Finding something fascinating and finding something deeply disturbing are not orthogonal; the relationships seemed deeply unhealthy, the men inherently violent and the women second class (don't disturb to club members while they're talking)—and still it was very interesting, very well told.
It's actually considered rude for any non patch-holder to approach two patch-holders having a private discussion. Gender isn't important in this instance. I'm not saying there isn't a ton of misogyny in the MC lifestyle. There really is.
I don't make my girlfriend, the woman who I love, ask permission to talk to me when I'm chatting to a friend (or coding), with the explicit or implied threat of violence.
Very, very different. And incredibly disrespectful.
The people in this story (including the author) seem insane to me. It's crazy enough to ride a motorcycle (let alone without armor), but that's a footnote to the real issues: the violence, needless aggression, and treatment of women as chattel.
What's worse is the author spares no effort rationalizing her abuse. For example: After Jack hits her, he quickly says he's sorry and comes to her aid. That was not an example of how much Jack cared about her. That was Jack scared of her calling the cops and sending him to jail.
I can't find a single good decision made by the author of this story. Had Jack not broken up with her, she'd probably still be in this abusive relationship.
> What's worse is the author spares no effort rationalizing her abuse. For example: After Jack hits her, he quickly says he's sorry and comes to her aid. That was not an example of how much Jack cared about her. That was Jack scared of her calling the cops and sending him to jail.
Is it? It's Jack being a wifebeater. Whether his regrets are genuine or not isn't something you can easily deduce from her account.
> I can't find a single good decision made by the author of this story. Had Jack not broken up with her, she'd probably still be in this abusive relationship.
Riding a motorcycle is not crazy. It is a risk/reward decision. The risk can be mitigated by always riding with gear (ATGATT - All The Gear All The Time) and making smart decisions about how & when you ride. For me the reward of being on a bike far outweighs the risk.
Humans suck at estimating risk. From the Wikipedia article on motorcycle safety[1]:
Per vehicle mile traveled, motorcyclists' risk of a fatal crash is 35 times greater than a passenger car.
In 2012, the US had 23 fatalities per 100 million miles ridden. If you do the math, riding 4,000 miles a year for 40 years gives you a 4.2% chance of dying in an accident. That's just death. It doesn't include getting crippled or having permanent brain damage.
You would be crazy to ride in a car that gave such a high risk of death. In fact, any car that dangerous would not be allowed on the road, and any excuses about mitigating risk would be laughed at. It is an accident of history that society allows motorcycles. If they were invented today, there would be zero chance of them being allowed on streets.
Paradoxically, the only sane place to ride a motorcycle is a race track. With no obstacles, large run-off areas, trained riders, and plenty of armor, injuries are minor.
"It is an accident of history that society allows motorcycles. If they were invented today, there would be zero chance of them being allowed on streets."
So glad they were invented in a time when big old nanny state didn't decide for us what risk we are willing to take.
These are anecdotes, but every person I know that commutes to work on a bike has had an incident of some kind. For awhile I knew one person that didn't fall into that category, but about a month ago his luck changed. Fortunately for him it was only scrapes for him. Others have permanent hand injury (pushed into a concrete barrier on the interstate to avoid being crushed by a car), foot injuries, and so on.
My cousin died on a track; I don't know what the data is for rates in that regard.
I used to ride, but it just doesn't seem worth it to me anymore. (I was also injured in a crash; in fact, every person in my family that rides has been. The brain trauma victim was the 'highlight' until my cousin's death).
I'm not saying someone shouldn't ride, but recognize the risks.
If you do the math, riding 4,000 miles a year for 40 years gives you a 4.2% chance of dying in an accident.
This is not a useful statistic.
I ride almost every day (weather permitting), and with all the riders out there in my area, there is a wide spectrum of safety consciousness and skill on the road.
I guess I fall closer to the 'Hyperreflective self-disciplinary' camp, but I do realize that there inherent risks to riding motorcycles, and I accept them.
Not only do I wear protective equipment from head to toe, but I pay a lot of attention to what's going on ahead and around me. Who's trying to turn left up ahead? What's going on with this intersection, even though I still have the green light? And so on.
So I don't think it is fair to lump me into a statistic with these punks riding bikes with too much power and not enough common sense... all while wearing t-shirts, shorts and flip-flops.
Motorcycle statistics are accurately dire, but the reason for this is rather obvious. Most "miles" in cars are commuter miles... getting to work, getting to the store, getting home again.
Motorcycles on the other hand are generally not commuter vehicles, and riders tend to be self-selected for high risk. From people obsessed with speed, to motorcycle gangs who were no gear, to the weekend rider who has very little experience... It even applies to route selection, the trip to the store is well understood, but if you want to have a nice ride on the weekend, you will probably go far off your normal path. Different vehicle type, less miles logged, unfamiliar territory and often inappropriate gear do lead a high risk of injury.
