70's NY Dump Porn
This could have meant any number of things, and all of them were awesome, so I grabbed my virtual letter opener and read the email immediately. What it contained was a link to pictures of pollution from the 1970s, including images of the Jamaica Bay area, which is where I lived when I was a little girl. Some might look at the photos in this collection and think, "Wow, New York was a real shithole back then." Others might think, "Boy, we've come a long way." As for me, my only reaction was, "Where the fuck was that ice cream truck?"
I would have been all over that thing.
Now, I should point out that I'm not trying to give you the impression I had some kind of hardscrabble upbringing. No, as you might have guessed I was relatively sheltered. We lived in a nice neighborhood, in a comfortable house with a panoramic view of the landfill across the bay. I had an Atari and a bike with sweet mags. It's just that there was a lot of trash around. If you didn't want a car anymore you just left it on the beach, but the upside was that we got to play in it. In any case, we lived a lot better than this:
My Big Wheel had a seat for one thing. Also, we had a much nicer house:
(Chez Rockmanstein, circa 1978)
Yeah, it's true. My last name's not really Rock Machine. I just changed it for "show business."
Of course today there's just as much if not more trash, but I guess the difference is that we just ship it off to Pennsylvania. This creates the illusion that New York is a clean city, it keeps the neighborhoods gentrifying and the real estate values climbing, and it forces the poor people to move away to Pennsylvania along with the trash. It's also an illusion that will be further enhanced by the bike share system, which the Department of Transportation says won't result in a bloodbath in the streets (or at least it won't add to the bloodbath that we're already experiencing):
Citibike:
With Citibike stations finally starting to surface, one questioner asked the DOT rep how he thought new cyclists would fare wobbling down the crowded city streets. Predictably, Benson was optimistic. "I personally don’t think it’s going to lead to chaos," Benson argued. "I think we have so many cyclists out on the streets, and we’re all out there setting a good example, I don’t think you’re going to see people hopping on these bikes and doing crazy stuff. I think it’s important for all of us to keep cycling with that in mind, that we’re setting an example for these people who want to take bikes out for the first time."
He added that New York has "one of the best networks of bike lanes in the country, and it's getting better by the day. I think that’s really going to make this all possible. People have a place to be when they’re biking, so there’s going to be a lot less friction between cyclists, pedestrians, motorists than there would otherwise be if there weren’t segregated bike lanes. I think we’re set up very well."
I agree--apart from the "we're all out there setting a good example" part, which is ridiculous. I fell off a folding bike in traffic while attempting to place a cellphone call the other day, and I'm one of the more experienced and responsible cyclists you're likely to encounter. Clearly I deserve some of that NYPD "tough love:"
Should cyclists get off easier than drivers for running red lights?
"The punishment is not in the purview of the police department," Hurley said. "I certainly don't think we're targeting cyclists. Enforcement is really just tough love to cyclists—we're trying to keep them from getting injured." He added that "speeding is top priority, along with DWIs and texting while driving. We take it very seriously."
But Steely-White disagreed. "The NYPD is doing very, very little speed enforcement at the moment," he said.
It used to bother me when I'd hear about the police not bothering to chase down hit-and-run drivers or ticketing cyclists for breaking laws that don't exist, but now that I know it's just "tough love" I feel a lot better. In fact, I feel...loved:
No, the tourists will be fine. After all, if they can manage to use bike share in London they can manage it here--though I do think the weak link in the system will be the NYPD. Consider the hapless rider who has a crash, consults the Citi Bike FAQ, and runs up against some of that "tough love:"
I've had a crash involving my Citi Bike bicycle. What do I do?
Call 911 immediately. You should also call the police precinct in which the crash took place and file a report with an officer. This will help assure all important information is documented.
Within 24 hours of the incident, you must notify us of the facts of the crash by calling and speaking with a Customer Service Representative at 1-855-BIKE-311(245-3311). We will provide you with a Citi Bike Crash Report to fill out. Remember, The bike remains your responsibility until it has been properly locked at a dock, or handed over to a Citi Bike representative.
Right, here's how that works. First, you get "doored" in the bike lane. Then you call 911, at which point the NYPD arrives and arrests you for intentionally ramming a BMW. As for the Citi Bike that you're now unable to return, it gets stolen and you're out the $1,000 deposit. Finally you come back to New York six months later, and you notice that all the Chinese food delivery people are riding what appear to be spray-painted Citi Bikes.
Oh, here's what the FAQ has to say about helments:
Do I have to wear a helmet?
Please. Don't be such a "woosie." This bike weighs more than your sofa for fuck's sake, there's no way you're going to get it moving more than 10mph. You're more likely to sustain a head injury after falling off a bar stool.
And here's what it has to say about fixies:
Are any of the Citi Bikes fixies?
Go back to Portland.
This bike share thing is going to be a hit, I can feel it.
Meanwhile, thanks to a Tweeterer, here's a photo of Doper Sagan ejaculating sparks:
And here he is last year getting head from a stuffed bear:
Well, as long as he doesn't run afoul of the UCI rule prohibiting participation in "unsanctioned" events he should be all right--though now they're not going to start enforcing it until 2014:
This should give irate riders plenty of time to form a new breakaway league, or at least to binge on "forbidden races:"
UCI general regulations include a section called "Forbidden Races". Within it, Rule 1.2.019 states, "No licence holder may participate in an event that has not been included on a national, continental or world calendar or that has not been recognised by a national federation, a continental confederation or the UCI." Related rules 1.2.020 and 1.2.021 provide additional details, including specifying punishment via fine or suspension for all UCI licence holders who violate the rule.
Though whether the UCI will still permit riders to partake in "forbidden dances" remains to be seen:
In any case, as the article points out, the "American mountain bike community" is particularly incensed by the rule, because here's what will happen if it's enforced:
1) An American mountain bike pro wants to stay fit and have fun in a slightly irreverent fashion alongside people with hairy legs;
2) This American mountain bike pro enters one of those non-race races in California like the "Super Cool Laid Back Vibes 100," the "Incessant References to Coffee and Beer Cyclocross Adventure Chillout," or the "Rim Brake Rigid Fork Steel Frame Thumbshifter Retro-Ironic World Championships;"
3) A picture of the American mountain bike pro racing in a Tom Ritchey moustache and a g-string winds up in Velo-snooze;
4) The American mountain bike pro gets suspended and has to pay a fine in Swiss Francs, which isn't even a real kind of money;
5) Everybody has a sad :-(
It's especially ridiculous when you consider the sporting history of UCI President, Doper McQuaid:
He was banned from entering the 1976 Olympics after being caught racing in South Africa, in contravention of the anti-apartheid sporting boycott. He had entered the race using a false name, but was identified after being photographed by a press photographer.
"Forbidden Races" indeed. So which is worse: Enjoying some super cool laid back vibes in a g-string, or lying about your identity in order to sidestep a boycott against a country that violates human rights?
(Ironically, while the photographer was partially to blame, Doper McQuaid still might have gotten away with it if he hadn't also foolishly registered as "Nelson Mandela," who was imprisoned on Robben Island at the time.)
Lastly, a reader informs me that VeloNews is now taking liberties with Bret's wardrobe:
He's supposed to look ridiculous. but if you told me this was actually a page from the 2014 Rapha Forbidden Race "Look Book" I'd have no trouble believing you.
No comments:
Post a Comment