Yesterday, I read what I thought was a piece of bizarre horror by someone with Sadistic Personality Disorder (SPD): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadistic_personality_disorder.
Before I continue, I’d like to say that I’m not a doctor and I don’t pretend to be one. However, I can read and do simple pattern matching which is what we’re doing in this article. I choose to go the medical route as it’s the most objective and kindest. I do believe, however, that people who promote violent, dangerous, and borderline criminal behavior in print ought to be shamed for it. Or worse. I can only wish that the federal database of those who promote terroristic and other violent behavior has a place for those who promote violence against American citizens who sometimes ride bicycles.
It turned out, I might have been mistaken and it was actually an LA Times Opinion piece.
What is SPD?
“Individuals possessing sadistic personalities display recurrent cruel behavior and aggression.”
Why do I feel this way?
Let’s start with the title: “Some advice for cyclists: Being self-righteous can be dangerous”.
While it appears that this is a “warning” message or good advice, it’s actually a thinly vieled threat of violence when you realize why, exactly, the feeling of self-righteousness is dangerous.
I have been self-righteous, on and off, for decades, and I was never in any actual danger. I’m self-righteous right now. I’m waiting for something bad to happen.
Nothing bad happened to me.
From the article:
“In theory, I love the idea of a population that is fit and nonpolluting on its two- (or even three-) wheelers. When I encounter them whizzing down hiker-only trails, though, it takes a measure of self-control not to stick my walking staff through their spokes.”
I believe that this would qualify as “cruel” and “aggressive”.
It also makes me wonder if the author, Karin Klein, later “accidently” hits a cyclist, the article can be used as evidence of premeditation and criminal intent. She clearly expresses, in a public newspaper, the intent to maim or kill. Why this is OK, is really bizarre to me. It’s like people writing, freely, about wanting to hurt “those people” and everyone sits there like it’s OK.
More from the article:
“State law says drivers must take maneuvers to leave a safe space between their vehicles and bicycles, but it doesn’t specify what that space needs to be.”
For the three feet skeptics, still think that this law is ambiguous or confusing?
“The [Three Foot Passing] law strikes me as a little nuts.”
Um, as we have all ready figured out that Karin’s a SPD (or at least acts like one in print), this isn’t surprising at all. She seems to be totally devoid of any form of human compassion or even common sense.
“So should a whole line of cars slow down to 20 mph or so to leave 3 feet of space between them and a cyclist for miles on end?”
The answer is that the road is badly designed and ought to accommodate all vehicles. Until then, the motorists have a moral and perhaps legal responsibity to not hit anything. They should take any common sense means necessary to protect human lives. This simple notion is not only incomprehensible to Karin, but “nuts.”
“Sometimes even well-meaning motorists will make errors around bikes”
Karin had all ready confessed to having criminal intent to harm cyclists. She also all ready thought that normal safety precautions are “nuts.” Once you go down the rabbit hole of crazy, you don’t get to make mistakes. At this point, my first guess is assault just as she had fantasized about a few paragraphs up.
“And the driver might have been within the law.”
No. I’m pretty sure that deliberately running people over with one’s car is totally illegal. I’m not a lawyer or anything. At any rate, I’d have to say that it [running someone over] is immoral.
I really believe that Karin is a good person at heart and can be helped, but I don’t think that she should be writing any articles.
I wouldn’t be surprised if someone runs over a cyclist then cites this article as proof that this is OK. Karin basically gave vehicular assault her stamp of approval. And the LA Times as well by printing this horrible article.
As a piece of fiction, I find the article to be delightful as I am a big fan of the horror genre especially when you find an everyday person go bezerk. Really cool.
As a work of journalism, this is not.
I suggest that the LA Times retract this article and print an apology. Out of all the articles I have read, the only one which was as bad was by Josh Board from the SD Reader. The Reader did retract the article, apologized, and shortly after Josh left [The Reader].
I suggest that Karin get some therapy and that the LA Times let her go and not print anything from her again until she goes on meds or something.
May you all, even Karin, be happy.
[Minor edits for grammar and comprehension were made.]