I’ve known some damn nice bikers in my life, some of whom did stuff like bike rallies to raise money for children’s hospitals and shit. But I’m not going to pretend that you’re wrong. There’s definitely a class of bikers out there who fulfill the whole racist Confederate-loving stereotype.

I find this years Republican slate so weird.  They all know they hate Romney and that he doesn’t have much of a chance against Obama, yet everyone else is bat shit crazy.  Romneys in it because he can finance himself, not because people love him.  As easy as Obama would be to defeat in this economy, the best the other side can offer is Mitt.  It’s a halfhearted gesture.

Yet they will continue to hurl the vitriol at Obama, even though they really have no plan for removing him.

Yeah, Peter Fonda is, last I checked, Mr. Liberal, and he does fund-raising through biking. But yeah, that’s not the general tenor of the whole thing, especially not in Texas.

Oh wait, I take that back. Seems like Fonda might fall outside the whole left/right political divide, what with the gun talk combined with the environmentalism. Carry on.

What Trip said.  My father-in-law is a unionized painter & Democrat, and belongs to a Vietnam vets bike club.  Which is interesting, meeting all of these rough looking, tough-talking nice guys whom are elderly in body with asthma or COPD or other infirmities.  But they’re still rebels, man!  But watch out if you start talking politics - these bastards will make sure you understand Obama’s an illegal immigrant and that the poor are lazy freeloaders.  Never mind that almost everyone in the club is in the blue collar lower middle-class.

Flip side, An uncle-in-law is an avid Harley rider and wealthy Christian conservative wingnut.  He definitely gets off on pissing off liberals, and is the type of asshole who does an altar call at his brother-in-law’s funeral.

Marcotte: Check out the latest Harpers. Thomas Frank has an article called “Semper Infidelis” - it describes something very close to what you are identifying here: the conservative ‘rebel.’

They position their ‘rebellion’ not against American orthodoxy but imagine themselves as rebels against the Muslim middle east. Of course it’s bizarre and rewrites the definition of ‘rebel’ essentially as ‘conformist’ By eating bacon and rooting for capitalist excess, they are rebelling against a people that the US Army is already slaughtering, and governments of which they are not citizens.

It’s all of a piece with Orwellian ‘up is down-ism.’

Okay, idiosynchronic, I give up: what’s an altar call and why is it assholish to do it at a funeral? Sorry, third-generation atheist here.

Even without the nastiness of their ‘ideology’ I’ve always been puzzled by this notion of ‘rebel conformity’ - “Hey everybody, lets all wear the same clothes, ride the same overpriced pile of crap Harley, and get together and do the same things! That’ll show what ‘rebels’ we are!”

I really don’t want to ‘go Hitler’ on this thread, but how different is that from the black shirts?

“Hey everybody, lets all dress in black shirts and march with Benito!”

@felagund, it’s that point at the end of an evangelical sermon where they cajole sinners to come forward and publicly repent-&-be-Saved-ah.

Thinking about songs about motorcycles, two by gainsbourg about Harleys and the living end by J&MC;, i think there’s an element of death fantasy to motorcycle escapism. Maybe these suburban dads secretly want to die, and the Motorcycle is their way of having one foot in the grave.

felagund, this is a good explanation of an altar call:

An altar call is a practice in some evangelical churches in which those who wish to make a new spiritual commitment to Jesus Christ are invited to come forward publicly. It is so named because the supplicants gather at the altar located at the front of the church building. In the Old Testament, an altar was where sacrifices were made. So, the name “altar call” refers to a believer “offering” themselves on an altar to God, as in Romans 12:1:

  I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service.[1]

Most altar calls occur at the end of an evangelical address[citation needed] invitation may be referred to as an “altar call” even if there is no actual altar present. Many preachers make use of the altar call; notable examples include Billy Graham, Benny Hinn, Franklin Graham and Reinhard Bonnke.[citation needed] Congregations often sing a hymn, usually with a theme of invitation or decision, during the altar call. Some churches makes use of the sinner’s prayer, which people who come forward to be “saved” are asked to recite. It is sometimes said by the invitee that those who come forth are going to receive Jesus Christ as their Savior. This is a ritual in which the supplicant makes a prayer asking for his sins to be forgiven, acknowledges Jesus as the risen Son of God and pledges his/her devotion to Jesus and to live thereafter following Christ’s teachings. This is often called being born again.[citation needed]

If you go to a revival, they are almost de rigueur,  but at a funeral?  That’s really tacky, and shows the callers’ devotion to himself rather than the Prince of Peace.

