Things that piss you off that shouldn't

[Sam-AVFC]

6 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Easy, I'm working, waiting for reports to run. 

I posted a comment which I knew pissed me off that shouldnt which the name of the topic and thought nothing about it. 

It's neither petty or shitty opinion but the point of the comment and thread can be seen as something I shouldnt get worked up about.  It doesnt necessarily mean that the thing you are getting pissed off about is petty or shitty opinion. 

My view is not shitty or petty it's a very valid opinion that some are getting preferential treatment not because they cant help something like disability but because they choose to have children. 

The reason I'm still here debating is that waiting for things to run i have minutes and nothing seems to be going on in the on-topic area and I keep getting notifications of responses so I come back and comment.  I've almost finished my work so I'll be offline soon anyway but the way this topic divides people is interesting because the topic does divide people to be on either side of the argument.

[Sam-AVFC]

6 minutes ago, sidcow said:

Most of the time I park as far away from the shops as I can anyway just to avoid all the carnage.  Half the time I drive straight into a space, start walking to the shop and get there whilst the lazy arse who was in front of me is still sat there stressing waiting for a car to reverse out of the only front line space that's due to be vacated. 

Same. I don't get why you wouldn't unless you have mobility issues.

[Rds1983]

45 minutes ago, sidcow said:

This has put me in mind of something that really pisses me off.  The design of car parks. 

They generally pack in as many spaces as possible with zero planning for getting the people from their cars to the stores. Your just left to dodge the traffic taking your life in your hands whilst pillocks drive around oblivious to the fact that people might actually be around them. 

But mostly that the main thoroughfare is generly right in front of the store/stores.  They funnel every vehicle to the busiest point right in front of the shops.  Why not have the loop ends near the shops and funnel the cars to the far side of the car park? 

Some supermarkets it's almost impossible to get from the car park to the shop because of the numbers of cars flowing past the main doors. 

Shirley retail park is another example.  The main route in and out is right by the shop front.  You have to play chicken to actually get to the shops whilst the far end of the car park is like a desert. 

This is a large part of what I was arguing above. There aren't safe walking spaces in car parks for adults let alone for little kids. If they put pavements in between the parking bay's so that people could walk safely then yeah, perhaps parent /child could be further away. But it won't happen as it eats into the number of cars that can park. 

I've lost count of the number of times people have driven at me when I'm half was across the zebra crossing on my way into the store. 

Another tick in the box for those that argue for online grocery shopping. 

[nick76]

7 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

You are being selfish

Nope

7 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

I don't see you arguing that people in wheelchairs shouldn't be allowed in supermarkets because they're too wide in the aisles, or complaining they get too much space at the football.

Read my arguments, the difference is choice as I've already explained.  You dont choose to be disabled but you choose to have a child.  If you make that choice, you at times will be limited or hindered in certain situations.  Why should I who decides not to have a child be hindered by your choice?  I shouldn't.  You're the one being selfish.  I have asked for no special treatment and expect us all to be treated the same (except for disabled that should get it).  You are the one expecting Parent/Child spots, expecting them them to be close to the shop and I'm saying why should you get that because you made the choice not me.  You could easily park at the other end of the car park and get all the space you need, why do I have to adjust to accommodate you and your decisions? 

You (or parents I mean) are being the selfish one not me, I'm just expecting all to have the same treatment, you are the one expecting special treatment.

12 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Personally I'd never park in the disabled or parents bays, but it's never even crossed my mind that those extra few metres I walk should be boiling my piss.

The point is why you should have to?  Easy to do I agree. I've flown hundreds of times to various places in the world on short and long flights and it doesnt bother me that parents/child get preferential treatment of seats and things related to that.  I've not complained about kids screaming all night on a long haul flight to Sydney (thankfully we stop half way) even though I have to go straight into work when I land for business meetings.  Do I think it's fair they get those preferential treatments....no of course not but it's life.  I'm a tall bloke so that extra leg room would be helpful but fortunately I travel a lot more business class these days so it doesnt affect me anymore but in my early business days it did when I was in economy class and some family had the front seats with all the extra leg room they didnt need (excluding baskets for newborns).  It just seems that we are now accommodating parents with child go to shops now in preference to anybody else for silly reasons.  What next do we have spots for fat people because it's harder to get out of cars for them, for people with SUV's because they have bigger cars, people that wear glasses because they have to change between driving and wearing glasses.....where does it stop.

