Conflict, clicks and cyclists

“And do you think cyclists should be taxed and have insurance?”

Leah and I had agreed to take part in a BBC Radio Norfolk interview about female cyclists and harassment.

And, as Leah said afterwards, it was as if the interviewer had just asked ChatGPT, “What questions should I ask a cyclist in an interview?”

But this question was completely off base. I should have simply said, “Next.” I hope I at least didn’t hide the disdain I felt when I answered.

The question wasn’t just irrelevant — it was divisive.

And it wasn’t the first time an interview about the audit had taken that turn: the EDP’s framing had made divisiveness a clear feature of the article.

I’d actually sent in a press release — which in previous dealings with the local paper had been enough. However, this reporter rang me a number of times, clearly wanting a certain angle. 

“This will make people know about your audit,” he’d promised.

Even at the time, it had felt like a threat, unctuously packaged as kindly assurance.

My press release had highlighted the audit and the value of community, but the reporter chose to zero in on the violence — and the divisiveness it could generate.

“Women are being put off cycling because of harassment, catcalls and verbal abuse from male drivers, a council-backed campaign group has claimed,” was the lede.

Cycling stories in the media are often framed as conflict: drivers versus cyclists, pedestrians versus cyclists, public transport users versus cyclists. This framing generates attention — but it distorts the issue to a harmful degree.

I’d even emailed the journalist after our second conversation to clearly explain what I’d been trying to say:

“What women and gender-diverse cyclists face isn’t just traffic risk — it’s gender-based harassment and threats to social safety. Verbal abuse, aggressive close passes, intimidation and street harassment are reported far more frequently by women and gender-diverse people, shaping whether and how they ride. In Norwich, we don’t yet have clear local data on these experiences, and that’s exactly why this audit is so important. By listening directly to lived experiences, we can understand barriers and design streets that are safe, empowering and inclusive for everyone.”

Please note that I never mention drivers — let alone male drivers. This is because it’s not necessarily drivers who harass women and gender-diverse people. It can be other cyclists, pedestrians — anybody! Because gender-based discrimination is a widespread societal issue.

And the piece sparked predictable hostile online responses — including accusations that we were being sexist running such an audit.

Ironically, I thought the radio interview would be a good way to clear up the misrepresentation.

I’d also emailed the editor of the EDP, asking for corrections to be made. Contacting IPSO and them taking on the case gave me a small sense of power when he declined.

Because I was left feeling powerless. The EDP had not only intentionally twisted my message but done so in a way that made me feel unsafe in my own city. When I see that kind of cyber backlash — even though I know much of it is noise from anonymous commenters repeating familiar anti-cycling tropes — part of me feels I should now be on guard. People who appear to really (really) dislike a big part of my life have been stirred into action — and they no doubt drive past me in two tonnes of metal.

But it also reinforced the importance of initiatives that look specifically at the experiences of women and gender-diverse cyclists.

Because when media reporting turns questions of safety into conflict, it doesn’t just misrepresent the issue: it helps create the hostile culture that women and gender-diverse cyclists have to navigate on the street — and beyond.

Bringing our experiences to light matters precisely because of this. If we want safer streets, we need to understand not only the physical risks of cycling but also the social and cultural environment that shapes whether we feel safe enough to ride.

And who is culpable for making our environment hostile.

Understanding these dynamics is essential — if we want streets where women and gender-diverse cyclists can feel safe, empowered and included, we must address both physical and social barriers.

Comments are copied and pasted below