It’s funny that you mention the American flag bandanna Amanda, as I’m old enough to remember a time when an American flag on any item of clothing, even that worn by a comic-book superhero, was a reason to arrest someone:

On another occasion, police stopped Hoffman at the building entrance and arrested him for wearing an American flag.

You could probably make panties with American flags in the crotch, for such patriotesses as K.Lo, the Anchoress, Jill Stanek, Pam Geller(don’t worry, they’d be kosher) and of course, that fraud Jennifer Rubin(She and Pam could have the Israeli version to wear on alternating days), and they’d sell.

@8 - “rebel” is a code word here for “asshole”, kind of how “freedom” and “family” also mean “asshole”.

On the Gingrich thing, I believe the next “not-Romney” will be Ron Paul. No idea whether he will still be the “not-Romney” in time for Iowa, though. I’m hoping it will be Santorum; that will be some fun.

@8 - I don’t think that’s a hyperbolic analogy at all, actually. The fascist paramilitaries constructed just the sort of mythology that Amanda’s talking about, albeit modelled more on Julius Caesar than on John Wayne. Mussolini is the only leader in history who came to power through more or less legal means and then spent twenty years trying to convince people that it had been a daring armed coup to prop up his image as a charismatic rebel!

Wow, that would be a super tacky thing to do at a funeral. Thanks for the info.

It seems like the Republican’s hearts are not really in the 2012 presidential election.  Otherwise how to explain the 2nd/3rd tier candidates that are running for POTUS?

I think the higher-ups in the party have focused on 2016, and continuing their current efforts to frustrate Obama at every turn until then.  They have to know that basing their electoral success on Angry White Men is a strategy that only has a few elections left in it.  (Caveat: of course, in the “right” parts of America, appealing to Angry White Men is a strategy that will work for generations to come).  The future is in appealing to other demographic segments, but as long as Angry White Men continue to dominate the Reichwing, they’ll be unable to pivot enough to grab many voters outside that group.

By 2016, they may have been able to muzzle the Teabagging Morons and stuff them back into the closet.  Or they might not.

In any case it’ll be interesting to see how it plays out — but not as interesting as it might be to someone who is not strapped into the same hell-bound handbasket with those idiots.  For me it’s more like terrifying…

***

Re the Harley thing, it’s always been amusing to me how riding around on a throbbing and noisy proxy-phallus appeals to so many otherwise conservative folk.  There has to be a good book or two in that, for the right sort of writer…

Good God. These “RUBbers” (love that neme BTW) are all over the place here in Orange County, CA. What’s really fun though is when my buddy’s band plays at the local biker bar and these people who are there to show off their expensive custom bikes run into the real bikers who have no qualms about beating down a phony if they look at their “old lady” the wrong way.

I used to live down the street from a harley dealership.  The noise was just short of living next to an airport.  I can see the fun in riding a bike, but why take the muffler off?  The only reason I can think of is “look at me, I’m so cool!”  Sorry guys, you’re not cool, you’re a cliche.

I’ve always wondered why murderous, drug dealing bikers like the Mongols and Hell’s Angels became role models for such a wide swath of conservatives. I guess their idea of rebellion is doing whatever they want without regard to others, although to me it always meant standing up to injustice and being true to yourself in the face of authority figures that deny your humanity. Not riding around in obnoxious, expensive, polluting machines.

An organizer of political Tea Party events in Jefferson County is facing marijuana possession charges following incidents at Fort Drum and in the town of Pamelia. Erik J. Dunk, 57,  owner of Iron Block Harley-Davidson, Adams Center,NY
Oh hells yes. This guy had his digital sign (idk what they’re called) advertising all the TeaBagger talking points. It could be seen from Interstate 81 going both North and South. He finally stopped it a couple of years ago. I wonder if someone complained to H.D. Headquarters? Idk, but if you’re in business, it’s prudent to keep your views to yourself.

Satanicpanic @ #18: My brother who rides a motorcycle (not a loud one) claims that some bikers say the loudness is a safety thing that makes up for motorcycles being notoriously invisible to cars.

Because, you know, Hell’s Angels’ main concerns are safety and caution.

