I'm kind of split on this issue. On the one hand, my shop just got a Trans Night off the ground, much to the chagrin of some of our volunteers. And I started a women's and trans cycling group here in Durham because I feel like the issues I face as a female cyclist just aren't addressed by the mainstream male-dominated cycling culture. That, and sometimes I simply want to ride bikes with other women/trans folk and celebrate that concept.

On the other hand, after years of going to conferences, hearing intense discussion on race, class and gender in my collective, and debating enough politics that my ears bleed, at some point I just want to fix some damn bikes, teach people how, and ride them in cyclocross races till I throw up and am bruised and muddy from the effort.

My current opinion is, there is room for all in this large cycling universe. Let people have their women's collectives and trans and queer fixin' bike nights, and let dudes and ladies ride expensive carbon frames and shred their local rides. All all welcome, and there is room for all types of riding- I don't care if you're a fixie//mtb/commuter/roadie/tri/cross rider (I'm all of these), you ride a bike and that's what counts.

At the end of the day, if you want to donate to Plan B, do. If you don't, don't. I wouldn't get your political gutchies in a bunch over it.

Best,
Leslie
Durham Bike Co-op

On Thu, Jan 3, 2013 at 10:42 PM, Andrew Shooner <ashooner@gmail.com> wrote:
As a middle class, straight white male, my gut emotional sentiment to this in the past was usually similar to Matt's, and to some extent it still is. However, I'm (slowly) learning the complexity that comes from our emerging plurality of personal identity. When I take a step back, it's actually one of the best things our society as a whole is managing to accomplish these days, imho.

I understand the concept of a need for leveling devices for subaltern communities, but reading the Plan B synopsis still hits me with questions. Do we really need to build more walls within our cycling communities? Is that what Plan B is even doing, or is that a misunderstanding? How can it be productive to explicitly excluding members of the cycling community? I imagine there are a dozen different directions you could go in answering these, depending on your perspective. I don't feel I personally have the experience/wisdom to come to definitive conclusions myself.

For me it comes down to where the rubber hits the road, so to speak. There many different ways we can use cycling to benefit and strengthen many different communities. We define those communities geographically, socio-economically, and politically, and I see no problem at all, and possibly some unique benefits, to also target our gender communities with our work. 

Each community we try to help has it's own characteristics, voice, and discourse. Some may be so under-represented they are difficult to discover, others might have a much stronger voice in their own right, and seem overwhelming. They all deserve our work.

TL;DR: As long as you're using bikes to help people, I don't really care if you don't let me into your meetings :)

-Andy S
Broke Spoke, Lexington KY

_______________________________________________
Thethinktank mailing list
Thethinktank@lists.bikecollectives.org
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to TheThinkTank-leave@bikecollectives.org
To manage your subscription, plase visit:
http://lists.bikecollectives.org/listinfo.cgi/thethinktank-bikecollectives.org