More Advice From a MAMIL

Dear MAMIL,

In my regular “non-cycling” life I like to think I’m a natty dresser. I don’t skimp on my cycling kit, either. And yet I get the sense that when I roll up to the coffee shop for a group ride, the other guys are kind of snickering at me. What am I doing wrong?

John D, Oakland, CA

Dear John,

Right off the bat, I’d guess this is all in your head. Your cycling pals could be snickering about anything, or nothing, or the snickering could be a figment of your imagination. That said, cyclists can be a judgmental lot so let’s proceed with the assumption that they’re actually judging your costume. Starting with your assertion that you don’t skimp on your clothing, I’ll advise that one can spend a lot of money and still look foolish. For example, you could be wearing a WorldTour pro team kit when you’re clearly not on the team, which 41% of a panel of veteran cyclists deemed “laughably Fredtastic” (i.e., demonstrating the tone-deafness of a newb). Or, you could be wearing Rapha in a cycling community like mine where we all shun that brand as overpriced hipster apparel too closely associated with Team Ineos and Chris Froome. Or, you could be underdressed or overdressed, or rocking arm warmers with a sleeveless jersey, or doing something similarly silly. But don’t sweat it. You’ll develop a sense of style on the road just like you have in your non-cycling life. If you’re impatient, go ahead and query your friends (however politely or bluntly you wish, from “Is there something untoward about my choice of apparel?” to “Fuck you starin’ at?!”). Or, consult this article, bearing in mind that “fitting in” is not a fundamental, necessary, or even commendable aspect of the sport.

Dear MAMIL,

I am somewhat new to cycling (in my late thirties) and have lately been doing group rides. A couple times I’ve heard this or that MAMIL talking about “digging deep.” I kind of have a sense for what this must mean, but can you explain it to me?

Virgil S, Louisville, CO

Dear Virgil,

As a former bike racer, I use this term to describe the kind of over-the-top suffering that we racer-types assume can only be achieved by the likes of us; that is, cyclists who have frequently found themselves in do-or-die race situations requiring the kind of massive effort that would frighten a recreational cyclist. Through trial and error we realize that we’re actually capable of more pain than we’d ever thought possible, because it means the difference between glorious victory and heartbreaking defeat. Do this enough times and you begin to think you’re special, and that casual cyclists couldn’t even begin to relate to what you can put yourself through. This is the essence of “digging deep.”

The problem with this expression is that if you use it outside your tight cabal of racer-types, and your audience doesn’t automatically feel included (due, perhaps, to not having raced), he or she or they may catch a whiff of arrogance in this usage. And then—depending on the pool of rapport available and/or the number of beers you’ve all consumed—he or she or they might give you a hard time about this usage, not just in the moment but repeatedly over time, almost as if to taunt you for your superciliousness. As you may have already guessed, this has happened to me with a pal who—though he hasn’t ever raced—recently completed a 400-kilometer ride. I don’t think anyone achieves that without digging deep. So use this term carefully.

Dear MAMIL,

You’ve gotta help me. I’m a teenage girl and the Lycra bike shorts my dad wears are disgusting. They’re so worn out they’re starting to become transparent in places! Some even have holes in the sides! It wouldn’t be such a big deal except he rides an indoor trainer and likes to parade around the house before and after his workout. My brother and I even chipped in and bought him a brand new pair of shorts but he doesn’t wear them, claiming he’s “saving” them for special rides. Would it be ethically wrong for me to “disappear” some of his worst clothing?

Lydia L, Portland, OR

Dear Lydia,

That really is a tough bind! Cycling clothing is notoriously expensive, and the Lycra often wears out before the chamois—so it can be difficult for a cheap bastard to part with them. Fortunately, there’s a modern solution: buy your dad a pair of baggy mountain-bike style shorts. I used to think these were pointless since they don’t have a chamois, but actually, that works in your favor: he can wear his thrashed old disgusting shorts under the baggy ones. A fellow mountain biking coach pointed this out to me … he is stoked to be getting a second life out of all his old road shorts. Give that a try!

Dear MAMIL,

I confess that I am officially a MAMIL, but I’m apparently still something of a “newb” since I’ve “only” been cycling for about five years. As difficult as this sport is, I thought I’d get some respect from the non-cyclists in my life. But instead they seem to cast aspersions. My sister-in-law said I’m at real risk for giving myself a heart attack, and a couple of people have said cycling actually reduces bone density. What’s the deal? Did I choose the wrong sport?

