Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Perhaps the old paths are just not able to accommodate the uber buggies of today. A solution could be the upgrading ie widening of existing foot and cyclepaths providing a wider, firm, stable surface. It will give good access throughout the year for light-wheeled vehicles such as buggies, wheelchairs and cycles, and for walkers, young children and frail and/or elderly - sans mud. However, like most things, it will come at a cost ie reduction of grassed area. But then again, that probably won't stop people misbehaving, buggy fascism and kamikaze bell ringing cyclists so it won't solve anything. Ho hum.

Really these threads boil down to "some people with [_______] are inconsiderate arseholes"


The blank can be filled with buggies, children, bikes, cameras, bus passengers, cars, cigarettes, class x, red hair, baseball caps, funny accents, white skin, black skin etc etc


The target is a red herring, it's irrelevant, some poeple are nice and some arent, all these threads do is reveal the prejudices of the complainant.

Stacey-lyn, why on earth should the council, and us via our taxes, pay for widening of paths when good old-fashioned manners, which are free, is the solution to the problem? On most pavements, a pedestrian with or without a buggy can pass another pedestrian, with or without a buggy, with no problems if they go single file. But some people think that their conversation is far more important than anything else, and force others to dodge and weave around them.

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Really these threads boil down to "some people

> with [_______] are inconsiderate arseholes"

>

> The blank can be filled with buggies, children,

> bikes, cameras, bus passengers, cars, cigarettes,

> class x, red hair, baseball caps, funny accents,

> white skin, black skin etc etc


Totally agree. Not sure there is much that can be done about it though.


> The target is a red herring, it's irrelevant, some

> poeple are nice and some arent, all these threads

> do is reveal the prejudices of the complainant.


Not so sure about this bit - what do you mean, "prejudices of the complainant"? I just thought it was a place to have a bit of a rant in the faint hope that the offenders might see it and change their behaviour (unlikley).

Bikes with a means of warning people ahead I am very impressed! This is indeed rare.


GinaG3 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> This really gets me whoever it is. Same goes with

> adult cyclists on the pavement constantly ringing

> their bell to get you to move out of their way. A

> few weeks ago I was forced into a very wet muddy

> patch by a large group of runners wanting to stay

> out of the mud themselves. Now wished I just stood

> right there and forced them to go round me

> instead. No-one ever says thank you in these

> situations.

El Pibe Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Really these threads boil down to "some people

> with [_______] are inconsiderate arseholes"

>

> The blank can be filled with buggies, children,

> bikes, cameras, bus passengers, cars, cigarettes,

> class x, red hair, baseball caps, funny accents,

> white skin, black skin etc etc

>

> The target is a red herring, it's irrelevant, some

> poeple are nice and some arent, all these threads

> do is reveal the prejudices of the complainant.



So I have a prejudice because someone was ignorant and refused to allow some space for me to use the path? Why has everything got to have am agenda? I just wanted to use the footpath! I agree that some people are inconsiderate, and it does boil down to the same thing, but to point the finger of blame at the person being afflicted isn't helpful. It just needs a change of tact from the people with not a shred of consideration for others, then we are all happy!


Louisa.

the-e-dealer Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Sorry if this is obvious but surely can't you just

> say excuse me? Then they move you pass and

> everyone is happy?


It sounds obvious, but in reality it isn't always the best move. On this occasion, I was visible, I didn't say excuse me because I didn't want to make a fuss (at first) but she then tuts at me as I walk around them, she started the confrontation despite being in the wrong in the first place. This is what got my back up. Then when she is verbally confronted, she seems unable to comprehend why.


Louisa.

You trade manners and consideration for a buggy, nothing else matters except that buggies and unruly toddlers have the right to run and do whatever they want, their adoring parents looking on, whilst carrying shopping home a small gremlin ran into me from behind and the "mother" shouted at me to "mind out for my child, you should watch where your going", hope she s as lucky telling that to a car, look out for your own spawn.

Louisa - you didn't say 'excuse me'. Then you're upset that all 'buggy' users aren't constantly aware of every other pedestrian out there.


How long did they completely roadblock the path? 5 mins? 20mins? Are they still there?


You do not "trade manners and consideration for a buggy", you either have them to begin with or not.

Many times I have gotten off a bus and walked because people more needy needed the space (not just wheelchair users either). Some people with buggys just blankly ignore them.


And all this 'JoJo' talk really annoys me. Just because you have a buggy and stand around in a park for a few minutes chatting doesn't set you in a certain demographic. Anyone who is a mother knows how hard a job it is and it really bugs me people painting it as some sort of holiday.


How about we stop abusing mothers with children and actually cut them some slack.

Children, especially toddlers are hard to control in a park environment and it's not unusual for them to be running a muck. We're not living in Victorian England.


If the women hadn't had buggies would you still be annoyed? I'm thinking you wouldn't have made it such an issue.

Just like all sorts of people, with our without children, some are nice and some aren't.


Some people say 'excuse me' and allow you to move out of their way, some people don't, and then go for a rant on here instead.

if the OP had said two black people, she may well have simply been adding some factual detail but most readers would be within their rights to infer that maybe it was the fact they were black rather than the blocking of the path that was the real issue.


Of course Louisa didn't she's lovely.


She does however have a long history of class issues and resentment of gentrification and it seems reasonable to assume it was the people, as represented by the buggies and Jo Jo Maman shopping habits, rather than the actual blocking that was the real issue.


If it had been a couple of pearly queens with push chairs rather than buggies who were so engrossed in a comparative discussion of where to source the best jellied eels, that they failed to notice her, I doubt Louisa would have felt so inclined to rant about a spectacularly minor inconvenience on a public forum ;)


For susiq the above times eleventy five


This theory extrapolates to most peoples rants on here.

In my case anything Tony Blair did I went ape about, not because of the specifics of his policies but because all I saw was a self-serving hypocritical lying murdering bastard....*breathe*.

Clare11 Wrote:

Anyone who is a mother

> knows how hard a job it is and it really bugs me

> people painting it as some sort of holiday.

How about we stop abusing mothers with children and actually cut them some slack.

Children, especially toddlers are hard to control in a park environment and it's not unusual for

> them to be running a muck.

X x x x x x x x x x

Above post says it all really & proves OP post - the parents chose to have the kids, their free choice. More than enough "slack" is cut re state benefits, time off work, adult bars catering for kids e.g playgrounds in beer gardens etc. The list is endless. Try controlling the kids rather than letting them run riot. Maybe Jo the Nanny from that how to be a parent programme is needed more than Jojo Mama Bebe. Bad mannerd parents = bad mannerd kids.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • As a result of the Horizon scandal it now seems very clear that the Post Office management are highly disingenuous and not be trusted!  There needs to be a campaign launched to challenge the threatened closure, unless the Post Office can demonstrate beyond doubt that the branch is loss making - and even then it could argued that better management could address this. I hope the local media take this up and our MP  and a few demonstrations outside wouldn’t do any harm. Bad publicity can be very effective!         
    • Unlikely. It would take a little more than a bit of Milton to alter the pH of eighty-odd thousand gallons of water.
    • It actually feels as though what I said is being analytically analysed word by word, almost letter by better. I really don't believe that I should have to explain myself to the level it seems someone wants me to. Clearly someones been watching way too much Big Brother. 
    • Sadly they don't do the full range of post office services
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...