To think men don't need to walk between a woman and the road and wonder where that idea came from?

[Damselindestress]

I saw this picture on Facebook. After staring for a while I eventually realised that they were saying he should be walking on the street side and that was confirmed in the comments but I don't know why that is considered correct etiquette. I've only heard of walking on the street side when walking with children so they don't run into the road, seems a bit patronising with an adult. I wondered if anyone could let me know where this idea comes from?

Slightly off-topic but, Rosie, what's the ascending and descending stair rule about?

Slightly off-topic but, Rosie, what's the ascending and descending stair rule about?

I don't know, but I would assume it's that you are below the vulnerable person in case of a fall.

I do this with all small children. I send them up first or down second so I am below them and if they fall I can catch them.

My parents had many, many faults. But one of the few good things they did instil was manners. I was brought up to walk on the outside. I always did it when out with my ex, my daughters and now with my grandson. Not patronising, but how I was raised. I hold doors for men and women. And would always let my ex into a seat first on a bus, more so she could have a window to look out of rather than anything else.
Sometimes people read too much into everday things.

Not patronising, but how I was raised.

Do you walk next to the road with other men?

I think it's nice. I also think it's nice when men hold a door for me or offer to carry bags etc

I think it's nice.

what I fear is that niceness comes at a cost. if what's being said is "you are vulnerable, you need help." then I am not sure everyone wants that because that thinking has other obviously bad implications.

I do it with my children, and my parents did it with me as a child.

I am thus highly offended when men do it to me as an adult. Being an adult means I am now trusted to walk where I find comfortable without needing to be protected from falling into the road or the possibility I might try to dash across the road without looking. I am not four years old any more.

There are no chamberpots and pushing me to the inside when I don't want to be is treating me like a child and incredibly rude. I said as much, too.

There are still puddles. And the risk of a car coming on to the pavement. I don't think they do it in case we fall/run into the road. (Unless someone has a health condition tha may make them collapse of course - as a PP mentioned)

redstrawberry, I don't automatically do it when I'm walking with any others than my ex, daughters and grandson. Why the need to ask that? I was raised to be polite. If I'm walking with a friend, male or female I may not do it. It's not a conscience thing as to whether 'oh, it's a bloke I walk on the...'

I have only ever heard of this in reference to dogs.

I think people are just contrary. If the OP had been a woman thinking a man should walk on the outside, everyone would think she was barmy.

To me it's more sexist to men as woman, woman being infantilised, men having it ingrained in them that their lives don't matter

I was raised to be polite.

I don't understand why it's considered polite, especially if it's so narrow and only applies to ex's, daughters and grandsons.

I note you've only responded to the bit about chamberpots. How interesting.

In that spirit, so, why, bumbleymummy, do I make sure my three-year-old goes on the inside on a sunny day then? Is it not for fear they'll fall under the traffic?

Why did my mother always keep me on the inside on a hot August day when I was five?

Automatically herding me around over the pavement to where an accompanying man thinks I should go is treating me exactly like a small child, except with less respect for my comfort than I was afforded as a child!

Oh, and I've had it happen in a 5mph city centre where any car trying to mount the pavement would have had to get through a line of parked cars first.

And to top it off, the bloke doing it was tall and the pavements were narrow. I was getting squashed against the walls. I kept moving to avoid it. And then he would push me back.

Words were eventually had.

Dejah,

"I don't think they do it in case we fall/run into the road."

Meaning we as grown women rather than children. I was trying to point out that as adults there are other things that they may want to keep us away from rather than it being because they think we're going to run out into the road.

My grandmother used to tell me a true gentleman always walked between a lady and the road.

She actually used to "test" complete strangers on the street : if a man was walking towards her on the pavement, she would walk right in the middle to see which side he would choose to walk past her. Me and my sister used to find it hilarious. In the early stages of her dementia she would deliver her "verdict" to the poor, bemused passer-by, declaring them either very rude or very well-mannered right to their face

Given that us adult women are in such danger from puddles and cars mounting the road, perhaps we should be confined to the house when male escorts are unavailable then?

Or perhaps driving test could be made more rigorous?

Or pavements could be universally lined with concrete bollards?

Seeing as the risk to women is so great that it's less rude to push her all over the pavement than to let her choose to walk where she likes and take the risk of a car mounting the pavement.

If someone is walking towards me with a child, I always pass them on the side closest to the road in case the child tripped, etc.

As for DP, I have to walk on his left side as he's deaf as a post on the other side!

I thought it was so that he had easy access to his sword, if right handed and needed to protect you!

I think it's lovely. To me it is a sign of being valued. I will always walk so my children are on the inside of me becuase it feels safer, but I automatically do it for other people I hold dear too, like my good friends. I guess it is my way of saying I value your safety over my own, not that I think anyone would even notice. My DH does it for me too along with other little things which to some might appear that he infantilises me, but I know it is just becuase he puts my needs before his own.

My DH does it for me too along with other little things which to some might appear that he infantilises me, but I know it is just becuase he puts my needs before his own.

I don't think that any nice thing means that you are infantilising someone. Intimate people do things for each other.

But it's quite another thing when one group ought to do something for another group, because there is an implicit assumption there: that the second group is more vulnerable, or the first group has more means.

3 little badgers

But do you do it for men?

And you saying about him putting your need before your own, I think it's sad that men are being bought up with the message to potentially risk their lives for practically any woman that they are with.

But I don't think he has been brought up with the message to potentially risk his life for any woman he is with, nor have I. Isn't it something any of us would do for someone we hold dear?

But they aren't are they? Women aren't told to walk on the roadside of the path (now seen as protection from cars and let's pray that a puddle never touches them) or to be in front/ behind so to prevent men from falling and hurting themselves. They do it for children but I never see women doing it because they were brought up to protect men.

Most men are bigger/stronger than women so more likely to survive an impact with a car/be able to support a woman if she fell. Isn't it easier/more likely to offer protection to those smaller than ourselves?