Jeff B, Columbus, OH

Dear Jeff,

I’ve been hearing rumors for well over a decade that too much exercise can damage your heart. Cycling sometimes gets singled out, because you can do it day after day. (Nobody runs back-to-back marathons, but lots of cyclists put in hundreds of miles a week.) I’ve written about this supposed cardiac risk here. The question for your sister-in-law is: if Tour de France type riders—despite making a living at this and being tough as nails—don’t tend to ride themselves to death, how could you? I mean, no offence, but if a recreational cyclist were actually putting himself or herself at risk for cardiac arrest, the pros would be dropping like flies. And would humans actually evolve to have the capability of working themselves to death? Statistically, the greater risk is when a middle-aged person who doesn’t exercise at all suddenly does something really rigorous. When I lived in Colorado we’d hear every year about some guy having a fatal heart attack while shoveling the snow from his driveway.

As for osteoporosis, it is true that very fit people, because they carry less weight on their skeletons, are somewhat more prone to it. Cyclists in particular can be at greater risk because it’s a low-impact sport, lacking the thumping-along of running that can help maintain bone density. Another issue is that you can sweat a ton during a really long ride, which deprives your body of calcium. So yeah, there’s something to this. But obesity is a far more common ailment among the middle-aged, so it’s not like cycling is unhealthy. Just add in some weight training to your regimen, and make sure your diet has plenty of calcium. Also, I once did a quick Google search on “is beer good for bone density” and apparently beer has boron in it, which is good for your bones. I’m not going to research this any deeper because I have the answer I want, and now you do, too.

Dear MAMIL,

What is it with the modern cycling sunglasses? They are so goofy looking! Have all you MAMILs (and MAVISes) lost your minds? Why not a tasteful pair of Ray-Bans or Maui Jims?

Julie D, Miami, FL

Dear Julie,

I agree. It’s hard not to find fault when you compare modern cycling sunglasses to classic styles like the Ray-Bans.

The problem is, as much as we’d like to blame the designers for deliberately making their product “edgy” (i.e., dorky), to some degree this actually form following function. I’m not in love with the looks of my own cycling shades, but they really do well at not letting light leak in from the sides, not fogging up, and being easy to stash in my helmet vents so I don’t drip sweat all over them during a long climb. A couple of times I’ve forgotten to put in my contact lenses before heading out for a ride, and instead of clomping through the house in my cleats I’ve just put on my prescription Ray-Bans, and I’ll tell you, they don’t work nearly as well. So maybe this is a matter of MAMILs choosing to feel marvelous vs. look marvelous.

Dear M. Hamill,

Can you put to rest the rumor that your car accident was a suicide attempt based on your humiliation over having starred in the “Star Wars Holiday Special” on CBS, a program so awful one critic suggested it could have been “written and directed by a sentient bag of cocaine”? I’m sure it was just an accident. And I know that TV special wasn’t your fault either.

Irving M, Irvine, CA

Dear Irving,

I think you’ve got the wrong columnist—I’m a MAMIL, not Mark Hamill. That being said, a quick Wikipedia investigation shows that the car accident happened before the TV special, and this article points out that during filming of the special he was still recovering from the facial injuries sustained in the crash, “under a thick coat of make-up and on heavy painkillers.” (Part of me hates to veer so far off my column's topic, but I don’t like the idea of you carrying around such a blatantly false misconception.)

Dear MAMIL,

Someone wrote in before about whether the real point of Lycra, for men, is showing off their junk. Your answer was totally unsatisfactory—you were clearly prevaricating. What’s the real story? Why can’t you admit feeling sexy is part of biking’s allure?

Kim G, New York City

Dear Kim,

I assure you, MAMILs and even their younger counterparts have no exhibitionist tendencies. In fact, I have seen widespread evidence of teenagers being as modest as possible. When I was growing up in the cycling mecca of Boulder, Colorado, a fad started among those teenagers lucky enough to stand on the podium after a race: they would put on regular shorts (Ocean Pacific brand, usually) over their cycling shorts, for modesty’s sake. After all, to be on the podium is to be right in the public eye. I myself partook of this tradition, but with my own spin: I would roll up the cycling shorts under the regular shorts, to be less nerdy, to buck (part of) the trend, and because I was actually trying to prevent that ridiculous tan line cyclists get. Here I am on the second place tier rocking that look.

