WaPo columnist anti-cyclist rant
By now a lot of you have read or read about Courtland Milloy’s tirade against cyclists. Milloy is an opinion writer for the Washington Post.
Before you all write into the Post – and I certainly don’t mind if you do – rest in the comfort that the response has been swift, vocal and, unsurprising to me, predictably civil. The best of the lot I’ve read comes from WaPo’s transportation reporter, Ashley Halsey III, himself a cyclist.
I, of course, ride a bike. And yes, broadsides like Milloy’s, whether by a radio shock jock or in print, bother me not simply because of the risk to my own safety but because almost every longtime Slowtwitcher knows someone who’s been killed or seriously injured by a motorist. A 20-pound bicycle and a 4000- or 6000-pound car is not a fair fight, which I know from personal rather than vicarious experience.
Upon reflection, however, what bothers me the most isn’t that this is just another ignorant troll (I expect this of Milloy). It’s that the Washington Post has allowed in its pages the permission slip to place a group of people into physical jeopardy. If you take a sentence in Milloy's OpEd and change a word or two, you get:
"It’s a $500 fine for a Christian to hit a Muslim in the District, but some behaviors are so egregious that some Christians might think it’s worth paying the fine."
"It’s a $500 fine for a straight person to hit a gay in the District, but some behaviors are so egregious that some straights might think it’s worth paying the fine."
"It’s a $500 fine for a man to hit a woman in the District, but some behaviors are so egregious that some men might think it’s worth paying the fine."
Milloy is known for, among other things, a full-throated defense of his rights as a gun owner. How about this:
"It’s a $500 fine for a gun control advocate to assault a gun owner in the District, but some behaviors are so egregious that some gun control advocates might think it’s worth paying the fine."
Milloy is also black, and he persuasively writes on the topic of civil rights as well, and the use below of Milloy’s self- generated meme is so offensive that I cringe as I type it:
"It’s a $500 fine for a white person to hit a black person in the District, but some behaviors are so egregious that some white people might think it’s worth paying the fine."
What would Milloy think about any of these statements? More importantly, what would the Washington Post think about them? I can only assume the Post would believe I’m making a false equivalence, believing blanket broadsides against those of a specific gender, race or religion are levels worse than against any other group. Otherwise, they would not have allowed Milloy’s column in its pages.
And WaPo would be right in thinking it a false equivalence when one considers the long history of those who think it's okay to subjugate or harm women, gays, and racial or religious minorities, the historic offenses against whom dwarf the protests of those who, like me, simply hope for safety while on our bikes.
Still, nobody who levels fire against a monolithic group thinks his fusillade is inappropriate, unwarranted or in bad taste. I do not expect Milloy to understand this. I do expect the Washington Post to understand this.
