People who aren’t quite getting it...

[MadameBee]

I wouldn’t comment IRL and am not part of the Stasi post on FB with “reported to police” written in capitals which I am quietly finding quite amusing.

But a few people are posting are posting stuff on SM with “and before you judge me XYZ”

Friend who posted last weekend “having a bonfire this afternoon so just letting all my neighbours on here no so you can shut your windows” erm - you aren’t supposed to be having bonfires because of the risk of added pressure on the emergency services if something goes wrong, everyone is cooped up inside and it’s foul and some of those people might be shielding because of impaired lung capacity.

Photos of children on a bouncy castle in the back yard, “before you judge me there was no contact and the guy cleaned it all” yes but the point is it’s not exactly an essential fucking journey is it?!

And the people moaning about traffic on the roads - erm you were there too but your reason is “justified” because you are a key worker? “The park/beach was so crowded” so I came home - BUT YOU WERE THERE TOO!!!!

I'm not sure what the answer is, perhaps basic Constitutional and Administrative Law should be taught as part of PHSE education in schools?

Nike I’ve met so many people like you. Very intellectual but lacking in social skills.
You enter a debate with a closed mind. Determined to ‘win’ the argument as it bolsters your clearly very high opinion of yourself. That’s fine, however you get your kicks.

I try to enter a debate with an open mind. To me, if I walk away having had my mind changed and my mind broadened, so much the better. The pursuit of knowledge is what matters to me. Not so much the ‘proving I am right’ to the detriment of others.

You are arguing that it is the legislation people should be stick to. I can obviously see your logic there. I mean, it is the legislation that is there to inform the decision to fine you (or not) for breaking it (or not) and the law of the land absolutely must be respected. I would not argue there.

However, when I talk about adhering to the rules (and I will apologise for not being more clear here) I am talking about the guidance... NOT the legislation. Because, it me, it is more important that I mitigate any and much risk as I can in order to not make others seriously ill (or worse). The reason being, my motivation is not making others ill/dead and/or contributing towards the overwhelming of the NHS. Perhaps your motivation is to simply avoid being fined.

That’s your prerogative of course. I find it very individualistic... but it’s your call.

You just can’t go through life only ever behaving in a way that follows anything that is enshrined in law and using that legislation to make arguments for doing whatever the hell you like.

I would imagine that there are plenty of acts that you wouldn’t dream of carrying out that aren’t necessarily ‘illegal’ but would be bloody rude or incredibly antisocial.

In this instance, and referring to the legislation in question, your act that may technically not be ‘illegal’ could have a majorly detrimental effect on someone’s health.

Don’t forget - we are a social species before we are a law-abiding one. Laws and legislations are not a substitute for morals.

It’s interesting how people suddenly care about the impact of bonfires on those who have respiratory conditions. There are lots of comments on MN about no bonfires, citing this as a reason. Strangely, it’s never been raised as an issue before and it’s offered up as a reason in very specific threads.

I wonder if people think the same before they use their car instead of walk or use public transport for journeys that are very short or otherwise don’t need a car. The British Lung Foundation are undertaking studies into the impact of air pollution on respiratory conditions.

This is social Darwinism in action

This comment has become very, very boring.

That aside: I think a healthy degree of questioning and scepticism is a good thing, whether it be about Covid or anything else at all.

People just accepting received wisdoms leads to them trundling out tropes like "social Darwinism in action" (i.e. if you don't do as you are told, you are stupid and deserve to die of Covid - not of anything else, as Covid is the only thing that has ever killed anyone, obviously), and "people are dying" (see above).

My own bloody parents. Just had our first baby, their first gc. I get messages almost every day saying how upset they are they can’t meet the baby and yet they have invited us to go over for dinner (apparently we would sit apart) and then when dropping some shopping at theirs today it turns out they’ve been at a street party. They insist it was distanced but what we witnessed from the others who were still going when we turned up to doorstep drop were absolutely mixing households.
They then get really cross and defensive when I mention it.

They seem to think that the 2metre rule is a way to interact and see whoever you bloody like socially whenever you like, and not a compromise in situations where being around others not from your household can’t be avoided.

I’d love for this to be over tomorrow so we could see our loved ones but it won’t be whilst all some people are doing is looking for loopholes. They have no comprehension they are twisting it to their own preference either - they genuinely believe they are following the rules. I’m gutted as dh and I have had to decide tonight following the street party debacle that they clearly can’t be trusted to keep hyper vigilant so if restrictions ease we can’t trust them to be safe enough to meet dd. I’m already dreading the conversation as they’ll kick off and make me out to be a bitch but I can’t ignore how reckless they are being!

If you want to question and challenge in a democracy become an MP 👍🏻

That aside: I think a healthy degree of questioning and scepticism is a good thing, whether it be about Covid or anything else at all

Couldn’t agree more. Whichever side of the fence you fall on, if you question what you believe and what you’re told then you’re alright in my book.