I had some influence at that point, but not enough to start a new tradition, as you can see above with the race winner, Pete, sticking with the previous tradition. But later that summer, in the Red Zinger Mini Classic, he’d adopted my rolled-up look and—given his dominance of that 9-day event—had driven 100% adoption in the new style across the podium by the end. You’ll have to take my word for it that he and the second place rider, David, were still wearing their cycling shorts in the photo below. (I didn’t have a second pair of shorts handy this time as I’d ridden to the race, which goes to prove how unnecessary this tradition even was.)

The double-short tradition persisted until the bike clothing industry wised up and started extending the padding in cycling shorts in the name of modesty. Fortunately, this evolution was complete before I hit puberty. ;^)

Dear MAMIL,

What’s the deal with power meters and Strava? Why do we even use these? Sometimes I wonder if I’m just trying to make myself feel bad by scientifically tracking and documenting the decline in my strength. I know you can’t answer for me in particular, and I wish I could, but I can’t other than to say I’m a blind follower of trends. So: why this trend?

Larry M, Atlanta, GA

Dear Larry,

I think I can take a stab at this. Starting with Strava, surely it succeeds for the central reason social media in general does: repeated doses of dopamine through the social traffic of the platform—kudos, comments, etc. There’s also the gamification of it: the KOMs, the PRs, etc. I’m not on Strava myself, but a friend tells me it has age-group-specific leaderboards to encourage ageing athletes.

As far as power meters, to some degree it’s just a cool new toy which fits in naturally with all the tech that cyclists enjoy. Beyond that, I find that—since I’m pretty new to having a power meter—I appreciate how it actually helps me feel better about certain stretches I ride. There’s a particular part of Wildcat Canyon Road that always made me feel weak and worthless because it looks like a fairly steep downhill but actually isn’t; I always felt like I should have been able to go faster through it. Now I see that, though my speed is barely over 20 mph, I’m putting out close to 400 watts, which ain’t too shabby.

The other thing to bear in mind is that those of us who are middle-aged now didn’t have power meters in our prime because they hadn’t been invented yet. So instead of comparing my time up South Park Drive to what I’d done in my 20s or 30s, I’m comparing my power output on it to what I did just last winter. Not such a comedown!

Dear MAMIL,

At the coffee shop this past weekend I overhead a couple of MAMILs talking about “luft.” Apparently it’s to do with cycling caps. I’ve been at this sport for a couple decades but never heard this term before. Care to enlighten me?

Sarah B, Boulder, CO

Dear Sarah,

“Luft” refers to how a cyclist wears his or her cycling cap. It should be worn high on the head, not pulled down tight; the higher up and puffier it is, the more luft it has. Below you can see Miguel Indurain getting it right, and your humble columnist getting it wrong (due to youth and ignorance, I must point out).

Not long after the above photo of me was taken, my brother Geoff schooled me about the proper way to wear a cycling cap. He did not use the term “luft” but he got the point across, and I learned my lesson. To this day I always employ plenty of luft.

Dear MAMIL,

How do you veteran cyclists tolerate having practically no body fat, particularly on your butts? How do you survive and sit comfortably? I’m a regular guy and my butt hurts after pretty much every ride.

H.Z., Princeton, NJ

Dear H,

First off, not all MAMILs have low body fat … only the former racers who somehow tamed their appetites in retirement. It’s the huskier MAMILs that earn us the reputation for being the wrong people to wear Lycra. But even those of us on the skinny side are just fine, because the padding is in the saddle itself, and the shell of the saddle, made either of plastic or carbon fiber, is designed to flex in just the right way. The saddles may look barbaric and torturous because they’re so narrow, but really it’s just your “sit bones” that need to be supported. If there’s pain involved it’s either due to chafing, or the saddle being set too high, or perhaps the rider putting too much weight on his butt and not enough on the pedals. Invest in a nicer saddle and you’ll probably be a lot happier.

