Road Rage

[Mamil]

44 minutes ago, RocknRolla said:

It's also good for survival to not resemble a penguin when swimming with Sharks.

 

I like that!

[Robbie Stewart]

2 hours ago, Jono said:

do you drive a bakkie?

Yep. It's not white though

[RocknRolla]

2 hours ago, Mamil said:

This view is rational and logically consistent but while it stops short of actually saying it does it imply the following? "The p32s in the white bakkie lost his temper because cyclists en mass behave badly and therefore have a bad image and this is the most significant factor in causing the p23s to lose his temper. If cyclists en masse rode better and gave more thumbs up and smiled more drivers wouldn't get as angry as they do"

If this is the subtext of this argument it runs very close to the kernel at the heart of any abusive relationship between powerful and less powerful parties "I wouldn't hit you if you behaved better".

On this point. 

I think the cyclists in this case was the trigger, but the cause of the reaction of the P)#S in the white bakkie, to be out of proportion to the perceived transgression is due to a lot of other external psychological factors.

Hence my Penguin-Shark analogy. (Or seals even) 

I had to take the cage to work this morning, and my frustration levels due to the ignorance and distractedness of drivers in traffic was through the roof. Being "stuck" in a cage constantly subjected to this stupidity with no way to escape had me feeling increasingly angry. 

Now multiply this by about 100, when someone is under stress at work, or at home, also financially and the straw that breaks the camel's back does not have to be particularly big or heavy.

[Patchelicious]

On 2/18/2026 at 7:48 AM, Mamil said:

This view is rational and logically consistent but while it stops short of actually saying it does it imply the following? "The p32s in the white bakkie lost his temper because cyclists en mass behave badly and therefore have a bad image and this is the most significant factor in causing the p23s to lose his temper. If cyclists en masse rode better and gave more thumbs up and smiled more drivers wouldn't get as angry as they do"

If this is the subtext of this argument it runs very close to the kernel at the heart of any abusive relationship between powerful and less powerful parties "I wouldn't hit you if you behaved better".

Appreciate you asking "if it implies", more often than not people jump to "So you are saying" rather than asking for clarity.

To answer your question. Nowhere in my post did I say the guy in the white bakkie lost his temper because cyclists en masse behave badly. And I certainly didn’t say that’s the most significant factor behind what he did.

What he did was irrational and unacceptable. Full stop.

Some people behave irrationally. Some people are aggressive. Some people are under pressure, angry at life, short-fused, or just plain idiots. We’re never going to eliminate that from society. Trying to reverse-engineer a neat, single cause for his behaviour misses that reality.

My point was different.

When someone like that reacts, they often react through a lens of perception. In this case, that perception was “you cyclists.” That generalisation didn’t start in that moment. It’s something that already existed in his head.

That’s not the same as saying cyclists caused his behaviour. It’s saying that we operate in an environment where public perception of cyclists is often negative, and that perception affects how some motorists respond to us.

The abusive relationship analogy doesn’t fit here. “I wouldn’t hit you if you behaved better” implies justification. I am not justifying anything. There is zero justification for what this guy did. 

What I am saying is that public sympathy matters. Broad perception matters. If more riders are visibly considerate, predictable and respectful on the road, fewer motorists will carry around a simmering resentment toward “cyclists” as a category.

Will that stop the truly unstable person? No.
Will it reduce baseline hostility? Probably yes.

That’s not victim-blaming. It’s acknowledging that we ride in a shared social environment where reputation influences reactions.

So no, this isn’t about excusing abuse. It’s about recognising that while we can’t control irrational individuals, we can influence the general temperature around us. And in a country where cyclists already have a branding problem, that matters.

Edited February 19 by Patchelicious

[DieselnDust]

On 2/16/2026 at 4:33 PM, Also-oldschool said:

 

I’ve been cycling since the 80s. Road, off-road, everything in between. Like most long-time riders, I’ve had my share of road rage and even a few direct run-ins with cars over the years. Still, every time I head out, I quietly hope I’ll get home safely.

These days I prefer off-road, but living in the South Peninsula means that’s not always practical. Tokai is great, but not an everyday option. So I try to be smart about timing — avoiding peak tourist traffic around Cape Point, the buses, rental Cobras and nervous holiday drivers. Normally, cycling is my happy place.

Three weeks ago (26 Jan) that changed a bit.

I headed out later than usual — around 9am — because the internet was down and work wasn’t happening anyway. Riding through Scarborough, I caught up to two other riders just before the Red Hill / Cape Point / Scarborough intersection. I was about 20 metres behind them.

They were already in the intersection when a guy in a white bakkie ignored the yield. The two riders scattered to avoid being hit. There was shouting — no swearing, no middle fingers — just shock and raised voices.

The driver then assumed I was part of their “group.” He crossed into the oncoming lane and stopped next to me. Immediately aggressive. Swearing. Swinging fists. I told him to back off and tried to ride on. He reversed toward me, trying to push me off the road. I was so close my bars scratched his bakkie.

That seemed to trigger him further.

More shouting. More fists. The usual “you cyclists” comments. I tried again to ride away and he again came at me with the vehicle. At that point I got off my bike. He jumped out. I put my bike between us as a shield. He grabbed it and threw it at me. I still have bruising on my lower leg three weeks later.

I wasn’t going to get into a physical fight. The level of aggression was frighteningly casual. Thankfully other cars stopped and the two riders came back. It could have ended differently.

I’m adding a picture of the vehicle involved. Riders in the South Peninsula should just be aware of this vehicle if you see it around Scarborough / Simonstown / Kommetjie.

I’m not posting this to start a fight or bash motorists. But something feels different out there lately. I’ve counted four road rage incidents since November — more than I experienced in the previous decade combined.

