More perverse PC getting away with it's idiocy
 

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/e...rd/7204543.stm

I don't care what people do in their bedrooms, but I would feel uncomfortable and irritated and would take it as an attack against my as well as public sense of reverence (Pietät) if needing to sit in a bus beside such idiots. I would also refuse to accept having to sit in a bus beside a naked couple. that the company is apologizing and evades into arguments about safety instead of telling them they are behaving like a$$holes and are an offense to the public, is cowardish, perverse, and another sign how far culture in the widest sense already has detoriated.

It's a simple thing of behavior, nothing else.

Oi!

what your doing now is STEEDS job , skybird;)

hehe, having red the article in a rush, I would say...what a crazy bunch..
pardon me, but there is something like pulbic appearance, act normal..what you do behind doors is fine with me, but keep it private.
and indeed the company shouldnt have apologized.

HunterICX

Steady on chaps. Someone having a stressful day perhaps? ;)

Much to do about nothing in my view. Now, is there any real news about that we can get our knickers in a twist over? Oh the outrage. Yawn. :roll:

I wonder if she pees on lamp posts?



Sounds like a real swell guy :roll:

Of course by 'swell guy' I mean 'tosser'

Ditto here.

Nice puppies :cool:


Would the bus company also tell its patrons to fk off if they had mohawk hairstyles?

I don't see the problem myself. What were they doing that was so 'dangerous' to public safety?
Jobsworth busdriver imo. The number of nutjobs I've seen on busses who're behaving in a loud and violent manner and the bus driver doesn't batt an eyelid... but these two for being a bit 'different'?

It takes all sorts in this world, and based solely on appearence, mr jobsworth busdriver has no right to discriminate between who gets to travel on PUBLIC TRANSPORT.

The company argues not with public safety, but safety for the freaks themselves. See, the bus slams the brakes, the line gets caught somewhere, the girl, sorry: the pet falls down, and there goes the neck into pieces.

Well, I am dreaming.

The same could be said of non-freaks :roll: who have long dangly necklaces also, would it not? Yet you don't hear of 'little old lady with long necklace' being refused to get on the bus. What about people who wear scarves around their necks, or cravats for that matter?

This is all about these two standing out from the crowd, nothing more.
Were Arriva to be that safety concious then they ought to ban people with hand luggage from buses too; driver has to break hard, loose bags fly forwards and injure passengers...
It's laughable and the only reason bussie is being a jobsworth is probably because the staff got a lecture from the company H&S bod, telling them it would be 'more than their job's worth' if they did or did not do something that caused the company to be liable for costs or whatever.

Pure stupidity.

Agree totally. :yep: I myself have experienced Arriva stupidity first hand.

I once used an Arriva bus just outside London. It was raining heavily wen I was standing at the bus stop. I hailed the bus as is the procedure. He stopped. I got on and gave him a £5.00 note as I had zero change. For the record the fare was around £2.00. He grumbled and said that he doesn't have the change and that I would have to get off the bus. I replied, "Are you kidding me! It's a five pound note. It's not like I'm giving you a twenty or even worse fifty pound note." He said get off. I promptly refused by parking my bum down on a seat while saying, "Radio your depot because I am not getting off this bus." He cursed at me before finally closing the bus door and getting underway a couple of minutes later.

So you could say that I am not a big fan of some Arriva bus drivers. :nope:

If a lapel badge is a catastrophe waiting to happen...

If made of solid iron that would not break, yes. But you miss the point. Instead of making an apology on that basis (security concerns), they should not apologize at all, but invite them to come over for an additonal spanking - for disgusting behavior that is an offense to public standards. i also do not want little children to see this nonsens. Or walking naked in public. I also would complain about people putting their dirty shoes on the seats. Some years a I was aboard a train to Mannheim, when a young man entered our compartement, sprawled himself over the bank, put his feet and shoes on the armrest close to me - and wondered why I balked at him to stop that. He shook his head, and continued, closing his eyes as if sleeping. Next thing that happened was that I threw him out, which really made him awake again. Half an hour later - I assume he made more troubles somehwerre else - he was led out by the ticket collector and two policemen. Right so. :yep:

we are talking about minimal standards of behavior here - MINIMAL standards of behavior.

And this: Sorry, that is sick, simply this, a clear index for deeply troubled minds and a pathologic neurosis on display.

Have you ever considered that it may be you missing the point. You're starting to sound like the thought police here on this one. I mean geez louise Sky. You talk as if they have committed an act of public indecency. Firstly they were adequately dressed (ie. not exposing themselves) and most importantly they broke no law of this country. I suppose hippies with long dreadlocks that stink of incense are bad too and don't meet your minimal standards.

Quite frankly I think that you are jumping up and down on your soap box over nothing. I'm more concerned with anti-social behaviour on our streets such as foul abusive language, teenagers carrying knives and firearms, and the like rather than a couple of Goths wearing black leathers and chains. Didn't you live through the punk scene in the 1980's?

That is Really perverse to discribe his girlfriend as a pet

Takes all sorts to make a world, denouncing them as freaks is, IMHO, a little harsh.


Besides, as anyone stopped to read the bit where it says that it's HER that wants to be treated as a pet, not him forcing her to behave like one. Anyway, one of our cats used to have a collar which would automatically break if he put too much stress on it to prevent him hanging himself, perhaps a similar agreement could be sort.