I say all this because even at the peak of my fitness I really suffered when I tried too hard a saddle. The modern ones seem to be a step forward. Some even have a big valley down the middle, which is supposed to spare your nether region, though I can’t tell any difference. Such saddles do provide a nice way to stash your sunglasses, though.

Dear MAMIL,

I’m not a biker and have resigned myself to witnessing it (and being baffled) as a bystander. And I’ve always wondered this: why don’t biking gloves have fingers?

Julie D, Santa Fe, NM

Dear Julie,

There are lots of official reasons. Many a cyclist would tell you the gloves are mainly for crash protection, to keep your palms from getting scraped up, without any need to protect the fingers since they tend to curl inward. Or you might hear that the gloves are to pad your hands but the fingers don’t bear any weight, and/or the gloves are fingerless so they’ll be cooler. But I’m going to give you the truth. The number one reason for cycling gloves is that soft fabric, almost like terrycloth, on the back of the glove, between the base of the thumb and the wrist, which is used for wiping the snot from your nose. Other than that, most cyclists wouldn’t wear gloves at all. And cycling gloves are fingerless to facilitate nose picking. I know this is gross but that’s just the way this sport is.

A MAMIL is a syndicated journalist whose advice column, “Ask a MAMIL,” appears in over 0 blogs worldwide.

—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—
Email me here. For a complete index of albertnet posts, click here.

Ask a MAMIL

Dear MAMIL,

Why are MAMILs like you, as a group, so hated on? I mean, it’s not like you’re hurting anybody and as we age, non-impact exercise like cycling makes a lot of sense.

Lisa M, Ross, CA

Dear Lisa,

Indeed, “MAMIL” is a largely derogatory term. Fun fact: the Oxford English Dictionary added this word in 2014, defining it as “A middle-aged man who is a keen road cyclist, typically one who rides an expensive bike and wears the type of clothing associated with professional cyclists.”  It doesn’t mention the negative connotation, but then dictionaries seldom do.

I suspect the antipathy relates to the intersection of Lycra, middle-aged-ness, and maleness. So many middle-aged men are shameless about wearing Lycra despite their un-svelte girth. This can create reactions along the lines of “why are you doing this to me?!” from onlookers. The hardcore cyclists with weedy builds are no better … why would we want to accentuate such a physique with form-fitting clothing?

On top of that, cycling is an expensive sport, thus much of the ridicule is based on the showy display of wealth and status by people we don’t actually envy and wouldn’t want to be. On top of this, the very fact that cycling is a virtuous activity can trigger the gag reflex. But I think “MAMIL” is a fairly lighthearted mockery, and of course anyone able to afford this sport, and in good enough health to do it into middle age, ought to be a good sport about it. If you call me “MAMIL” to my face I’ll good-naturedly reply, “Guilty as charged.”

Dear MAMIL,

Let’s just be real for a minute here: isn’t the point of men wearing Lycra to show off their junk?

E.A., Albany, CA

Dear E,

The short answer is no. The slightly longer answer is hell no. The full answer is: I’m not going to discuss genitalia in this column. Nice try.

Dear MAMIL,

How can you justify the horrendous cost of your clothing? I mean, isn’t it like $200 for a single pair of shorts? Wouldn’t that feed a poor village for like a week?

Malcolm D, Oakland, CA

Dear Malcolm,

You can actually spend $400 on a pair of Assos bib shorts. There’s no doubt about it, cycling clothing is atrociously expensive. A relatively upscale Castelli costume (i.e., a pair of bib shorts and a jersey) is, ounce for ounce, more expensive than  MacBook Air, a leather jacket, a pair of Nike Air Jordans, or a pair of Doc Marten boots.

(Take the above AI-generated chart with a grain of salt, as I didn’t hallucination-check it.)

Now, a lot of this cost is basically a luxury tax for an upscale sport. But to some degree the cost is justified, because the fabric, the cut, the design, etc. really do help the clothing perform well. I fully appreciated this one cold January morning when I was getting ready for a race, but hadn’t changed yet, and was freezing my ass off in jeans and a sweatshirt. Once I put on my ABCs (that’s cycling vernacular for “angry biker clothes”), I was immediately more comfortable.

Fortunately, if you scour the Internet (and, depending on where you live, even your local thrift stores) you can find cheaper gear. The high school mountain bike teams in my region get styled out with all kinds of free gear, because MAMILs love to upgrade their wardrobes and donate perfectly good stuff.

