[grannyg00se]

That may be the case, legally. But as the OP indicates, that is not always the case, culturally.

But if bicycles are treated like motor vehicles, why is it that you often find them creating a lane where there is none? You don't often see motorcycles riding alongside cars, in the same lane, grazing parked vehicles.

[fivethirty]

But if bicycles are treated like motor vehicles, why is it that you often find them creating a lane where there is none? You don't often see motorcycles riding alongside cars, in the same lane, grazing parked vehicles.

I'm not 100% sure what you're describing, but it sounds like you are talking about a situation where a cyclist is riding on the far right side of the lane next to the parked cars and is being passed in the same lane by other cars. What sounds dangerous to me about this situation is not that the cyclist is creating his own lane (because he's not, he's in the proper right most lane), but rather that cars are trying to pass him (a vehicle that is legally allowed to be there) without leaving enough room.

Also, kind of off topic, but where I'm from (California), motorcycles are legally allowed to weave between lanes and do it all the time. Not that I think this is a particularly smart think to do :)

[grannyg00se]

If the cyclist was in the center of the lane it wouldn't look like he's trying to "create a lane". And cars wouldn't try to pass in the same lane in that case because it wouldn't be possible. They would wait until it is safe to pass properly. Or get really pissed off and try to intimidate the cyclist to move over, but that goes back to my point about culture and not belonging.

Being legally allowed to weave between lanes doesn't seem right.

[fivethirty]

Being legally allowed to weave between lanes doesn't seem right.

Yeah, I'm not really sure why it's legal, but I've also never ridden a motorcycle. A quick glance at Wikipedia suggests that it's legal in most of Europe and Japan though, although not in most places in the US.

Anyway, FWIW, I commute by bike and ride in the center of the lane when there is no bike lane for the exact reason that you describe. However, I don't really get what you are saying about "not belonging". Cars and bikes are both legally allowed on the same roads. Just because this inconveniences some drivers doesn't mean that bikes are "culturally unacceptable". In other words, the opinion of said drivers (legally, and I'd argue culturally) is no more important than that of the bikers who think that it's a totally acceptable thing for them to be there so long as they follow traffic laws.

[grannyg00se]

I'm not trying to imply that the inconvenience makes them unacceptable. That they are culturally unacceptable is a fact - stated by the OP as : "cars simply do not give a single shit about bikes". I'm simply trying to provide an explanation for why that may be.

I suppose people downvote because they dislike my explanations. I think it is reasonable to think that many motorists don't feel that cyclists belong on the same road space. As a cyclist, I wouldn't feel that I belong on the same road space as cars. That's why I haven't ridden a bike since moving to a city where the sidewalks are busy.

[tmrggns]

In some states (for example Illinois), bicycles are required by law to stay to the far right of their lane, which makes it look like they are "creating a lane".