I think a lot of it is psychology. I tell people at uni, young people, most of whom are aged 18 - 21, and a lot thinner than me about my my modest (8 miles each way)commute. They think I must be super fit, which is nonsense. I'm sure they'd all be fitter than me, It's just that I don't think cycling's hard.
There's a dependency on cars for transport, and a perception that cycling is difficult, a sport where you need to be committed to in order to be capable. That's true at the very top end, but with it comes this idea that you can't do certain cycling tasks without a certain bike (got to get my touring bike or I can't tour, downhill bike to go downhill). That's nonsense too. The experience is optimised on a specialised machine, but not impossible.
Compare where we are now with the average cyclist of the 50s, pretty much the golden age of club cycling in Britain. Most clubmen only had one bike, and it was a major investment. My old 1948 Clubman was £22 3s 8d when it was new according to Sheldon, providing you bought it as a singlespeed. The best gearing you could get for it - a four speed hub - was extra.
The average wage at the time was £4 12s 2 1/2d for a 47.5 hour week. If you bear in mind food as a third of that and the Clubman was not a really high end bike, you can see what a commitment owning a club bike was, and that it had to earn its keep.
So in short yes, we've gone soft.