Motorcycles: their prime virtue is they turn douchebags into organ donors.  Fuck ‘em and their pointlessly loud exhaust systems.  Get a quieter penis-substitute, assholes.

Progrocker @ #19: The History Channel had a very informative documentary on Hell’s Angels a while back, as part of the “Gangland” series. http://www.history.com/shows/gangland/articles/hells-angels Highly recommend the whole series; it’s not the usual History Channel WWII battle logistics or sensationalistic end-of-the-world schlock.

It was amazing how the original Hell’s Angels organization was exactly like Boy Scouts. Uniforms, strict code of conduct, military inspiration, suburban roots looking for something more “outdoorsy.” They had merit badges and everything (for killing people, of course.).

Years ago I was reading a biker magazine and one of the letter writers complained about black bikers that were in some of the pictures. The editors gave them a hella smackdown, basically saying stfu, we’re all bikers no matter what. I was pleasltly surprised.

A different 1 Percenter: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Outlaw_motorcycle_club#One_percenter

which begs the question: How many 1% are pretending to be Harley One Percenters?  Fun fact: I grew up in the San Berdoo/Riverside area which has one of the most famous Hells Angels Sunny Barger. Who’s also a cat lover. Weird

#21- Yeah, that would be a little more believable if you saw that on more kinds of bikes as opposed to mostly just Harley’s.  Not saying that no one thinks that, but I’m skeptical about that being the main reason.  I got nothing against motorcycles, it’s cheap, efficient transportation, I just don’t get the “I’m a rebel biker” image.  Must be a generational thing.

After all, it costs a lot of money to buy just a basic Harley off the lot, much less one of the chopped bikes that draws so much attention at the ROT Rally. My sister called them “rubbers”, for Rich Urban Bikers, but while that has a nice ring to it, they’re really Rich Suburban Bikers. Good luck finding a pleasant acronym for that.

Pseudo Rebels In Conformist Congregations.

@JonE & progrocker: They’re doing it because they want to feel like people are afraid of them. That’s the conservative idea of manliness. Most of them lack the physical ability and have the wrong personality disorders for making anyone afraid of them, and they’re usually cowards to boot, so they have to do it in groups and pretend. It’s the same reason they support wars (As long as they don’t have to fight: They want no part of real danger.) and open carry, and why they oppose anti-bullying and hate crime laws. They latched onto the biker thing because unlike all the other non-conservative social trends they try to emulate, being a fake biker just requires spending money instead of thought or talent.

You know the guy that lives in his mom’s basement and fantasizes about being a Jedi? This is the same thing. It’s a right wing Jedicon or whatever it’s called. (Starcon? Warscon?) Harley and leathers = Robe and plastic lightsaber.

At least that’s the impression I got after being drug to a few of these things by friends that were selling goods or services at them and didn’t want to be the only liberals there.

@Comment #19: progrocker on 12/15 at 01:13 PM

I’ve always wondered why murderous, drug dealing bikers like the Mongols and Hell’s Angels became role models for such a wide swath of conservatives.

Good point. Proboscidea’s response to you also suggests the cultural rhyme between middle aged suburban white guys idolizing bikers and the younger set of white kids getting into “gangsta” culture in the 1990s. Perhaps there is something inherent in our culture, where we appropriate the styles of “outlaw” subcultures.

Pissing off the liberals ... fills in the holes where your sex drive used to be

Amanda, you gotta stop hating on the asexuals.  Asexuality is not necessarily an unhealthy condition, unlike being a Repub.

@23 & 29: To me its just so transparent that it is all empty posturing, and I wonder if they know how obvious they are. Either they do, in which case they’re pathetic, or they don’t, in which case their idiots. Neither possibility reflects well on them.

Wives in halter tops? Ha! They are usually FAR more scantily clad that that. Sometimes it involves jeans artfully ripped to resemble a cross between chaps, a thong, and Elizabeth Hurley’s safety pin dress. The must-have accessory is a really bad sunburn.

Proboscidea @ 21: and with the complete cancellation of outside sound/road noise in modern SUVs and luxtury cars, its totally bogus if ever it was true.  My husband was on a thumper (not nearly as loud, but a solid thumping noise) wearing bright yellow jacket and red helmet with an eye painted on it (which got most peoples attention) when a 16 yo turned through traffic in his mom’s SUV on MA Rte 125 and sent him sliding more than 100’ down the road on his back.  Thanks to shredders.  He’s still pissed ambulance crew cut that jacket off him instead of just letting him sit up and take it off and it’s been a couple of years.

