In message , Mrs Redboots
writes

Paul Terry wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 3 Jul 2005:

Just as you can tell the criminals because they wear ear-rings and call
you "mate"?

What the smeg are you talking about?

I am referring to the fact that you made a loaded assumption about a
person on the slightest evidence (his accent).

How you can tell that he might have a good salary, own his own home,
send his kids to public school or whatever it is you mean by "middle
class", simply on the basis of an accent, I cannot tell.

In my book, this is tantamount to assuming that someone who is gay must
be promiscuous, that an Albanian is likely to be a criminal or that a
Christian is an extremely gullible person. One really should think
carefully before making unsubstantiated generalisations based on limited
personal experience.

The bottom line is that your comment was nothing like making a factual
observation such as saying that a person appears to be male, black or
well-dressed - it was simply pre-judging him on "accent".

Just as well, since you're being totally incomprehensible!

I am sorry that you don't understand. I enjoy your contributions to this
newsgroup, Annabel, but I don't like the idea of making assumptions
about people on the slightest of evidence, such as accent. Perhaps that
is your style, but it is not mine.

Anyway, I previously indicated that I would not continue this debate -
you have provoked me into doing so by your incomprehension. I would like
to think I have helped you understand the nature of prejudice (which is
rife in this land of ours) but that is now the end of my contributions
to this thread and I'm certainly not going to be drawn into a slanging
match. I'm sure you will wish to have the last word.

--
Paul Terry

On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 09:07:32 +0100, "Ian F."
wrote:

That doesn't alter the fact that I, a 55 year-old, am expected to jump up
and hand over my seat the minute some 17 year-old chav slapper gets on the
bus with a buggy the size of Peckham!

Can't you sit somewhere else in the first place?

The above reinforces my opinion that these "flexible areas" should be
used as standing space and never seating, incidentally.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:56:15 +0100, Mrs Redboots
wrote:

Bicycle (g, d & r)?



I purposefully left that out to avoid controversy, though it is
permitted off-peak in Hamburg, at driver's discretion (i.e. not on a
busy bus), and also as I recall in Amsterdam.

Of course, it is normally quicker to ride a bicycle than to transport
it by bus, so this facility is very rarely used even though it isn't
exactly secret. It would be useful if it was permitted over here for
the purpose of recovering a damaged or vandalised bicycle, however.

Neil

--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

"Neil Williams" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 1 Jul 2005 15:56:15 +0100, Mrs Redboots
wrote:

Bicycle (g, d & r)?



I purposefully left that out to avoid controversy, though it is
permitted off-peak in Hamburg, at driver's discretion (i.e. not on a
busy bus), and also as I recall in Amsterdam.

The buses on Oahu (The network is catchily called "TheBus") have a bike rack
capable of taking 2 bicycles fitted to the front of each bus.
http://www.thebus.org/ for details. Bit of a spiffy idea I thought at the
time I was there a couple of years ago...
--
Cheers, Steve.
Change from jealous to sad to reply.

Clive wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 4 Jul 2005:

In message , Mrs
Redboots writes
It was not I who referred to young mothers on buses as "chav
slappers", yet I notice you don't accuse the person who *did* of bias
and narrowness of mind.
Maybe it's because I based my ideas from one of experience as a bus
driver, whereas you have made a decision just based on an accent.

Do feel free to point out in what respect any such decision was
derogatory? This is what I am objecting to, the fact that you seem to
think that merely because I note a difference between people, as it
might be their gender or their skin tone or whether they are wearing a
T-shirt or a jacket, you seem to think that I think that one is better
than another. Well, I have news for you: I don't.

Violence in the home goes on at all levels of society, although I suspect
you to say "not in middle class families though, they are far to polite for
that sort of thing".

Whyever would I say that? I am well aware of the fact that domestic
violence goes on at all levels of society.

In any event, what has violence got to do with it? Unless I have quite
misunderstood, surely the word "slapper" refers to prostitution, not
violence?
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 23 May 2005

Paul Terry wrote to uk.transport.london on Mon, 4 Jul 2005:

In message , Mrs
Redboots writes

Paul Terry wrote to uk.transport.london on Sun, 3 Jul 2005:

Just as you can tell the criminals because they wear ear-rings and call
you "mate"?

What the smeg are you talking about?

I am referring to the fact that you made a loaded assumption about a
person on the slightest evidence (his accent).

How you can tell that he might have a good salary, own his own home,
send his kids to public school or whatever it is you mean by "middle
class", simply on the basis of an accent, I cannot tell.

Whatever do you mean? I mean nothing of the kind - can't think what
*you* mean by "middle class", but I make absolutely no assumptions like
that! I said he appeared to be middle class, based on his accent and
the way he interacted with his child. Accent and vocabulary are still
class indicators - but no "judgement" was given. Why is it more of a
judgement than to say someone is male?

In my book, this is tantamount to assuming that someone who is gay
must be promiscuous, that an Albanian is likely to be a criminal or that
a Christian is an extremely gullible person. One really should think
carefully before making unsubstantiated generalisations based on
limited personal experience.

Or that a woman with a baby buggy on a bus is liable to be a prostitute?

The bottom line is that your comment was nothing like making a factual
observation such as saying that a person appears to be male, black or
well-dressed - it was simply pre-judging him on "accent".

Not at all. No prejudice involved, I assure you! I make no value
judgment at all - it was, I can assure you, merely an observation to
counter the observation that someone else made that people with babies
in buggies on buses (splendid alliteration there!) are apt to be "chav
slappers" - which is far more of a value judgement, in my opinion.

Just as well, since you're being totally incomprehensible!

I am sorry that you don't understand. I enjoy your contributions to this
newsgroup, Annabel, but I don't like the idea of making assumptions
about people on the slightest of evidence, such as accent. Perhaps that
is your style, but it is not mine.

What assumptions? I think you are making assumptions about what I am
assuming!
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 23 May 2005

In message , Mrs Redboots
writes

I think you are making assumptions about what I am assuming!

Taken to email.

--
Paul Terry