A couple of questions for other riders:

• Is it becoming normal to ride with pepper spray?
• Do you use front and/or rear-facing cameras? Has it helped?

I’ve always believed cycling should be something we look forward to, not something we brace ourselves for.

Ride safe out there.

 

lay a charge of Assault GBH at the appropriate SAPS office. Hope you got the witnesses contact numbers. Make this POS pay

[Mamil]

3 hours ago, Patchelicious said:

Appreciate you asking "if it implies", more often than not people jump to "So you are saying" rather than asking for clarity.

To answer your question. Nowhere in my post did I say the guy in the white bakkie lost his temper because cyclists en masse behave badly. And I certainly didn’t say that’s the most significant factor behind what he did.

What he did was irrational and unacceptable. Full stop.

Some people behave irrationally. Some people are aggressive. Some people are under pressure, angry at life, short-fused, or just plain idiots. We’re never going to eliminate that from society. Trying to reverse-engineer a neat, single cause for his behaviour misses that reality.

My point was different.

When someone like that reacts, they often react through a lens of perception. In this case, that perception was “you cyclists.” That generalisation didn’t start in that moment. It’s something that already existed in his head.

That’s not the same as saying cyclists caused his behaviour. It’s saying that we operate in an environment where public perception of cyclists is often negative, and that perception affects how some motorists respond to us.

The abusive relationship analogy doesn’t fit here. “I wouldn’t hit you if you behaved better” implies justification. I am not justifying anything. There is zero justification for what this guy did. 

What I am saying is that public sympathy matters. Broad perception matters. If more riders are visibly considerate, predictable and respectful on the road, fewer motorists will carry around a simmering resentment toward “cyclists” as a category.

Will that stop the truly unstable person? No.
Will it reduce baseline hostility? Probably yes.

That’s not victim-blaming. It’s acknowledging that we ride in a shared social environment where reputation influences reactions.

So no, this isn’t about excusing abuse. It’s about recognising that while we can’t control irrational individuals, we can influence the general temperature around us. And in a country where cyclists already have a branding problem, that matters.

THis is how I understood your view - it's the effects of this view that I'm uncomfrtable with. I'm not sure that the heuristic that informs the target acquisition system of a p23s with a overstimulated amygdala is "cyclists are bad" - or maybe it is that at a very granular level - at a higher level I think it might be änything that I think gets in my way and is more vulnerable than me"or maybe even less discriminating than that and it's something like ""änyone who engages me in a less than complimentary fashion"

Of course we can behave in a way to not look like a lightning conductor looking for a storm but I worry that arguments that emphasise our behavior de-emphasise the stronger variables in the picture which I would see as being more contextual. In no particular order, the design of public spaces, the lack of provision for non motorised transport, the complete dominance of oil and petrol over transport infrastructure, a lack of law enforcement, deeply entrenched cultural and psychological investment in cars as symbols of all sorts of inter and intrapersonal dynamics, many of them to do with status, power, freedom, importance of individuality, negation of vulnerability, and so on.

[Shebeen]

On 2/17/2026 at 4:19 PM, Patchelicious said:

Some cyclists ride like absolute a-holes. That behaviour doesn’t just endanger them. It increases risk for everyone else who rides responsibly. We have a collective responsibility to not make things worse.

Great post, and this paragraph sums up my view on a lot of these topics.

I have had the seed to articulate it long form as the "tragedy of the common cyclist", but some other wordsmith is welcome to run with that if they see fit.

We have a perception of how the cycling community is perceived, and as the vulnerable community we need to be the ones doing the olive branching. But try get that point across, the recent active thread on this issue has been something like "motorists vs cyclists", people want a fight.

There is one large scale petrol=>battery transport device well under way - delivery e-scooters. Unfortunately these guys are volume driven and mainly use the roads like complete #@$#@$@# which doesn't help the cause in anyway.

[RocknRolla]

There is a thread on another forum and the point of the "draconinan" "over zealous" nanny-statedness of said nanny state was brough up.

Without going into details, it was related to enforcement of what the poster believed to be stupid traffic laws.

In my mind, such enforcement and over zealous applications of the law is the only way to systematically educate ALL ROAD USERS.

From pedestrians, through to cyclists (both recreational and commuters, and as mentioned above delivery service workers) as well as motorists and HMV operators.

It's just a small part in having a functional society, and the general lack of adherence to the law specifically relating to road rules, points to greater issues within our South African society at large.

[Reinhold Achleitner]

On 2/16/2026 at 6:27 PM, michaelbiker said:

It's Argus time of the year. Lots of tourists around, schools are back and people are low on cash after the holidays. High stress, high traffic and high frustration. Best to just stay off the roads in general.

Hi stress,tell me another,doesn't excuse wreckless disrespectful driving,certain have zero shame and accountability.

[RocknRolla]

13 hours ago, Reinhold Achleitner said:

Hi stress,tell me another,doesn't excuse wreckless disrespectful driving,certain have zero shame and accountability.

Nope, not an excuse. But a reality.

As is driving recklessly and disrespectfully.

[The Ouzo]

On 2/17/2026 at 4:19 PM, Patchelicious said:

often. Also in South Africa most cyclists sit in the upper economic brackets. The majority of South Africans are impoverished, disconnected from cycling as a concept, and frankly don’t care about cyclists. 

Whilst I agree with you, it must be noted though, that up here in gauteng, the most motorists that are aggressive to cyclists appear to be from the very same economic background as the cyclists themselves. 

[Mook]

25 minutes ago, The Ouzo said:

Whilst I agree with you, it must be noted though, that up here in gauteng, the most motorists that are aggressive to cyclists appear to be from the very same economic background as the cyclists themselves. 

22 minutes and the lynch mob have'nt responded yet 😏

They must be out on the golf course.