4 x £50 vouchers to be won from Pedal Revolution when you complete the survey
We talk a lot about why women don't cycle.
Usually, it comes down to infrastructure.
Not enough bike lanes. Too much traffic. Unsafe junctions.
That’s all true.
But it's also incomplete.
Because one of the most uncomfortable truths sits underneath all of it: more than half of drivers don’t see cyclists as fully human.
Not figuratively. Not emotionally. Literally.
In studies, cyclists were rated closer to insects than people.
And when someone isn’t seen as human, the rules change.
Patience disappears.
Empathy drops.
Risk becomes acceptable.
Passing close doesn't feel dangerous—it feels insignificant.
Shouting out the window doesn’t feel aggressive—it feels justified.
Now layer being a woman on top of that.
Cycling already places you in a vulnerable position.
You’re exposed.
Unprotected.
Reliant on the judgement of others.
But for women, that vulnerability isn't neutral.
It's amplified.
Because the question isn't just: “Will this driver see me?”
It's also: “How will they treat me when they do?”
Cycling makes you visible.
That’s often framed as a safety benefit.
But visibility isn’t always positive.
It means:
being looked at;
being judged;
being commented on;
being shouted at.
And when you’re already navigating societal pressure to look a certain way—to be composed, put together, not “too much”—that visibility becomes another barrier.
Sweating.
Wind-blown hair.
Makeup gone.
These aren't trivial concerns. They're part of a wider system that tells women how they should exist in public.
Cycling directly challenges that.
For many men, cycling is simple:
Get on. Ride. Arrive.
For many women, it's a calculation.
Do I have somewhere to change?
Can I carry what I need?
Will I feel safe on that route?
Will I be the only woman there?
What happens if something goes wrong?
Add one more layer: Will I be respected?
Because if cyclists aren’t seen as fully human, and women already face reduced respect in public space, the combination isn't additive.
It's exponential.
Cycling culture hasn't caught up.
Clubs. Group rides. Online spaces.
Still often male-dominated. Still shaped by male norms.
Not always openly hostile—but not neutral either.
Women report:
being underestimated before they start;
being "looked after" instead of ridden with;
having their presence treated as an inconvenience.
So spaces get split:
women's rides;
beginner groups.
Separate, rather than integrated.
But that doesn't solve the core issue.
It avoids it.
We can build better infrastructure—and we should.
But infrastructure doesn't fix perception.
If a driver doesn't see a cyclist as human, a painted line won't change that.
If anything, it can create a false sense of safety.
Because the real issue isn't just where cyclists ride.
It’s how they're treated.
Not because they're less capable.
Not because they lack confidence.
But because the environment—physical and social—asks more of them.
More preparation.
More awareness.
More resilience.
All for the same journey.
So when we ask: "Why aren’t more women cycling?"
The better question is: "Why does it require so much more from them to do it?"
If we're serious about increasing participation, we need to go beyond infrastructure.
We need to address behaviour.
A shift in how drivers see cyclists.
Not as obstacles.
Not as inconveniences.
But as people.
Because until that changes, no amount of paint, signage or campaigns will fully close the gap.
Cycling shouldn't require you to prove your right to be there.
But right now, for many women, it does.
And when you're not even seen as fully human on the road, that's not a cycling problem.
That's a societal one.
Matthew Limb and Simon Collyer. (2023). The effect of safety attire on perceptions of cyclist dehumanisation. Transportation Research Part F: Traffic Psychology and Behaviour, 95, 494–509. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trf.2023.05.008