To say that if you are quite covid risk adverse there are some places it’s best not to go

[Scentsandsensible]

Inspired by a few threads and personal experience.

I’m not saying stay at home and be isolated BUT... if you’re someone who is going to have a panic attack if someone gets within a metre it’s probably best to avoid

• busy shopping centres
• theme parks
• pubs

-restaurants

• busy hotels

I do get that this may sound unfair - but it’s the reality. If you feel vulnerable these probably aren’t the best places to go.

I agree with you too, OP, on the whole, and will be avoiding those places, partly because of my own risk averseness, partly because it's obviously better if we don't all go to them. I live fairly near Durdle Door and always go in the summer, not this year. (I found a local river with no bathers at all instead)

We tried Hollywood bowl once and won't be going back. Us too it's quite sad cos DS loves bowling and I thought it could have been done so much better

@Chicchicchicchiclana

"If some people can manage it, why can't everybody."

Because that's just unrealistic! Remember the woman who was shocked at so many people on the beach at Durdle Door? She seemed nice enough didn't she, but she totally didn't get it.

Yes, this thread seems to have focused more on the people who are refusing to SD so far. We've not seen much mention of those who aren't capable, and those who are but make mistakes.

I can see that people are persuaded by the logic and fairness of the argument that if you're not going to SD you should stay in. But life is very clearly not like that. Even if we had could enforce keeping people away from public places if they won't SD and, rather horrifically, if they can't, there would still be mistakes to contend with. I doubt very much that I'm the only MNer who has absent-mindedly and unintentionally got too close to someone.

Yes. What these risk averse people can’t understand is that there are in fact millions of people who just want to get on with their lives. These people are NOT reckless. But they ARE capable of assessing the real risks associated with Coronavirus which are very small. Maybe they don’t soak up all the Government panic and media hysteria?

You forgot to add school to the list.

I think anyone who is incapable of following the guidance should stay at home.

It’s knowing that even with all the recommendations people are more likely to forget or not care in areas that are crowded or socialising, especially if drinking is taking place. I can not control other actions but I am in control of mine and take the risks accordingly. Establishment can try to implement safety rules but cannot guarantee that the general public will abide with them.

If there are rules I think it's reasonable to expect to be able to go out and about safely knowing everyone is following them. No matter who you are. No need to be catty or personal about it. That's what "learning to live with it" looks like.

@CaptainMonkey

I think anyone who is incapable of following the guidance should stay at home.

Which makes not two shits of difference to the reality that they aren't, and can't be made to.

@Jenasaurus Schools, supermarkets - completely different. They’re to some degree essential.

@scentsandsensible yes that's true. There are many places I've avoided because I know it may be over crowded etc. Its hard to strike a balance between doing things that will help bring some normality back for my son, but also trying not to get too anxious over the social distancing myself! I've been once to the zoo with ds, and if I'm honest couldn't enjoy it as much as usual! I probably should have stayed home!

I don't think learning to live with it means resigning yourself to staying home if you're a stickler for the rules. If anything, stay at home if you don't like the rules as they're there for a reason and the risks are not small at a population level without them.

It’s just not natural to social distance all the time, being constantly mindful of keeping two meters distance from any other human does not make for a nice time out.

I will make the effort to distance in supermarkets where people often have no choice but to go, but in other public spaces that people could easily choose to avoid, I’m not going to spend the entire time thinking about 2 meters and constantly be watching what other people are doing and trying to work out what direction they’re going in so as to avoid them. We’re either outside or in masks anyway, and it’s highly unlikely that the virus is going to miraculously jump, from an asymptomatic person, through two masks and infect someone in the amount of time strangers are likely to need to pass by each other.

So I agree, if you’re that convinced there is a risk from healthy people in masks behaving otherwise normally, then it’s best to stay at home.

We are a nation of awkward queuers after all. Who better to awkwardly keep apart.

I hate what I'm about to say as I think it's wrong but.

I haven't been out unless un avoidablee in busy public places with my kids. One has ASD, one is five, one is dyspraxia.

Took the dyspraxic one out to town to get his hair cut today and I had to tell him to walk through a queue for the chip shop today. Mostly because he hasn't been out for months so isnt used to these rules

I dont want them going out as I dont want a mouthful but equally they cant learn the new rules

@PiataMaiNei yeah I guess so. Always best to avoid arseholes. Shame they stop other people from doing stuff though.

Unfortunately it's the sensible option because other people can't be trusted to SD.

But, I agree with those that say it's 'not fair'. IF people followed the SD guidelines I'd feel safer going out & I would be able to enjoy the same things they are - but people WILL be stupid & selfish, so 🤷🏻‍♀️

@Shockingstocking I agree, but arseholes generally win. It's the same with every aspect of public life: people end up avoiding places where others are behaving badly. The aspect that makes this a shame is that places where people are accustomed to going are now off limits due to arseholes.

Can I just get this clear?

You are saying that the exceptionally vulnerable should just shut up and push off, and it’s OK to exclude the 3% of the population who are (any age) extremely clinically vulnerable, plus millions more who are vulnerable?

Of course it’s not OK

Nor is it OK to belittle the most vulnerable by writing them off as ‘likely to have a panic attack’ as if that was the real issue?

Looks like the DDA is more about the breach than the observance

I do agree with what you are trying to say. Some locations /events /activities don't lend themselves to be easily adapted to social distancing. If you need for your own physical or mental health not to be in a situation where social distancing isn't being properly followed at all times, then you need to use your judgement about the type of location and activities you pick to do/go to.

YANBU, obviously.

I’m in a high-risk group due to asthma, and I won’t be going to any of the places on that list plus airports, aircraft, cinemas, theatres, sports stadia & public transport until this nightmare is over.

[quote CaptainMonkey]@PiataMaiNei yeah I guess so. Always best to avoid arseholes. Shame they stop other people from doing stuff though.[/quote]
You think people who aren't capable of fully understanding and consistently practicing SD are arseholes? Individuals with limited cognitive functioning, dementia, perhaps some severe MH conditions? That's an, erm, interesting perspective.

So instead of people following rules, those who want rules followed should stay away from public places?

50/50 tbh. Yes everyone has the right to expect others to follow guidelines. But if you are so anxious or vulnerable that someone not adhering 100% is going to result in your having a panic attack or turning into an arsehole then perhaps do yourself a favour and avoid busy places.

@CaptainMonkey to some degree this is what I mean about assessing risk.
For example - I should Be able to walk along certain streets at 1am and not live in fear of getting mugged. If everyone followed the law, I wouldn’t get mugged. But the truth is that not everyone does - therefore I tend to assess this as too dangerous for me.

While I’m not saying it’s entirely the same thing, the point is - certain places are going to be less covid friendly (unfriendly?)