Perhaps there is something inherent in our culture, where we appropriate the styles of “outlaw” subcultures.

The Wild One was based on an actual incident that took place in Hollister, CA, in 1948:

The story took a cue from an actual biker street party on the Fourth of July weekend in 1947 in Hollister, California that was elaborately trumped up in the July 21, 1947 issue of Life Magazine, and dubbed the Hollister riot, with staged photographs of wild motorcycle outlaw revelers. The Hollister event is now celebrated annually. In the film, the setting is the fictional Wrightsville, California.

It’s is famous for a line that I’m sure conservative bikers mutter in their sleep:

When another local girl (Peggy Maley) asks him “What are you rebelling against, Johnny?”, he answers “Whaddaya got?”

Brando’s portrayal of the Johnny has become an iconic image. His character wears long sideburns, a Perfecto style motorcycle jacket and a tilted cap; he rides a 1950 Triumph Thunderbird 6T. Brando’s haircut inspired a craze for sideburns, followed by James Dean and Elvis Presley, among others.[5] Presley also used Johnny’s image as a model for his role in Jailhouse Rock.[6]

<quote>Pissing off the liberals ... fills in the holes where your sex drive used to be

Amanda, you gotta stop hating on the asexuals.  Asexuality is not necessarily an unhealthy condition, unlike being a Repub.</quote>

Well, technically, asexuality (as a sexual orientation) is defined by not experiencing sexual attraction to anyone.  Sex drive doesn’t factor into it- that varies for asexuals as much as it does for people of other orientations. 

But, yeah, treating sexual attraction and a medium-to-high sex drive as normative, and thinking that everyone else who doesn’t fit into that as broken or repressed or a religious nut, is a remarkably narrow viewpoint that I sadly see in a lot of liberal/sex-positive circles.

Sorry to go a bit off-topic, but as much as I love Amanda’s writing 99% of the time, this is one thing she brings up sometimes that makes me go :/.  I know it’s not intentional, but it is a huge liberal blindspot a lot of the time.

and is the type of asshole who does an altar call at his brother-in-law’s funeral.

You have to be fucking kidding me.

You have my sincere condolences, both on the loss of a loved one (whenever it was), and on having to deal with this righteous bullshit.

Crosses my mind too, always1895. 
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EverybodyHasLotsOfSex

@6 KingElvis:

I haven’t read the Frank piece yet, but the historian Kevin Mattson wrote an excellent little book a few years ago called Rebels All about precisely this aspect of modern U.S. conservatism.

Yup.

The most vocal elements of the GOP base still can’t stand Mitt Romney, but he’ll ultimately win the party nomination anyway. He’ll win it because they know that he is the only one who has any realistic shot of winning the general election, because on the surface, he seems like the least offensive GOP candidate to low information mushy middle voters.

Michael Savage of all people actually offered to pay Newt Gingrich $1MM to drop out of the race, because he thinks Romney is the only candidate who can win, even though Savage admitted he doesn’t particularly like him. Coulter and Hannity are starting to make the same argument (though neither has offered Newt $1MM to drop out) - it’s OK to dislike Romney, but vote for him anyway because he’s the only one who can beat the evil Muslim Kenyan Stalinist black fella in the White House.

Nominating the retread candidate is simply following the GOP electoral playbook of the last 50 years. The only time since 1964 that they’ve nominated a first-time candidate was Dubya in 2000. Despite his Mormonism, it’s gonna be Mitt Romney.

On the Gingrich thing, I believe the next “not-Romney” will be Ron Paul. No idea whether he will still be the “not-Romney” in time for Iowa, though. I’m hoping it will be Santorum; that will be some fun.

As ridiculous as this may seem, I really think the fact that Rick Santorum always looks like he’s clenching his ass like he badly needs to shit during the debates is ultimately what will ensure that he will never get to be the “not-Romney” flavor of the month. He’s the only one of the hardcore wingnut candidates who has never been able to pick up any steam in his campaign at any point over the last six months.

@Comment #35: always1895 on 12/15 at 02:18 PM

Why is it that so many on Pandagon feel the need to sift every fucking sentence for thoughtcrimes? I think her statement about conservatism being like undead libido was meant as a creatively phrased dig, not as an insult to asexuals, who are not really known to congregate on Harleys, as far as I am aware.

