-
No, this is false. You’re just transposing the wanker-bike ethos to a lower economic strata. It’s more accurate to state that the sub-wanker bike is simply a FBNPNA with a little more character or playfulness applied to it. The sub-wanker will be of lower total value to many FBNPNA and will be used as much, but potentially with wider scope of purpose. This scope, this shoehorning in of function, is what produces idiosyncratic choices made in its conception. It might need to take the kids to school, so feature a rack for carrying sparkling Frozen backpacks. That same bike might also need to handle trails so will also have chunky tyres. It’s used and locked up and left, so will never be a wanker-bike, but the owner will lavish it with the parts they feel it deserves while remaining ‘covert’ and retaining function.
I suppose it exists somewhere between or even overlapping the wanker and the FBNPNA, but is rarely quite one or the other.
You are reading a single comment by @AlexD and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
AlexD
Qebrus
when people ask "what separates this from FBNPNA", i propose the difference is ideological
you see, the FBNPNA rider really likes riding their bike, they ride it everywhere, so much so they never feel it special to document,
the SWH poster tho? they hate riding their bike, but they really like taking a photo of it when it gets a new doohickey, or even just taken out the communal hallway