Dear MAMIL,

Is there really an article of bike clothing called “bibs”? I was overhearing my teenager talking about his team’s clothing order and I kept hearing “bibs.” I know bikers eat fast, and it’d be a shame to spill on their expensive biking jerseys, but bibs? Really?

Phyllis R, Topeka, KS

Dear Phyllis,

“Bibs” is short for “bib shorts.” These have shoulder straps, kind of like suspenders, instead of an elastic waistband. The vast majority of MAMILs use this type of short. They’ll tell you it’s because bibs are more comfortable, cause less bunching, etc., but in reality it’s a) a mimetic thing (i.e., it’s what the pros wear), b) for the corset effect, and c) to avoid the discomfort of the elastic waistband cutting in to our belly fat.

Middle-age spread aside, I’ve been wearing bibs since I was a teenager. The main reason, originally, was bullying. It was surprisingly common (i.e., almost inevitable) in those days, at least in Boulder, for a rival teen rider to come up behind you, grab the back of your shorts, pull them down, and hook the waistband under your saddle like a super-snuggie. In most cases the perp then grabbed his water bottle and hosed down your butt. Once this started happening, no one I knew ever bought another pair of non-bib shorts.

Dear MAMIL,

It seems like most of your readers ask questions about the Lycra side of MAMIL. What about the middle-aged part? Doesn’t anyone care about that? I’ll start: isn’t cycling a younger person’s game? Why persist at something so physically taxing, not to mention dangerous? At our age, what’s wrong with golf?

Perry L, Sarasota, FL

Dear Perry,

I’ve wondered myself about the preponderance of clothing-related questions. I suspect it’s just harder to articulate inquiries around the inchoate wistfulness that accompanies middle age. In answer to your question—why do I persist?—I think the short answer is because I still can. Ageing alone is hard enough, with the loss of muscle mass, power, and stamina, but psychologically I was dealt an extra blow upon becoming an empty nester. For the past few years, life in general—and cycling in particular—have come to feel like when you get Extended Play during a car race video game. The real work has been done and life is starting to wind down, and it feels like if I pause for too long in my cycling I’ll suddenly discover I can’t do it anymore. So in a way, cycling is more important to me than ever … it’s like one of the few strands left connecting me to my younger life.

As for danger, the risk of injury with cycling is less than soccer, basketball, skiing, snowboarding, and even running and jogging if you factor in overuse injuries. With golf, meanwhile, you run a roughly 100% chance of being a dweeb.

Dear MAMIL,

Not all of my cycling clothing has the same washing instructions. Some tags include crazy decrees like “line dry in the shade.” Can you give some general tips that I could safely apply across all my bike garments?

John L, Ithaca, NY

Dear John,

It can definitely be confusing. Check out this label from a pair of shorts I had (click to enlarge):

Can you believe it? Two sets of conflicting washing instructions on one garment! I think it just goes to show, there aren’t many hard-and-fast rules. But my decades of experience (see how asking a MAMIL has its benefits?) have taught me a few things:

• You can use whatever detergent you want (my wife often makes her own)
• You can (and should) use a stain remover like Shout or Spray ‘n Wash
• There’s no need to wonder about fabric softener because nobody, and I mean nobody, has used this product since my neighbor Mrs. K—back in the ‘70s
• Wash all of your cycling gear (including the socks) on cold, permanent press or “casual” cycle (whatever one step down from “normal” is on your machine)
• Don’t worry about separating darks from lights, that’s a completely mythical rule with zero basis in reality, other than that weird pair of unripe-plum-colored “Thai fisher pants” that my wife bought once that turned everything pink
• Line dry all your bike clothes (except your socks), and yes, it’s okay to dry them in the sun if you want (I mean, think about it, it’s not like we only ride at night!)
• Wash your shorts right-side-out (to protect the chamois), but dry them inside-out (because it’s faster)
• For really fancy shorts like Rapha, hand-wash, and only in bottled water (just kidding—if you have any Rapha clothing,  donate it to the Goodwill and then go buy something less hipster-douche-y)

Dear MAMIL,

This isn’t a big deal or anything, but I’m kind of hung up on why we call so much apparel “Lycra” when it mostly isn’t. If I see “Lycra” on a clothing label at all, it’s usually a pretty small percentage. Can you shed any light on that?

