This goes beyond cyclist / motorist behaviour. If you really prove deeply you can extract a classical attitude and behaviour seen between a semi-homogeneous maj

This goes beyond cyclist / motorist behaviour. If you really prove deeply you can extract a classical attitude and behaviour seen between a semi-homogeneous majority class and its minority coutnerpart. By that I mean, in this case we have motorists upset at cylists because they feel that cyclists in some way conflict with their beliefs / way of life (that I can drive on the road with other automobiles and not worry about cyclists or that my behaviour may harm others). I suspect though that at the heart of the matter motorists are upset because it exposes just how poor some people are when it comes to driving and how driving isnt a right nor a privlidge but a skill which requires practice and training. I mean the same thing can be seen in other conflicts between major groups and minorities. Cars and motorcycles. Post colonial naturalised citizens vs. indigenous people. Middle class vs. Poor. Police vs. 'inner city youth'. I mean is the issue really that cyclists might do something wrong or that cyclists expose just how bad drivers are at driving and how arrogant individuals try to blame others for their mistakes under the guise of 'being impartial'? Im rambling now but theres a point in there somewhere.