Wearing a helmet: protection or infantilization?

The debate is so intense… It seems thatIn Spain, helmets are mandatory. Outside of town. Not for a quick trip to the bakery – which will reassure those who cherish the tradition of cycling to the bakery – but rather for those euphemistically called "sport cyclists." In other words, the guys with toned legs who ride fast, for long periods, and often upright enough that the probability of hitting the ground is almost zero… until the day a wild boar, a car door, or their own ego decides the opposite.

By Jeff Tatard – Photo: Nico & JL

In short: Wearing a helmet: protection or infantilization? This is a question we thought belonged to the era of GoPro cameras mounted on helmets that weighed 5 or 600 grams, but apparently not. The editorial team of 3bikes We occasionally love topics that seem uncontroversial but are then cleverly manipulated to become controversial (it's one of our favorite intellectual exercises). So we dove in. And we asked for the opinions of two individuals who embody two different cycling styles, two eras, and two philosophies: Jean-Loup, the unchanging disciple of the wind in his hair, and Nico Meunier, the man who "fell to the side of the helmets" after a professional career that began in the early 2000s.

And then the debate started to liven up on its own.

Jean-Loup: the helmet, yes… but only when he wants to!

Jean-Loup is the guy who knew competitions of the 80sThose were the days when helmets were as ubiquitous as SPF 50 sunscreen: practically never. A different era. A different attitude towards risk. And above all, a hairstyle that even modern manufacturers of "aerodynamically optimized" ventilation systems can never replicate.

When asked why he often rides bareheaded, he answers us with adorable candor: “Previously I didn’t wear it often, mainly out of habit, a bad habit, I admit… Now, when I choose not to wear it, it’s for comfort… or in good weather… or in cold weather because I like my hat.”

He also adds: "For me, the helmet is very uncomfortable: it tends to tip forward and hit my glasses. I haven't had many that suited me."

Rural common sense in all its splendor.

For him, the helmet is not an enemy. Nor is it an ideological principle. It's a tool that one uses if one feels the need.

"Obviously it's a real safety feature, but I wouldn't want to see it become mandatory... It's up to each individual to wear it or not."

Whether in a group or in the city, he automatically puts it on « "For fear of getting shot"Alone, in the open countryside, he prefers "Beware of wild boars"We're not judging: everyone has their own priorities.

And above all, this sentence that sums up his state of mind: "I like this option to be able to choose."

For Jean-Loup, cycling is freedom.Freedom to go out, freedom of pace… and freedom of natural ventilation.

Nico: the helmet as an act of setting an example

At the opposite end of the hair spectrum, Nico Meunier.

Former pro, now a firm believer in helmets In all circumstances. He has known the years without, then the years with, then the years when the question is no longer even asked.

And for him, the turning point is crystal clear: "The arrival of the children and the exemplary behavior required of all participants has changed my view on wearing a helmet."

That, and the fact that modern helmets no longer look like half-melons made of compacted polystyrene. The technological argument is also making a strong comeback. : "With technological advancements, we no longer feel it."

For him, Making helmets mandatory in all circumstances would be excessive.He even agrees with Jean-Loup on the issue of bread – but In a group, discussion is not possible. : "Wearing a helmet during group training should be mandatory, both to set a good example and because of the risks associated with group practice."

And regarding the prevailing security atmosphere: "The approach may seem moralizing."

You can tell he's the guy who's ridden in the rain, against the wind, averaging 38 km/h in training, but who's never needed to be lectured.

Infantilization or responsibility?

Between these two visions lies the heart of the debate: Should we protect cyclists from themselves, or can we leave them responsible for their own safety?

Those who want to impose helmets everywhere say: "We are protecting lives."

Those who refuse the obligation respond: "We are also protecting freedoms."

In an ideal world, everyone would wear a helmet when it's appropriate.And no one would need legal coercion to understand that asphalt is hard and the skull is fragile. But in the real world, some find that Prevention sometimes veers into moralizingand others than Freedom sometimes borders on recklessness.

Jean-Loup doesn't want to be told what to do. Nico wants to set an example. Both operate, both exist. The two are consistent.

What if the real problem wasn't the helmet after all… but…we always try to resolve a debate through a decree which is deeply cultural

The Epilogue, without judge and without court

Helmet It is not just an object: it is a symbol. For some, it protects. For others, it constrains..

But what ultimately emerges is that Cycling remains a rare space of freedomA freedom of movement, of pace, of solitude or of...tage. And that we instinctively want to preserve it.

So yes, the helmet issue will remain a debate. And that's perfectly fine.

Because a debate is life.

And Cycling should always remain alive.

=> And if you want to avoid a €200 fine in Spain The rules for cycling in Spain

=> All articles Mag