[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.