I believe the next “not-Romney” will be Ron Paul. No idea whether he will still be the “not-Romney” in time for Iowa, though.  I’m hoping it will be Santorum; that will be some fun.

Oh Buffy, this please.  Please.

Atheist,

Feministe is like walking through a minefield for this sort of thing, but I’ve seen it popping up here more often, too. I assume, but don’t know, that like other under-represented/socially invisible groups before them, asexual people are starting to make more of an effort to make their presence and issues known. Which is, of course, great. I’ve never read anything by Amanda or Jill that would indicate (quite the opposite actually) that they don’t believe that the ideas of sexual equality and freedom don’t also apply to those with no or little interest in actual, physical sex…but....and at the very likely risk of telling an oppressed group that they are overreacting to perceived sleights…I think (in this particular case) that they’re overreacting to perceived sleights.

Amanda has made the point that she sees Pandagon primarily as a political blog that is heavily informed by feminism. Obviously she is going to write about a lot of issues that are intertwined with sexuality and the larger culture’s views and attitudes thereof (similarly Jill at Feministe). Asexual posters over at Feministe seem to take this as an affront to their existence if the blog authors do not preface every post about sexuality with an “and obviously this won’t apply to people with no or little sexual interests, which is totally valid” disclaimers. I’m not sure how to get around this other than the usual “if it’s not about you, then it’s not about you” advice.

Amanda is clearly a sex positive writer and thinker and her work reflects that. When our president can still shoot down contraceptive access for women based on fears of women’s sexuality, I think her viewpoint is one that is still frustratingly non-mainstream and under-represented. So, she’s going to write about that, and it’s one of the many things I love about Pandagon. Also the snark, which is all that’s on display in the comment under discussion. I think it’s safe to say that sexual and gender conformity fears go to the core of the conservative mindest (especially the male conservative, but I almost repeeat myself). Unless you’re being very disingenuous, I don’t think you can claim that Amanda believes that conservative biker rebels are actually a bunch of asexual conservative biker rebels. Nor do I think that you can make the claim that she’s using perceived asxuality as an insult. If the conservatives in question had little or no sexual interests, they obviously wouldn’t need giant, throbbing phallic substitutes to “fill the holes where their sex drive used to be”.

Not to conflate the two, but it almost comes across like the “but what about the guys?” responses whenever Amanda writes about something like female genital mutilation or some issue that primarily impacts cis-women. I’m a guy, but just because a post doesn’t directly address me as a guy, I can take it on faith (and experience) that her belief in equality (sexual, social, or otherwise) applies just as much to me as it does to the women reading. I think the same thing applies here.

My sister called them “rubbers”, for Rich Urban Bikers, but while that has a nice ring to it, they’re really Rich Suburban Bikers. Good luck finding a pleasant acronym for that.

I’m really tempted to call them Upperclass Suburban Bikers, despite the loss of the “rubber” acronym. There are people using bikes as their primary transportation, but that’s different—we’re talking about bikes that are expensive hobbies, parked in USB-ports most of the time (while the riders download the standard attitudes from compatible cable.)

The whole “Romney sucks, but he’s the only one with a chance to win” sounds like the same bullshit that got the Dems to nominate John Kerry.  Nobody liked him that much, but he was supposed to be appealing in the general election.

That went so well.  I can see why the GOP wants to imitate that strategy.

@ Egnu Cledge

No, I totally get that!  I’m definitely in the “if it’s not about you, then it’s not about you” boat, and I have basically no qualms about anything Amanda has written about sexuality and sexual health/reproductive justice matters before.  As an asexual, I know that as far as personal experience goes, a lot of those thinks don’t necessarily apply to me, though I obviously see their importance for everyone else (since more people than not have some kind of desire to engage in sexual activity).  I’m not arguing with that, or going “what about meeeeeee” in response to any posts about that.  (As far as the stuff you mentioned on Feministe: I haven’t been on there for a while, but I hadn’t seen before any posts disparaging asexuals and people with low/non-existence sex drives really- it’s usually people in the comments doing that.)

I know I’m picking at a really tiny thing in an otherwise good post, and I know that Amanda isn’t doing it intentionally to pick on asexuals or whoever.  But off-hand digs at people with non-normative (i.e., not normal-to-high) sex drives tend to further drive the attitude that those kind of people have something wrong with them.  I understand that her comment was most likely framed as “these guy’s conservatism doesn’t allow them to express their sexuality in a more healthy manner because conservatism is not a friend to healthy sexuality, thus they need to express it with stupid phallic symbols and hating on brown people,” but it didn’t read to me like that at first. 

