|
i have a school at the end of the street that i live on, and every day at about 3.15pm the place is full of women drivers in people carriers, and 4X4's, the problem is that the road is tiny, and like andy says, these women drivers dont park, they just stop in the middle of the road, or double park. CRAZY.
|
|
also i wonder if carol adams will say anything about this thread.
|
|
|
|
Andy wrote:
>
> Hi Tomo - I've got to agree that those strange people who
> constantly edge forward at the lights are annoying and
> possibly dangerous,
- but then, they couldn't possibly let a woman get away first, could they?
> but those women seem to take sooooo long to get going......
... may be struggling with an unfamiliar car and argumentative children on too little sleep ...
> ....and when it comes to dropping off their kids at school
> they don't park up, they just stop in the road!
Believe me, men AND women do this. But the worst example I've seen recently was definitely a man.
Look, the reason you see more women do this than men is that the men have gone off to work earlier than the women, leaving the women to get out of the house in a tearing hurry to drop the kids before they go to work or whatever.
And if we want to continue discussing the difference between the sexes, who has the biggest say in *choosing* the car in most households?
|
Sue wrote:
> Look, the reason you see more women do this than men is that
> the men have gone off to work earlier than the women,
Ahh so men work longer hours and women are slackers...
No wonder the political parties need women only shortlists if tottie can't get it's pretty little self out of bed before 8:45.
;-)
|
Dave wrote:
>
> Sue wrote:
>
> > Look, the reason you see more women do this than men is that
> > the men have gone off to work earlier than the women,
>
> Ahh so men work longer hours and women are slackers...
>
> No wonder the political parties need women only shortlists if
> tottie can't get it's pretty little self out of bed before
> 8:45.
>
> ;-)
I love the Back Room, it confirms all my prejudices about men who know anything about cars ;-)
Mine doesn't, but after him working part-time and me full-time for two years, we have just swapped back again. We both know who works hardest now - and I won't comment on the last two years.
|
|
|
|
Sue wrote:
> ... may be struggling with an unfamiliar car and
> argumentative children on too little sleep ...
Sue, I'm going to quote a reply I made on June 16 here:
"My heart is still thumping after what happened yesterday morning. I travel into work along a series of narrow lanes in Sussex, usually before 8am. But yesterday I was a mite late and hit the 4x4 Mums coming in the opposite direction -- one of them almost literally ('hit', I mean...). She appeared around a bend in what is more or less a single-track road, and was leaning into the back of her Freelander messing about with one of the kids. She did not see me until the last minute, and I swear I heard her scream... All I can say is that it's a good job for me the road is bounded at that point with hedgerow rather than the usual ditch-and-drystone wall, otherwise HJ would be looking for a temporary moderator for The Back Room."
The point is, if she's unfamiliar with the car, or has argumentative kids, or has had too little sleep (note the use of "or", and note also that "she" could equally be "he"), then she should not be driving. Full stop.
I'm sorry, because that looks like an attack on women drivers. Nothing could be further from the truth. But in this context, for the reasons you state, it usually *is* the woman who drives the kids to school. Perhaps they could walk (most schools are less than a mile from home), thereby cutting obesity and traffic density problems at a stroke.
|
|
Another thing that doesn't help - The vaguely recent trend of many people to have 4x4's (and no offence or wish to be sexist, but it is frequently mother's round the schools etc who prefer these 'high-up vehicles' though applies to many of my own lot from "Mars" as well) who then drive them exactly like they used to thrash their Escort estate around. You cannot drive a 4x4 in the same way as a car but this is never taken into consideration by the people who buy the car, who drive them or the garages who sell them (I have no doubt there are exceptions to the latter though). I live in Cheshire near many country lanes and I have seen rather too many 4x4's lying upside down in fields or driven through fences (NOT farming 4x4's either, I'm talking Freelanders and RAV4's!). These are the same people who then put the accident down to a slippy road or something similar, get a replacement through insurance and then doubltessly drive that one in the same manner... I wouldn't mind, but it isn't just their own lives they're putting in danger.
|
Dan
It can work to your advantage. Recently, I was being tailgated by a Frontera in the country roads, which included a long, tightening left hander I know well. Frontera driver now knows why Shuey and Co don't drive 4x4's. Kept a bit of space after that.
But, it illustrates the problem you highlight. The impression given is that 4x4's are 'safe'. Problem is the manoeverability and braking are compromised and your chances of avoiding an accident are minimised, compared to a normal car. I know it's true having had a RR for a year. Good visibilty yes, but you need it to plan the manoevres. If something spins in front of you on the motorway, you've less chance of avoiding it in a heavy vehicle with a high C of G - you can't alter the laws of physics.
Richard Branson is a prime culprit. Having survived a rollover accident many years ago when a tyre blew on his Range Rover, he immediately ordered a fleet of them because of the 'safety'. As was pointed out at the time, if he'd been driving a luxury car, it probably wouldn't have rolled in the first place.
Regards
John
|
|
|
|
Martyn (Back Room Moderator) wrote:
> The point is, if she's unfamiliar with the car, or has
> argumentative kids, or has had too little sleep (note the use
> of "or", and note also that "she" could equally be "he"),
> then she should not be driving. Full stop.
On the whole agreed, but
a) my reply was in the context of people not pulling away as promptly as some men would apparently like from traffic lights
b) how does one get familiar with a car without driving it??? I'd say I'm still struggling with a borrowed one after 6 weeks: OK 'driving' it, but creep-crawling through traffic is not yet second nature!
c) parents, only take one child at a time!! (I have been known to stop the car until the row stops, but it's not always practical.)
d) both men and women drive when they should not, probably in equal numbers.
> I'm sorry, because that looks like an attack on women
> drivers. Nothing could be further from the truth. But in this
> context, for the reasons you state, it usually *is* the woman
> who drives the kids to school. Perhaps they could walk (most
> schools are less than a mile from home), thereby cutting
> obesity and traffic density problems at a stroke.
Mine do, and always have to Primary school. For secondary school they get the bus. May I now polish my halo? OK, maybe not.
|
Sue wrote:
>
> On the whole agreed, but
>
> a) my reply was in the context of people not pulling away as
> promptly as some men would apparently like from traffic lights
Still holds, though. If you can't do it properly, then don't do it at all.
> b) how does one get familiar with a car without driving it???
> I'd say I'm still struggling with a borrowed one after 6
> weeks: OK 'driving' it, but creep-crawling through traffic is
> not yet second nature!
Ok, point taken. (Though rush-hour is not the time to hone one's skills or become familiar with a deadly weapon.)
> d) both men and women drive when they should not, probably in
> equal numbers.
I wouldn't want to argue with that at all.
> May I now polish my halo? OK, maybe not.
Please accept this slightly used tin of Silvo with my compliments!
|
|
|
|
|
"Work is the curse of the drinking classes" - Oscar Wilde.
|
|
|
|
|
|
