When I write a column for Outside, I often don’t know that they’ve actually published it until someone sends me an indignant email about it. Such was the case with my most recent column, which was the sort of anti-crabon propaganda you’d expect from a cantankerous old bike blogger:
Now, I should note that since 2007 I’ve been writing about bikes in a provocative (some might even say “dickish”) manner on an almost daily basis, and in that time I’ve received who knows how many thousands of emails. Of those, I’d say I could count all the angry ones on my fingers–and of those angry ones, I’d say the angriest ones come from Outside readers. From this I’ve often been tempted to make the following generalization:
- Bike people are often smart people who don’t take themselves too seriously
- Outside readers are often douchebags
To be fair, I have no idea if this particular letter writer is in fact a douchebag; I don’t know him and would like to give him the benefit of the doubt. He was clearly angry though, here are the salient points of his missive:
- The column was “silly and short sighted”
- I should “do some more homework before crafting such a ridiculous piece for a major outdoor media company”
- Carbon is better than alloy in “every single way,” ideal for any type of bike including “commuting”
- My mechanical skills are probably “that of a 5 year old”
- My article “sucked”
My column is of course an opinion piece, and the sender is of course entitled to his own opinion, which is fair enough. Given this, I think what concerns me the most is not that he thinks I have the mechanical skills of a young child–which, again, fair enough–but that he has such high expectations of Outside and respects them as a “major outdoor media company” that I have somehow defiled. I mean, sure, I write for Outside, so I realize this is a total self-own, but you should not read anything in a digi-rag like Outside and take it seriously enough to get angry. People believing what “major outdoor media companies” tell them is why we’re inundated with plastic bikes and battery-powered shifters in the first place. In fact, the faith people put in their favorite media brands explains pretty much everything wrong with modern discourse, and 97% of social media is idiots foaming at the mouth over some stupid article they read on [insert media property here].
And yes, for that matter probably 75% of this blog is me foaming at the mouth over some stupid article somewhere, so again, I absolutely realize I’m part of the problem.
Nevertheless, in this case I stand by what I wrote, insofar as I have in fact done my homework by immersing myself in bikes for many years, which has led me to conclude that the “silly and short sighted” thing would be to invest in, say, a carbon fiber commuter bicycle. However, as I also point out in the column, of course most people will own and ride carbon bikes without any problem. Most bikes fall victim to their own riders’ boredom, not some mishap or inherent structural problem. The fact is that sometimes we buy stuff because it turns us on, and if a light, aero bike plastic bike hardens or moistens your privates (as applicable) more than a metal one then by all means you should buy it and ride the hell out of it. Just go into it with your eyes open, which can be hard to do given all the marketing crap that passes for bike content out there, which is why cantankerous old bike bloggers like me try to slip a little reality into “major outdoor media” outlets every now and again.
You’re welcome.