Sean D, Austin, TX

Dear Sean,

Lycra is a brand name for a high-end version of elastane, aka spandex. A number of my cycling garments say “elastane” on the tag, and a few say “Lycra,” and none say “spandex.” (I reckon this is because “spandex” is associated with women’s apparel like swimwear, leotards, dancewear, and ‘80s aerobics wear.) Cycling shorts tend to consist of 20-35% elastane (or Lycra if they’re fancy) and 65-80% nylon. That’s enough Lycra/elastane to give enough stretch, but keeping the nylon content high makes shorts more durable. Jerseys, on the other hand, tend to be mostly (or entirely) polyester, which is a totally different material from elastane (polyester being polyethylene terephthalate, to be precise, vs. elastane which is a polyurethane-based elastomer). But we just call it all “Lycra” because that gets the point across, just like “Kleenex" and “Xerox” do.

In fact, it’s a good thing the term “Lycra” still predominates, because if we always said “elastane” then I’d be a Middle-Aged Man in Elastane, i.e., a “MAMIE,” which sounds like “someone who is maimed.” Though actually, considering how hard this sport is, that kind of fits…

Dear Mammal,

I still breastfeed my 18-month-old and refuse to apologize for it. In countries like Norway this isn’t even considered strange. Why do you suppose so many mothers in my community seem freaked out by this?

Joan L, Burlington, VT

Dear Joan,

I’m sorry, I think you’ve got me confused with another columnist. While I am a mammal (and admittedly prone to occasional mansplaining), I am not equipped to field your question about breastfeeding. I hope you’re able to find the right expert to help, as opposed to a MAMIL which is all I purport to be.

Dear MAMIL,

I’ve noticed that a lot of cycling clothing isn’t so sleek and form-fitting anymore, particularly mountain biking clothing that can be downright baggy. Why don’t more MAMILs sensibly wear that instead of continuing to wear Lycra kit that in many cases puts their extra “padding” on prominent display?

Rob S, Phoenix, AZ

Dear Rob,

At first blush this newer clothing, mainly used for mountain biking, seems like a fine idea, and in many cases totally is, but there are both practical and cultural impediments to replacing Lycra with modern, baggy bike clothing.

If a middle-aged cyclist is fairly new to the sport, isn’t worried about what cultural signals he is sending, and doesn’t need gear that’s high performance, baggywear (to coin a term) is totally fine with just a few minor caveats. One, the baggy mountain-biking shorts don’t always have a chamois, so either you wear traditional Lycra shorts underneath (which means spending more money) or you get a sore butt. Two, if this cyclist is skilled enough to hit really high speeds, the flapping of that jersey could get annoying (and eventually irritate the skin if worn as a single layer). Mountain biking is slower, which is why this clothing works at all. The final caveat is that the mountain biking jerseys often don’t have pockets. This is fine if you use a seat bag, or a Camelbak-style pack, or one of those crazy compartments that some modern bike frames have. But if you do long road rides, you’ll want pockets for your vest, your jacket, your food, etc.

Culturally, baggywear is designed around youth who think Lycra is for, well, MAMILs. When I was head coach of a high school mountain bike team, and leading the big kickoff meeting for prospective new riders, one of the questions I fielded from a new kid was, “Do we have to wear the Lycra?” My answer—that you can wear whatever you want in training, and whatever shorts you want in the races, but you have to wear the team jersey in races—really put this kid at ease, and in fact he went on to do most of the rides in a t-shirt and sweatpants. (This was before baggywear existed.) So, when I see an adult (e.g., a fellow coach) in the baggier stuff, my spidey-sense starts tingling and I wonder if it’s a case of arrested development. If I’m honest, this is probably just sour grapes because the other adult can pull it off better than I could. But if you go down this path, you should be aware that others, particularly youth, may think you’re trying to be cool, which is widely held to be a major gaff, especially when perpetrated by the middle-aged.

A final practical consideration applies if you are both a roadie and a mountain biker. If you want to wear the baggy stuff off-road, but wisely stick to Lycra on the road, you’re talking about doubling the size of your (expensive) wardrobe. My advice? Just stick with the old-school Lycra and own it.