[nick76]

11 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

Yeah but it's not petty when all the parking spots are gone in a small car park and the only ones left are the parent/child spots like I had a few weeks back.

[Sam-AVFC]

Just now, nick76 said:

You're the one being selfish.

Am I? What's selfish about me not caring about parking further away?

I have a friend who was brought up by their aunt after their parents died young. She didn't choose to have kids. Guess she could have stuck them in care.

I know people who are disabled from accidents sustained during extreme sports. Did they 'choose' to become disabled?

You're oversimplifying it and saying there should be a blanket ban based on your own anger about having to walk an extra few metres. That is selfish.

[nick76]

8 minutes ago, Rds1983 said:

This is a large part of what I was arguing above. There aren't safe walking spaces in car parks for adults let alone for little kids. If they put pavements in between the parking bay's so that people could walk safely then yeah, perhaps parent /child could be further away. But it won't happen as it eats into the number of cars that can park. 

I've lost count of the number of times people have driven at me when I'm half was across the zebra crossing on my way into the store. 

Another tick in the box for those that argue for online grocery shopping. 

See we can agree on something here (even though it was sidcow who posted it)

[nick76]

Just now, Sam-AVFC said:

Am I? What's selfish about me not caring about parking further away?

I meant the parents view (The "you" was the parent inference....apologies that's what i meant)

1 minute ago, Sam-AVFC said:

I have a friend who was brought up by their aunt after their parents died young. She didn't choose to have kids. Guess she could have stuck them in care.

ok you pick an example but on the whole I assume 95%+ are parent choosing to have kids.  Of course there are some that havent chosen to have kids like your example and other example but on the whole it's adults choosing or accidently having kids.

3 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

I know people who are disabled from accidents sustained during extreme sports. Did they 'choose' to become disabled?

I've already said I have no issue with disabled.  You cant compare somebody being in an accident to having a baby.  You have three choices re a baby....choose to have one, if you dont choose but fall pregnant then you can have an abortion, or you choose to adopt out your child...........(this has got really weird - didnt think the distinction of understanding the difference between being disabled or choosing to have a baby would be an issue)...somebody being disable isnt a choice whether born with it or you incur an injury/disease later in life.  If via extreme sports the only choice you made was do the extreme sport, you didnt chose to be disabled then.  The comparison there is that in an extreme sport if you do get injured you dont have a choice to be disable or not that choice is taken away.  If you have sex and you fall pregnant then you have a choice to have the baby or not have the baby.  So scenario is valid comparison.

8 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

You're oversimplifying it and saying there should be a blanket ban based on your own anger about having to walk an extra few metres. That is selfish.

 Nope.  I'm saying why should somebody get special treatment because of the choices they made.  I'm advocating that we should all be treated the same.  Disabled parking yes, all the rest is regular parking based on first come, first served.  Having Parent/Child spots is preferential treatment, expecting the rest of society to be impacted (However little) to accommodate your personal choices in life.

[nick76]

Anyway people I am out of this conversation now, I've finished my work.  I'm glad I've convinced you all to my way of thinking, I am a great thought leader sometimes.

Seriously, I know some of you disagree with me, my brother does even though he abuses the parking system by parking when he doesnt have his kids.  I think it's preferential treatment, you guys think I'm a dick, I think you are being selfish, you think I'm being selfish.  We are never going to agree and parking systems are moving towards more what you want anyway and the likes of Tesco are putting on parking fines so I've lost anyway. 

So my view means nothing and it was a good debate with some of you.  I take nothing away from this about you guys and I hope you dont think of me differently apart from you think I'm a prick on this subject, I do have some good other traits that you would like.  Let's get back to talking about Villa

Enjoy your day.  UTV

[Sam-AVFC]

My point was the person who brings up their siblings kids didn't choose to have children any more than the guy who chose to do a dangerous base jump which ended in an accident chose to have a disability.

I thought it was pretty clear the point was you can't make assumptions about anyone in these circumstances. That leaves you with 2 choices - disadvantage everyone for 'fairness' or start a car park division of the police.

[sidcow]

1 hour ago, sharkyvilla said:

Unnecessarily complicated roundabouts.  The ones with lanes that seem to go all over the place and have 3 sets of traffic lights in, it's bad enough even if it's somewhere you live and kind of get used to it but in a place I've never driven before I've got no chance.  

