Beyond Bike Lanes: Why Cycling Inequality Demands Systemic Change 

The gender gap in cycling isn’t just about who rides a bike — it’s about who feels able to move through public space freely and without fear. Questions of safety, time, work and care all shape that. So if we want to understand why fewer women cycle, we have to look beyond bike lanes and into the wider structures that shape everyday life.

Take the Netherlands, often seen as a cycling utopia. Women make up just over half of cyclists, and the infrastructure is recognised as amongst the best in the world. On paper, it looks like cycling has been normalised for everyone.

But that doesn’t tell the whole story.

Even there, women report feeling unsafe in certain spaces, especially at night or in quieter areas.¹ Good infrastructure can enable cycling, but it doesn’t remove the social conditions that shape how safe it feels.

In the UK, recent legislation has made sexual harassment in public spaces a specific offence.² This is an important step, but also a reminder that harassment is not incidental — it’s a routine part of how many people experience public space, including on a bike.

The data backs this up. Around 70% of respondents to the Audit survey so far have reported experiencing aggressive behaviour while cycling.³ In London, the figure is around 90%.⁴ These aren’t isolated incidents — they shape confidence, decisions and, ultimately, whether cycling feels worth it.

And cycling can amplify that feeling of exposure. Unlike driving, there’s no barrier between you and the world around you. You’re visible, unprotected and constantly negotiating space with others. For anyone who already feels vulnerable in public space, that visibility isn’t neutral — it can heighten a sense of vulnerability.

However, public space has never been neutral. It has traditionally been shaped as a masculine environment, while women’s mobility was often tied to the home. When women began cycling in the late 19th century, it was seen as radical — a symbol of independence, but also something to be policed and questioned. That tension hasn’t disappeared; it’s just taken on new forms.

Other gender-based barriers are less obvious, but just as real. In a discussion with the Norwich Youth Advisory Board as part of the Audit, one participant pointed out that some schools still require girls to wear skirts. It sounds small, but it has practical consequences. Clothing affects comfort, confidence and how exposed someone feels. It can quietly determine whether cycling feels like an option at all.

Care is another factor. In England, women are still far more likely to take on unpaid caring responsibilities.²  These journeys are rarely simple — they involve school runs, multiple stops or travelling with others. Cycling can work, but it often requires extra equipment, more planning and more time. When you’re already stretched, that extra effort matters.

Work patterns compound this. Women are more likely to be in part-time, lower-paid or shift-based roles.⁶  That often means travelling early in the morning or late at night, when safety concerns are heightened. It can also limit access to a reliable bike or the right equipment. Over time, these constraints build up, making cycling less practical and less appealing.

These dynamics don’t only affect women. Gender-diverse people — including trans and non-binary cyclists — often navigate public space under even greater scrutiny. Cycling can intensify that visibility: there’s no private interior, no easy way to withdraw from attention or scrutiny. For those whose gender expression is read or misread by others, this can lead to harassment, questioning or unwanted attention.

Practical barriers can also intersect here — from access to appropriate clothing to concerns about using gendered facilities during longer journeys. As with women, these factors shape not just whether cycling is possible, but whether it feels safe, manageable or worth the effort.

All of this points to a bigger issue.

If we treat cycling inequality as just a question of infrastructure, we miss the point. Bike lanes matter — but they don’t exist in isolation. Safety, income, time, social norms and care responsibilities — just to name a few  — shape who gets to use them.

Until those wider inequalities are addressed, cycling will never be as accessible as it appears in policy or design.

FOOTNOTES

¹ DutchNews. (2025). Young women avoid unsafe places in their own neighbourhoods. 18 July. Available at: https://www.dutchnews.nl/2025/07/young-women-avoid-unsafe-places-in-their-own-neighbourhoods/

DutchNews. (2026). Third of young women in Netherlands feel unsafe in public: Study. 16 April. Available at:   https://www.dutchnews.nl/2026/04/third-of-young-women-in-netherlands-feel-unsafe-in-public-study/

² Home Office. (2026). Protection from Sex-based Harassment in Public Act 2023: statutory guidance for the police. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/protection-from-sex-based-harassment-in-public-act-2023 

³ Based on 127 respondents; +/- 8% margin of error.

⁴ London Cycling Campaign. (2024). Women’s Freedom: What stops women cycling in London. Available at: https://lcc.org.uk/campaigns/womens-freedom/ 

⁵ Carers UK. (2024). International Women’s Day 2024: 10 facts about women who are unpaid carers. Available at: https://www.carersuk.org/press-releases/international-women-s-day-2024-10-facts-about-women-who-are-unpaid-carers/

⁶ Office for National Statistics. (2025). Gender pay gap in the UK: 2025. Available at: https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/earningsandworkinghours 

Comments are copied and pasted below