Riding on a motorcycle is risky business, but so is riding a pedal bike in a city. It can be done practically and reasonably, I even used it as my primary form of travel for a little over a year... but it requires proper gear, a full understanding of the bike (and your place on the road), how avoiding an accident differs on a bike from a car.
It will never be as safe as a car, but in the hands of a conscientious intelligent rider, it isn't the death trap it is often saddled with... it is a calculated risk, like many others people take...
riding 4,000 miles a year for 40 years gives you a 4.2% chance of dying in an accident
No, it doesn't give me a 4.2% risk of dying. That 4.2% (assuming your math is correct) is a figure for the entire population which doesn't say much about an individuals level of risk.
It is possible to ride in a low risk fashion that will put an individuals risk at a significantly lower rate. There is a reason my insurance rates are drastically lower than a 16 year old on a super sport.
I would be highly interested in knowing what the risk is for a population of mature riders, who wear proper gear all the time with 50000+ miles experience is. I'm sure my insurance company has the numbers on file...
24 comments
[ 3.5 ms ] story [ 94.1 ms ] threadHells Angels: A Strange and Terrible Saga by Hunter S Thimpson http://www.amazon.com/Hells-Angels-Strange-Terrible-Saga/dp/...
Stone (1974) http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0072209/
Very, very different. And incredibly disrespectful.
What's worse is the author spares no effort rationalizing her abuse. For example: After Jack hits her, he quickly says he's sorry and comes to her aid. That was not an example of how much Jack cared about her. That was Jack scared of her calling the cops and sending him to jail.
I can't find a single good decision made by the author of this story. Had Jack not broken up with her, she'd probably still be in this abusive relationship.
Is it? It's Jack being a wifebeater. Whether his regrets are genuine or not isn't something you can easily deduce from her account.
> I can't find a single good decision made by the author of this story. Had Jack not broken up with her, she'd probably still be in this abusive relationship.
Unfortunately, plenty of people do this.
Per vehicle mile traveled, motorcyclists' risk of a fatal crash is 35 times greater than a passenger car.
In 2012, the US had 23 fatalities per 100 million miles ridden. If you do the math, riding 4,000 miles a year for 40 years gives you a 4.2% chance of dying in an accident. That's just death. It doesn't include getting crippled or having permanent brain damage.
You would be crazy to ride in a car that gave such a high risk of death. In fact, any car that dangerous would not be allowed on the road, and any excuses about mitigating risk would be laughed at. It is an accident of history that society allows motorcycles. If they were invented today, there would be zero chance of them being allowed on streets.
Paradoxically, the only sane place to ride a motorcycle is a race track. With no obstacles, large run-off areas, trained riders, and plenty of armor, injuries are minor.
1. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motorcycle_safety
My cousin died on a track; I don't know what the data is for rates in that regard.
I used to ride, but it just doesn't seem worth it to me anymore. (I was also injured in a crash; in fact, every person in my family that rides has been. The brain trauma victim was the 'highlight' until my cousin's death).
I'm not saying someone shouldn't ride, but recognize the risks.
This is not a useful statistic.
I ride almost every day (weather permitting), and with all the riders out there in my area, there is a wide spectrum of safety consciousness and skill on the road.
I guess I fall closer to the 'Hyperreflective self-disciplinary' camp, but I do realize that there inherent risks to riding motorcycles, and I accept them.
Not only do I wear protective equipment from head to toe, but I pay a lot of attention to what's going on ahead and around me. Who's trying to turn left up ahead? What's going on with this intersection, even though I still have the green light? And so on.
So I don't think it is fair to lump me into a statistic with these punks riding bikes with too much power and not enough common sense... all while wearing t-shirts, shorts and flip-flops.
Motorcycles on the other hand are generally not commuter vehicles, and riders tend to be self-selected for high risk. From people obsessed with speed, to motorcycle gangs who were no gear, to the weekend rider who has very little experience... It even applies to route selection, the trip to the store is well understood, but if you want to have a nice ride on the weekend, you will probably go far off your normal path. Different vehicle type, less miles logged, unfamiliar territory and often inappropriate gear do lead a high risk of injury.
Riding on a motorcycle is risky business, but so is riding a pedal bike in a city. It can be done practically and reasonably, I even used it as my primary form of travel for a little over a year... but it requires proper gear, a full understanding of the bike (and your place on the road), how avoiding an accident differs on a bike from a car.
It will never be as safe as a car, but in the hands of a conscientious intelligent rider, it isn't the death trap it is often saddled with... it is a calculated risk, like many others people take...
No, it doesn't give me a 4.2% risk of dying. That 4.2% (assuming your math is correct) is a figure for the entire population which doesn't say much about an individuals level of risk.
It is possible to ride in a low risk fashion that will put an individuals risk at a significantly lower rate. There is a reason my insurance rates are drastically lower than a 16 year old on a super sport.