When travelling to my parents in laws house we have to use m42 Junction 9, Dunton Island.  The same one you would use to get to The Belfy or Bodymoor Heath. 

It's a nightmarish island.  Everytime I use it even after all these years I think how much I would hate to try and negotiate it if I was unfamiliar with it.  In fact even now I would probably struggle if I was taking a different route off it. 

I also wonder how the heck self driving cars are going to deal with some of these complications Islands and junctions, the computing technology must be mind blowing. 

[nick76]

9 minutes ago, Sam-AVFC said:

My point was the person who brings up their siblings kids didn't choose to have children any more than the guy who chose to do a dangerous base jump which ended in an accident chose to have a disability.

My point in return was that I agreed with your very point as I said, but then I went on to say 95% of children are brought up by their parents or somebody who choosing to adopt kids.  Even if that stat is slightly wrong you are talking amount a small percentage of cases rather than the majority of society.  The majority of people as parents going to shops with children they choose to have in whatever form that it.  Yes you then have people that havent chosen like your example but that isnt the majority or anywhere near.

Right I'm definitely gone now, I'm five minutes late.

Edited July 10, 2021 by nick76

[Rds1983]

11 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Anyway people I am out of this conversation now, I've finished my work.  I'm glad I've convinced you all to my way of thinking, I am a great thought leader sometimes.

Seriously, I know some of you disagree with me, my brother does even though he abuses the parking system by parking when he doesnt have his kids.  I think it's preferential treatment, you guys think I'm a dick, I think you are being selfish, you think I'm being selfish.  We are never going to agree and parking systems are moving towards more what you want anyway and the likes of Tesco are putting on parking fines so I've lost anyway. 

So my view means nothing and it was a good debate with some of you.  I take nothing away from this about you guys and I hope you dont think of me differently apart from you think I'm a prick on this subject, I do have some good other traits that you would like.  Let's get back to talking about Villa

Enjoy your day.  UTV

Don't worry I've always thought you were a prick. 

It is what it is mate, nobody ever agrees on all things with all people and discussing different opinions is the only way to potentially grow as a person. 

[bickster]

Protect the children, their taxes will pay your pension

[mjmooney]

1 hour ago, nick76 said:

@mjmooneyyou laughed against this comment, am I wrong though?  Am I being "me, me, me" or am I saying everybody should be treated the same whereas yourself you guys are arguing the selfish part that parents i assume like yourself should get preferential treatment?  that seems like the jist of your argument and trying to justify it by control of kids and such things.  It's hard to argue that I'm being selfish when I'm not asking for preferential treatment, I'm just asking for the same treatment as everybody else whereas you guys are saying that parents with kids should be getting preferential treatment.  I mean what other splits do you think people should have....

Quite a lot actually - I'm less bothered about 'equality' than 'reasonableness'. You seem to have a real bee in your bonnet about people who have children making your life a tiny bit less convenient. Well boo hoo. Sure, they chose to have children, and you chose (I assume) not to. So far, at any rate. I don't know your age or circumstances, so that may yet change. But, talk about first world problems... you have to park a little further away from the supermarket. My heart **** ing bleeds. 

This "I'm just in favour of equality" line is just disingenuous. Hence my remark about Tory attitudes, and your riposte that the Tories have won more elections. Well that doesn't make it OK in my eyes. Unlike Margaret Thatcher, I know there is such a thing as society. I'll bet you think it's 'unfair' that the rich get taxed at a higher rate than the poor, don't you? Not 'equal treatment'. Well, good. 

We're not even talking about Daily Mail-style "Underclass chavs with ten kids sponge off the state" stuff, here, we're talking about supermarket parking, FFS! It had literally never occurred to me that it's an issue (even before I had kids). Because it really isn't. 

As for these selfish shits who choose to have families, if your parents hadn't done that you wouldn't be here to whinge like a spoilt crybaby in the first place. 

Still, I suppose the thread is 'Things That Piss You Off, But Shouldn't'. How apt. 

 

[HanoiVillan]

I always think there's a difference between 'drivers', who are people who own a car and use it to go from place to place, and 'motorists', for whom having a car is part of their identity, something that *aligns their interests* with other people driving cars, and who therefore care passionately about the rules affecting people driving cars. It's of a piece with the LTN debate in that way; some people just drive their car, and if there's an LTN they just go a different route, and if you asked them they would probably understand why you might want quiet streets not rat runs for families with kids etc. Other people get furious about the restrictions on their liberty, maybe even politically organise to get rid of the burdensome restrictions.