Checks and balances remain in place, always be vigilant for decent counter arguments and above all - do not be too stubborn to change your mind after you’ve obtained more facts

It's simple really. Those of us observing the rules (the rules that pretty much the whole of the world is observing) of lockdown and social distancing are carrying the percentage of 'special' (read entitled, superior, ignorant, no-shit-giving) people who are doing whatever the fuck they want. Is lockdown the right thing? We don't know for sure. We do know, or are pretty sure, that herd immunity would have meant overwhelming hospitals so we we would still be unable to treat non-Covid emergencies. We won't know the true stats of any of this for many many months or years. But for now I choose to not be selfish cunt and stay inside as much as possible and socially distance myself.

@sixthtimelucky

Exactly this.

I'm not at all surprised how many of there of you. I see it all the time. I don't appreciate or respect any of you or what you think you are standing for, in some superior, special way. Not sure what the hun is about.

But @sixthtimelucky none of the example OP has given are breaking any rules in any way. Ok the bonfire was ignoring a polite request but it was a polite request they might not been aware of the f they hadn't happened to visit their local fire service page (I've never visited mine ever and didn't know til this thread either) the rest are all perfectly reasonable and within official guidelines not just within the stricter legislation, yet she wants to pick and choose which part of closed services should be open without knowing any of the behind the scenes risk!

Great I bet school love your children questioning and challenging

They definitely should because an inquiring mind is a mark of intelligence. As for me being a pedant - it isn’t me who’s blindly following the rules without question.

Children in school who question and challenge rules that are in place for their own safety and well being are absolute PITAS.

I admit my parents came round. Twas DS 18th. They let themselves in the separate entrance to the big garden. Set up at one end with their own drinks and glasses🤣🤣🤣 and masks for between sips. We sat about 20 feet away. Thet left via the back gate we never use.
Probably no different from their walk around the block. It's the only yimexweve seen them. Not seeing the kids is really affecting them. My own grandmother has deteriorated physically and mentally dreadfully because of lockdown as she is normally so independent and busy. Its had such a vast impact (she has no choice though much to her disgust).
My neihbours decided to hold a "gathering for approx 20-25 people in our front garden on two separate occasions over the past two weeks. That us not like going for a walk around the block. They are just annoying all round.

@glamgiraffe

Ffs my DS had his 18th on the day the lockdown was announced. He saw his brother and his sister and his girlfriend that day and he did nothing.

We haven’t seen any family since and yes I am really “struggling” too but I am not selfish enough to think it’s ok for me to break the rules. I have never gone this long without seeing my kids before, like many others.

Children in school who question and challenge rules that are in place for their own safety and well being are absolute PITAS

Intelligent children who think for themselves aren’t easy admittedly. Nor are the adults they grow into. I’m more than happy not to be easy and delighted to have raised another adult in the same mould.

MadameBee

Honestly we are howling into the abyss. Seflish is what selfish does.
Your ds (and my nearly 16 year old and nearly 18 year old) can celebrate later in the year and feel good about themselves.

x

@Alsohuman

I assume your children attend a Steiner?

However, when I talk about adhering to the rules (and I will apologise for not being more clear here) I am talking about the guidance... NOT the legislation. Because, it me, it is more important that I mitigate any and much risk as I can in order to not make others seriously ill (or worse). The reason being, my motivation is not making others ill/dead and/or contributing towards the overwhelming of the NHS. Perhaps your motivation is to simply avoid being fined.

But you are choosing to do something the government didn't legislate for.

Maybe you have your personal reasons and that's fine, but you must see that those are your own personal reasons and they may or may not be shared with other people.

It's like... I don't know, veganism? You can refrain from eating meat if you want to because you care about animals but unless it's actually illegal to eat meat then you can't really blame other people if they have personal reasons for doing it.

In Scotland the message is exercise once a day. I go out more than once a day for exercise because I'm not actually getting any exercise when I take my kids for their exercise. We don't have a garden and I don't believe any of us are getting enough exercise. I'm choosing to prioritise my health because I think the healthier I am, the further away from an unhealthy bmi, and the more VIT D I get, the better chances I have of fighting a virus (that's not even deadly in my age group anyway!)

The park is a 30 second walk from my house and I give everyone a wide berth.

If that isn't in the "spirit" of save lives then I don't know what is.

And remember the lockdown was actually about saving the NHS. If everyone who gets it serious has space to be treated in hospital then the more people who get mild cases the better.

Have you ever considered that perhaps they didn't legislate the "spirit" of the message for a reason?

What if we ALL except keyworkers locked ourselves in our houses for 3 months. The virus would still be in circulation. The day we came out of lockdown and moved to social distancing it would just start ramping up again, the numbers would rise just as they did in February when the message was "wash hands, social distance, self isolate with symptoms". There wouldn't be enough immunity in the community and it would spread like wildfire anyway.

I do believe the reason the gov made so many exceptions in the legislation is because the virus is supposed to spread to an extent. That's why those most at risk are shielding.

I assume your children attend a Steiner?

You assume wrong. My “child” is a 45 year old man who was educated in run of the mill state schools. He was taught the value of independent thought at home. His grandfather was a particularly strong influence. You could say it runs in the family.

You can have independent thought and be respectful of the rules of the establishment you are in 👍🏻

Not if they don’t make any sense.