I dunno.  Maybe because I’m so used to seeing unexamined digs at people who don’t fit the “normative” sex drive category in otherwise liberal/sex positive circles, it just made me twinge.  It’s such an easy jab and people don’t really think about it.

I’ll shut up now.

Whenever I hear an obnoxiously loud bike, I immediately think “small penis” or otherwise unable to get laid/lousy fuck. It’s been my experience that men who are confident with their penis size and their ability to please women with it don’t have to compensate by having a cool car or obnoxious bike.

My take is that conservatives have suppressed/repressed libidos (hence their tendency toward phallic substitutes), while asexuals simply lack libidos. So they are like apples and chocolate bars.

Though, if asexuals did congregate… on Harleys, or in cafes or anywhere, really… it might be a nice kind of safe space for people who feel this culture is too sexed up all the time. Just a thought.

Though, if asexuals did congregate… on Harleys, or in cafes or anywhere, really… it might be a nice kind of safe space for people who feel this culture is too sexed up all the time. Just a thought.

There are not many real life spaces for asexuals simply because of numbers (sex surveys generally place only 1% of the population as asexual), but we do have a very nice online community.  We tend to mostly talk about Doctor Who. ^^

Proboscidea @ 21: and with the complete cancellation of outside sound/road noise in modern SUVs and luxtury cars, its totally bogus if ever it was true.  My husband was on a thumper (not nearly as loud, but a solid thumping noise) wearing bright yellow jacket and red helmet with an eye painted on it (which got most peoples attention) when a 16 yo turned through traffic in his mom’s SUV on MA Rte 125 and sent him sliding more than 100’ down the road on his back.  Thanks to shredders.  He’s still pissed ambulance crew cut that jacket off him instead of just letting him sit up and take it off and it’s been a couple of years.
Comment #33: helen w. h.  on 12/15 at 03:05 PM

Why would the existence of soundproofing on big luxury cars or the existence of idiots who ignore a bright yellow jacket and red helmet mean a louder motorcycle can’t be heard by people in *other* vehicles who are less totally oblivious?  Loud exhaust won’t protect you from every idiot but it can alert people who do want to look out for them, like me.

Just because assholes like to make loud noises to get attention doesn’t mean all loud noises made to get attention are caused by assholes.

Why is it that so many on Pandagon feel the need to sift every fucking sentence for thoughtcrimes?

Because doing so allows those policing other people’s word-choice to indulge in a bit of Oppression Olympics posturing over imagined verbal slights while avoiding any real work of confronting actual conservatives over the real, tangible & negative consequences of their actual behavior.  A progressive version of the MRA “But-but-but-whut-about-the-menz?!” BS is on display here in the dead-end, going-nowhere-fast hand-wringing re: Marcotte’s turn of phrase in an hollow effort to score some empty political points, while even a passing glance at the phrase-turn in question reveals that a.) asexuality was neither mentioned nor inferred, & b.) the observation that reactionaries get a profound & perverse thrill saying things for the sole purpose of baiting / trolling / pissing of liberals dovetails neatly with Marcotte’s larger body of work that documents how conservatism has become indistinguishable from Sadism.

I remember the Harley Owners Group had a thing in our town every year… And while all of them were from some far off ‘burb, this was the 80s, and Harleys were neither expensive nor glamorous.  They took work to keep running and everything glam on them had to be made by hand, usually by their owners.

In California, we call these guys ‘Call Center Warriors’ for the fact that most do dead-end urban jobs of no particular skill and spend all their kitch on being buff and ignorant on the weekends.

Nevermind you could always get more chrome and mileage on a Honda, they won’t listen.  It’s about image, not substance.  Not something ZatAoMM at all.

http://www.bartneck.de/projects/research/pirsig/

The existence of the very cars that usually run over bikers also being immune to the sound?

Gosh, I dunno…

Motorcycles aren’t worried about small cars, generally.  They’re worried about those uneven pavement gouges and large vehicles that have big blind spots.  There’s just no data that says unmuffled motorcycles crash less per mile driven.  And we have tons of data on this, motorcycles wreck alot.