This thread has seen a very strong example of 'motorist thinking' IMO.

[chrisp65]

As a general rule in life, the people that argue for ‘that sort of equality’, don’t really want equality at all, they’re just scared someone else could be benefitting and therefore they must be suffering some perceived loss. 

They’re generally horrible self centred nihilistic arseholes.

Nobody on here, obviously. That would be post on poster.

More a general comment about the self centred arseholes out there. Weighing up their place in the supermarket car park pecking order and not liking what they see. They don’t really want equality, the slightest expansion of the conversation and they always want their list of priorities, not the list of priorities that doesn’t suit them. They want their version of equality, that puts their priorities higher up the list.

 

[mjmooney]

1 minute ago, chrisp65 said:

As a general rule in life, the people that argue for ‘that sort of equality’, don’t really want equality at all, they’re just scared someone else could be benefitting and therefore they must be suffering some perceived loss. 

They’re generally horrible self centred nihilistic arseholes.

Nobody on here, obviously. That would be post on poster.

More a general comment about the self centred arseholes out there. Weighing up their place in the supermarket car park pecking order and not liking what they see. They don’t really want equality, the slightest expansion of the conversation and they always want their list of priorities, not the list of priorities that doesn’t suit them. They want their version of equality, that puts their priorities higher up the list.

 

Thank you, you put it better than me. 

[nick76]

I made the initial comment, you were the one that decided to respond to me

10 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

I'm less bothered about 'equality' than 'reasonableness'.

Well I dont think it's reasonable for somebody to get favouritism over me because of a choice they made that has little relevance to the shop I'm going.   If it was a place that was for parent and kids then sure, that's fine but it's not reasonable for a place that caters for all to favour some over others. 

12 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

This "I'm just in favour of equality" line is just disingenuous.

because you dont agree, but doesnt mean you are right

13 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

I'll bet you think it's 'unfair' that the rich get taxed at a higher rate than the poor, don't you? Not 'equal treatment'. Well, good. 

No I dont, I'm happy to pay to society. I have paid many many times over the national average of tax down the years and I'm happy to pay it but I am sick of high earning individuals getting beat up all the time because we pay more than our fair share of taxes which benefits society but we get tarnished with the same brush as those 1% people who avoid paying tax by whatever means and companies that do the same.  I pay my tax and understand the benefits it has to society, just because you maybe more left wing leaning doesnt me I'm a bad person.  I pay my taxes and I understand.  It's like me arguing about all the benefits people get that dont deserve them like real job dodgers or faking disabilities to get benefits and hinting towards the left wing.  You and I are probably just slightly the opposite sides of the political spectrum and thus shouldn't throw extreme versions of those sides in our faces.

20 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

We're not even talking about Daily Mail-style "Underclass chavs with ten kids sponge off the state" stuff, here, we're talking about supermarket parking, FFS! It had literally never occurred to me that it's an issue (even before I had kids). Because it really isn't.

It wasnt a major issue, look at the title.  I made a comment that it's something that pisses me off that shouldnt and you and a couple of others have argued with me and then it became a bigger discussion.

21 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

As for these selfish shits who choose to have families, if your parents hadn't done that you wouldn't be here to whinge like a spoilt crybaby in the first place. 

So what! If I wasnt here I wouldnt be here...great point there!  Crybaby? I wouldnt have brought it if it wasnt for the thread, it's not as if I've talked about this elsewhere apart from my brother and I discussing it.  I brought it up because nothing was going in the on-topic thread and I came over here and it was just something on the tv last night that I had disagreed about before with that women is pro-parent/child parking spots. You guys have made it the big deal and crying because somebody doesnt agree with your desire for preferential treatment because you decided to have kids.

25 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Still, I suppose the thread is 'Things That Piss You Off, But Shouldn't'. How apt.

At least you can put down now my name that Things that Piss you Off But Shouldnt.  

"How apt"  That's the point of the thread!  It irritates me but I should ignore it...but some things just piss you off and preferential treatment without earning it or doing something by choice does!

So you dont agree with my view, you guys have made it a bigger deal than my original post!  Crying over somebody not agreeing with you

[Seat68]

Well I have to say it seems parent and child parking is text book what pisses you off that shouldn’t.