Not my cup of tea this one, see my thread for a good rant. :D

BTW, any bus company has the right to kick you off the bus for X,Y & Z reasons. I was kicked off for having too much small change (1p's 2p's 5p's) which was the correct amount but the driver would not count it and blamed me for holding him up. If you stand a yard from the bus stop they will drive by and so on.

Depends on the driver, some are good, some are right arseholes. I've had a good insight into the bus industry, my father is a bus driver, and you do get some right sods.

Yes, and in Berlin. And guess what - I am not too tolerant to that, too. If they nevertheless behave, okay, let's see how it works. But leading people around like dogs - well, next is some rubber fetishists in half-naked outfit parading on the street. - Gee, I forgot, we already have that: Christopher Street Day.

And you know what? I am intolerant on that one, too.

One cannot criticise the fall of values and social behavior - and tolerate practicing of it nevertheless.

and most decisive for me personally is this, what I already said at the beginning: I would feel irritated, a bit helpless maybe, offended, and even attacked in my sense of shame, when needing to see such people like in that article and sit beside them in a bus. And that is what social standards, amongst others, are there for: to protect against the direct, confronting violation of taboos and sense of shame in public. at home, they even can eat dogfood if they want, i do not care. but if I am forced to witness them doing that, the fun comes to an end.

Boy oh boy, what is wriong these days, that every BS and every freak and every misbehavior must be tolerated and dealt with as if nothing is wrong, and all is okay, and if you are not willing to do that, you are accused to be an intolerant, reactionary burgeois.

In germany, three or four weeks ago an old man was almost killed by a Greek and a Turkish juvenile while teling them not to smoke in the subway. after he left the train, they jumped onto him, kicked woith full power in his neck and face, and he suffered multiple skull fractions and got almost killed. Nevertheless, an editor of a major newspaper here "Die Zeit", wrote an essay that such violance gets provoked by german "Spießbürgerlichkeit", and that a buregois like that that old man would maybe get away healthy if they would not be so tunnel-minded and accept that rules and laws get violated (smoking in trains is forbidden here). the editor caused an avaöanche of aggressive angry responses to his follies, even hateful post, but he even kicked a second time, saying that it is a sign of intolerance in Germany if the criminal statistic (saying that around one half of the crimes of juveniles are committed by juveniles from foreigner's families, and the other half by german offsprings) is being discussed as interpreted as that foreign juveniles commit significantly more crimes than German juveniles. That is Pc in action - if foreigners really would not commit more crimes than Germans, in crime statistiscs they should have a drastcially lower score. but if their score is as high as that of German, although there are mutliple times as many Germans living here than foreiogners, than this means that the crime rate is multiple times as high amongst foreigners, than it is amongst Germans. solution in order not to be burgois: ignore it, and remain silent about it as if nothing is happening.

Sorry guys, not with me. I am totally pissed with this kind of unreasonably tolerance, becasue I see how it is raping the culture I live in, and makes mockery of everything that our cultural developement over past centuries has brought to shine. That is true with regard to those wannabe-killers in the subway. That is true for almost naked men bragging with their sexual orientation on public parade, and that is true for a couple walking around and provoking their social environment without any consideration like the two in this article.

Oh seriously, what kind of issue is this? By that logic me carrying my sturdy laptop bag could be dangerous for passengers on the bus! Let's ban bags, they're dangerous to people! Let's ban bread, too, people could choke on it.

Sure, these guys are pretty weird. But that's not up to the bus company to worry about. I don't think their particular dress code or philosophy of life really threatens anyone.

I would say it's PC on your part Skybird - terribly PC of you to feel offended by a subcultural tendency that's way left of field.

I can see where your coming from Sky, and in the case of those idiots in the subway tunnel yes, I agree with you, it's certainly stupid to blame the man for telling them not to smoke, and making it his fault that he got near beaten to death. However, I cannot draw the similarities between that case and this. Surely, if this was the case then we would be saying that the incident at Heathrow I think it was a few months back when a lady was banned from wearing a cross, was a valid thing because she was provoking her environment, likewise, the three little pigs story in the thread below this (or above it) could be accused of provoking its environment. I'm not saying your point of view is wrong, as each and every person is entitled to one, I'm just not able to agree with it in this instance. Social violence is one thing, but social expression is another in my opinion.

But a social community that does not agree on rules anymore, and knows no limits in what it tolerates and what not - breaks apart sooner or later. Becasue you define yourself not only by what you agree to be yourself - but also by saying clearly what you are not, and do not want to be maybe - and thus, rejecting it.and nthat is the problem of the modern time: that we consider it to be a virtue to tolerate EVERYTHING, just because it is there, and we consider a dull sentence spoken by a drunk man after having six beers to be a cultural statement, and precious personal opinion that equals argument and must be valued, a proof of individual originality that must be respected. But that goes beyond what our communities can bear. We are loosing our cultural identities, we even engage in actively refusing them, we splitter. that way we become more and more vulnerable to other stuff, cultures, people, ideas that before were off-limit to our dying culture - we become prey to the negatives that before were unacceptable. Of course i know that killing an old man in the subway does not equal the couple in the above article. and of course I know that juveniles livng a punk-style of life somtimes use it to express protest against what they see as the rules of the adults (more often they are just anarchic and lazy, let's face it, at least that'S what it was like with the berlin scene in Kreuzberg in the 80s). Nevertheless, both the subway incident and the couple in the bus are symptoms of one and the same process of cultural erosion, and destruction of our cultural identity.