic and dangerous, whereas obstructing cyclists is not a problem.
At least the cycle path was not too busy : I had time to ride up behind the cyclist, pull off the cycle lane, dismount, get my phone out and take the picture. This phone consultation was not a momentary affair!
Many cyclists (this particular cyclist is part of a trend: I am not trying to single them out) think it unproblematic to obstruct a cycle lane for minutes at a time to chat on their phone, or to cycle whilst wobblingly attempting to scroll their messages.
Richard Shearmur 