Dear MAMIL,

It’s not like only men ride bikes. Is there any female equivalent for “MAMIL”?

Tina O, New York City

Dear Tina,

I’ve never heard one, and my light research hasn’t unearthed anything in widespread use. ChatGPT suggests MAFIL; Gemini asserts MAWIL and OWL (Older Woman in Lycra); and Copilot purports to have come across WILMA (Woman in Lycra, Middle Aged) and SOMAT  (Slightly Overweight Middle-Aged Totty) though it credits Single Track World magazine which it acknowledges is a very niche publication.

I’m not a fan of any of the above. Let’s see if we can get MAVIS to take off: Middle Aged Vixen in Spandex!

Dear MAMIL,

I once thought I could fight the “MAMIL” stigma by simply not wearing Lycra when cycling, but eventually I got over myself and starting wearing the proper gear. This started with just shorts and jersey but now I’ve discovered arm and leg warmers—what a game-changer! I don’t know why it took me so long to understand their value. Are there other types of cycling apparel I might be missing out on that actually help?

Paul M, San Francisco, CA

Dear Paul,

I eschewed the cycling vest for over thirty years, as I just didn’t see the point. What’s wrong with sleeves, right? Well, now I have seen the light. A cycling vest is a very close fit, which is doable because you don’t have the problem of bunching up around the armpits. The snug fit makes them warmer than a jacket and they don’t flap around at all. Plus, a vest can be made of a relatively stout fabric like Gore Windstopper (typically just on the front panels) and still scrunch up nice and compact in your pocket.

Another amazing accessory is the Lycra skullcap, such as Castelli’s “skully,” which looks like those weird caps astronauts wear under their space helmets. It’s just thin Lycra so it fits really well under a helmet, yet for some reason it does an amazing job keeping your head warm. I’m so fond of this skullcap, I think if it were chilly out and I couldn’t find it, I’d probably just not go.

Dear MAMIL,

A pal told me Castelli makes a product called a “light head thingy” and though I was sure he was pulling my leg, I checked and they actually do! My question is, who wears this thingy, and why?

Bart B, Chapel Hill, NC

Dear Bart,

Who wears it? That’s easy: Thing 1 and Thing 2! And why? Because Thing 1 and Thing 2! (Full disclosure: they actually don’t, which came as a big disappointment to me. Why did I think they did? Because The Cat in the Hat wears one! His happens to have a brim, but look at it: it’s clearly a light head thingy.)

Hey MAMIL,

Why are you people so annoying?

Anonymous, Irvine, CA

Dear Anonymous,

I think you meant to sign off, “Anonymous motorist.” If you were a cyclist, you probably wouldn’t find us annoying. But you live in Irvine, so you are clearly a motorist. Most non-cyclist motorists view the world though a very narrow perspective: that of somebody who is perennially frustrated while behind the wheel, but doesn’t know why. The reason, of course, is that you’re so often stuck in traffic, and instead of thinking, “I’m getting what I deserve,” you’re blaming your situation on others, like other motorists, and on traffic laws, and on red lights, and—especially—on cyclists. We drive you bonkers because we’re actually allowed to just ride right past you, gliding along merrily while you’re there fuming.

Oddly enough, I used to be just like you when in motorist mode. I would be driving my daughter across Berkeley to her ballet class, and running late, and feeling stuck, and just generally being terrorized by the imposed paralysis that is the condition of the urban motorist, and I would be tempted to start lashing out the way you do. In fact, for a brief, senseless moment I once started to criticize the city of Berkeley for all the streets I couldn’t take because they were blocked to cars and labeled “Bicycle Boulevard.” But then it hit me: Berkeley isn’t the problem; I’m the problem! I shouldn’t be driving a car, I should be on my bike! So from then on I made my kid bike to ballet class with me. It went splendidly because Berkeley, wisely deciding it had catered to motorists long enough, has designed its roads to be truly bike-friendly. Wait, don’t go yet! There’s an epilogue to this story: fast-forward a bunch of years, and my daughter is now a young adult and hasn’t bothered to get a driver license. She bikes everywhere, like her old man. Her middle-aged old man in Lycra.

A MAMIL is a syndicated journalist whose advice column, “Ask a MAMIL,” appears in over 0 blogs worldwide.

—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—~—
Email me here. For a complete index of albertnet posts, click here.