Motorcycles aren’t worried about small cars?  Really?  Even a small car can hit and potentially kill a motorcyclist.

Just because the bigger cars with more obliviousness built into them are more dangerous doesn’t mean other vehicles can’t hurt you as well.  If someone knows you are there they are less likely to run into you.

The only studies I could find compared stock with modified pipes, which doesn’t control for rider behavior.  The fact that the most risk-taking riders are the young guys who are likely to also have heavily modded machines that turn it up to eleven means modded machines could be heavily represented in the crash rate even if the noise did prevent some accidents.  Maybe it’d be even worse if they didn’t have the louder bikes.  In this case I think louder pipes are a dependent variable, not an independent one.

Does this mean the main reason people have loud bikes is safety?  No.  Does this mean a louder bike is always going to prevent an accident?  No.  Does this mean that people with loud bikes can’t be annoying or in some kind of arms race of noise to the point of stupidity?  No.

I am only saying that it does not strain credulity that they could be safer in some circumstances because they are more obvious. 

The people I know who ride (many of them riding since the 60s or 70s) don’t have super loud annoying bikes, but they do have bikes that are louder than bikes with stock exhaust.  I would rather they annoy a couple of people occasionally than be dead or hurt by someone who didn’t see them but might have heard them.

The purpose of loud engines is to be a douche and cause unhappiness to people around you, just like every other conservative fucking thing.

The commenter above who said that conservatism is just sadism is right.

Actually, there is a not insignificant overlap between one branch of the swinger community in New England and the people who attended the big biker Rally in NH (“the ‘Vous” as they call it). 
The spouse and I refer to these folks as the “White Trash Dream” contingent who own big loud bikes (which they do actually ride a lot from mid-Spring into late Fall, even to work) and have fantasies of a house in the middle of nowhere in NH (despite often being from inside the I-95/128 ring around Boston).  Some of them are more libertarian-ish than liberal about some policies, but most of them are generally liberal due to the sex thing being no one else’s business belief.
This may be a regional thing as the Harley crowd elsewhere, and to a point outside of the swing folks here, is pretty conservative/libertarian-conservative IME.  Here there seem to be huge swathes of exceptions, and commuting on a motorcycle is gaining in popularity for the warmer months.

There have been studies that show loud exhaust does not help.  Sorry, can’t locate them right now.  The fact is that the accidents with motorcycles caused by the other vehicle are almost always because the driver of the other vehicle was inattentive, impaired or both (like most accidents between cars are - these cite I do have at hand: http://www.lawcore.com/motorcycle-accident/common-causes-of-motorcycle-accidents.html and http://www.smartmotorist.com/traffic-and-safety-guideline/distracted-drivers-cause-motor-vehicle-accidents.html ).  This is even true in Europe for at least 70% of vehicle-motorcycle crashes where it was determined the car driver was at fault ( http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/newsandupdates/european_motorcycle_safety_study/index.html ).  A study in New Zealand found that wearing bright colors did reduce accidents ( http://www.motorcyclistonline.com/newsandupdates/bright_colors_motorcycle_study/index.html). Drivers don’t see because they are not looking and they wouldn’t pay attention to the noise either.

“There have been studies that show loud exhaust does not help.  Sorry, can’t locate them right now.”

Too bad, because your first two links don’t seem to include much if any information on noise and motorcycles.

Your third link says “The object motorcyclists most often collided with were passenger cars. In half of the collision accidents, the driver of the other vehicle was judged to have made the primary error that caused the crash, and he failed to “perceive” the motorcyclist in 70 percent…”

Then continues on with nothing about noise, sound, or pipes.  So this doesn’t even state a position on whether a louder motorcycle might actually get, you know, perceived better.  Which seems at least plausible.  I mean, I know of no study that says people who don’t actively look for motorcycles would be literally unable to hear them.  Some might be, but all?  Hardly plausible.

Please amuse me further by quoting the people who think you can’t hear a motorcycle coming towards you because the exhaust system points backwards.

And please ignore what I wrote about the actual studies I read about and their lack of clarification of dependent and independent variables, then. 

Thanks.

The purpose of loud engines is to be a douche and cause unhappiness to people around you, just like every other conservative fucking thing.
Comment #56: Punditus Maximus on 12/16 at 11:18 AM

You seriously don’t know any motorcycle riders who aren’t assholes?

Re: what always1895 said

Smartpatrol: “an hollow effort to score some empty political points”

I think you’re being too cynical about the motives of people who get hung up on language. Speaking for myself, when I did it a lot, I certainly didn’t get any feeling of superiority about it. In fact spending so much time thinking about how almost every action and word causes or is influenced by something shitty made me dislike myself as much as anyone else, since it emphasizes the idea that no one, even if they’re a pretty decent person, gets through life without causing suffering to someone else. always1895 even used an ableist term in their post (“blind spot”), for an example of how prevalent it is even among the well-meaning.

That’s why I stopped, though, because there’s a difference between theoretical and practical progressivism. Human beings can’t really be expected to devote that much of their time to deconstructing everything around them. It’s draining at best and depressing at worst.

Good point. Proboscidea’s response to you also suggests the cultural rhyme between middle aged suburban white guys idolizing bikers and the younger set of white kids getting into “gangsta” culture in the 1990s. Perhaps there is something inherent in our culture, where we appropriate the styles of “outlaw” subcultures.

Part of the very American founding myths are founded partially on the lionizing the “outlaw” as the underdog fighting against a more powerful ruling establishment whether it was the British Empire during the Revolution, Eastern/Western establishments in the Wild West, etc.  Some of this even predates the US as the Robin Hood Legends illustrates. 

Also, many people….especially young males are socialized into believing being polite, civilized, and considerate of others…in other words…“not being an asshole” as being “constrained”, “forced into being dullard conformists to established norms”, and “consigned to living a dull boring life”. 

A reason why many people….especially in an individualist oriented society like the US does their best to be “more different” and “unique” than everyone else. 

Nevermind you could always get more chrome and mileage on a Honda, they won’t listen.  It’s about image, not substance.

There’s also the factor that Harley’s are “American” and Honda’s an “infernal furriner import”.  Am old enough to remember the widespread hysteria surrounding how the Japanese will take over the USA with its negative effects on Asian-Americans as shown by the Vincent Chin case in 1982 when he was mistaken as Japanese and beaten to death by “real ‘murikans”.

always1895 even used an ableist term in their post (“blind spot”), for an example of how prevalent it is even among the well-meaning.

And another example of perceiving a sleight where none exists. From wikipedia:

A particular blind spot known as the blindspot, or physiological blind spot, or punctum caecum in medical literature, is the place in the visual field that corresponds to the lack of light-detecting photoreceptor cells on the optic disc of the retina where the optic nerve passes through it.[1] Since there are no cells to detect light on the optic disc, a part of the field of vision is not perceived. The brain fills in with surrounding detail and with information from the other eye, so the blind spot is not normally perceived.

Everybody has a blind spot. Unless “blind” is insulting terminology even when referring to the actuall, physiological condition of blindness (however localized), I can’t see how the use of that phrase could be ableist. One of language’s great strength’s is its ability to create metaphors. I don’t think it’s much of a stretch to extend blind from meaning a lack of physical sight to also meaning a general lack of perception.

Re: Comment #55: oldfeminist on 12/16 at 11:07 AM

Then you don’t also know that the majority of modified bikes aren’t Harley-compatibles but are races or offroaders that shouldn’t be on streets.  You just can’t hear these bikes from within a car when you’re on a collision course - either they’re around a corner in front of you or behind you.  Sound does go around corners and does spread out radially but not at an intensity of a siren.  A simple test of this is easy:  Rev the engine in a parking lot.  Does it set off car alarms in front of you, where danger is going to be?  No.

It’s just a stupid idea from people who want an excuse to have a loud bike and be an asshole.

I do know lots of motorcyclists who are nice.  None of them ascribe to the loud pipes meme.

Like I said, todays Harley owner is only superficially yesterday’s.

I am late to this party.  Just thought I’s point out that every single year an average of 4-5 of these ROT rally folks die in crashes.  Locals tend to abandon downtown and stay off the road as much as possible to avoid the danger.  I don’t know what this says about the analogy to the Republicans - just thought I’d mention it.

Crissa, I’m not talking about racers or offroaders that aren’t street legal.  I’m talking about Harleys, Indians and so on that are louder than stock, owned by people who have been riding responsibly for decades and know that no matter how careful they are, many drivers will still not see them and a little noise helps remind those drivers to LOOK.

It’s not only a stupid idea from people who want to be loud assholes.  It is also a practical idea from people who want to stay alive.