When & Where Did it Change?

spen666

Had to travel in by public transport today. tube and train and noticed on tube that carriage seats were all occupied by a class of school kids aged circa 10- 11 years old. Thus all adult had to stand.

This is not an unusal phenomenom. I often see parents with their children occupying seats whilst adults including pensioners are having to stand.

Indeed, I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down, or complaining loudly how no adult has given up their seat for their child.

When I was a child, it was the opposite way round and children were only allowed to occupy seats if they were not required for adult usage. It used to be a condition of carriage on the nationalised bus services pre de regulation ( not sure re Tube/ trains).

So, when did the change happen?

Gussio

Probably the same time that national service and the birch were abolished. This country has gone to the dogs.

el_presidente

that reminds me my chimney is filthy, where is an urchin when you need one

spen666

I'm not saying it is wrong, its just a 180 degree change from what it was.

el_presidente

earth to Spen - things change over time, get used to it. next!

spen666

el_presidente wrote:

earth to Spen - things change over time, get used to it. next!

Ermmmm


Can you read?


I am not complaining about it, I am asking WHEN it happened or is that too advanced a quuestion for a seemingly simpleton like you

el_presidente

Well Spen it happened at some point between 1955 and 1990

probably at different times in central London, rural Wales and the Outer Hebrides

Why would anyone care.

lost_in_thought

I don't know when exactly it happened, but I was born in '83 and was told by my mother to only sit down if nobody older or better than me was standing.

So sometime between 1997 and now.

When did Labour get in again?

:P

bails87

Don't you read the Daily Mail? They'll get you up to speed. It's because anyone over the age of 3 is a gun carrying hoodie who can't wait to knife-crime brave 'fought-for-this-country' pensioners. Especially in London.


In reality, I imagine it might be because kids are more likely to fall over, or get knocked over than taller, stronger adults, having encountered some of the grumpy creatures that inhabit the tube. And a 'pensioner' isn't necessarily that frail anyway.

I imagine in your particular example that it's a hell of a lot easier to keep a whole class of kids under control, safe and in view if they're all sitting down than if they're standing up along the length of a carriage.

rjsterry

lost_in_thought wrote:

I don't know when exactly it happened, but I was born in '83 and was told by my mother to only sit down if nobody older or better than me was standing.

So sometime between 1997 and now.

When did Labour get in again?

:P

Interesting. Better in what sense?

daviesee

Probably about the same time they stopped respecting others....




and started demanding it from others...........

re-cycles

bails87 wrote:

In reality, I imagine it might be because kids are more likely to fall over, or get knocked over than taller, stronger adults, having encountered some of the grumpy creatures that inhabit the tube. And a 'pensioner' isn't necessarily that frail anyway.

Absolutely right! Having seen the way that some commuters feel the need to rush around with no care for anyone else I'd make every effort to get my kids sat down before they're pushed over.

As a child I was expected to give up my seat for old folks, which always annoyed me as they didn't even pay to use the bus! Whenever I questioned this my folks gave me the lecture about "if it wasn't for that generation we'd all be speaking German!".

With the recently retired folks theres not that argument, all they've given us is a lousy infrastructure, huge debt and mass pollution. They can stand up and be grateful they're allowed on public transport at all!

spen666

re-cycles wrote:

bails87 wrote:

In reality, I imagine it might be because kids are more likely to fall over, or get knocked over than taller, stronger adults, having encountered some of the grumpy creatures that inhabit the tube. And a 'pensioner' isn't necessarily that frail anyway.

Absolutely right! Having seen the way that some commuters feel the need to rush around with no care for anyone else I'd make every effort to get my kids sat down before they're pushed over.

As a child I was expected to give up my seat for old folks, which always annoyed me as they didn't even pay to use the bus! Whenever I questioned this my folks gave me the lecture about "if it wasn't for that generation we'd all be speaking German!".

With the recently retired folks theres not that argument, all they've given us is a lousy infrastructure, huge debt and mass pollution. They can stand up and be grateful they're allowed on public transport at all!

suprised you don'twant to have them registered, licensed insured and pay tax whilst displaying their licence plate as they travel on the tube

wgwarburton

spen666 wrote:

Had to travel in by public transport today. ... I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down,
...
When I was a child, it was the opposite way round ...
So, when did the change happen?

My guess would be that it would correspond roughly to a transition within the medical profession from prioritising the mother ("she can try again") to prioritising the baby ("must be perfect, she may not have another chance") during childbirth along with parallel social changes (delaying having children, having less of them)... should such things be observed...

Essentially, back in the old days, children were less important. Nowadays we have less of them and they are treated as a social priority, given more rights, better protected...

Not making a judgement on which approach is better, BTW.

Cheers,
W.

baloo_the_bear

lost_in_thought wrote:

I don't know when exactly it happened, but I was born in '83 and was told by my mother to only sit down if nobody older or better than me was standing.

So sometime between 1997 and now.

When did Labour get in again?

:P

Im around the same age and my folks always taught me that in waiting rooms, on public transport etc. i should give up my seat for anyone that was older or more in need of a seat than I was. My friends parents taught the same thing.

It still seems to be pretty much the norm up here. Maybe we are just a bit backwards north of the border tho..

Monkeypump

spen666 wrote:

Indeed, I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down, or complaining loudly how no adult has given up their seat for their child.

Have never seen this and wouldn't entertain it for a second!

bails87

daviesee wrote:

Probably about the same time they stopped respecting others....




and started demanding it from others...........

"Get off my lawn, you damn kids"


Also, as a genuine question, were the French forced to speak German?

Headhuunter

WGWarburton wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Had to travel in by public transport today. ... I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down,
...
When I was a child, it was the opposite way round ...
So, when did the change happen?

My guess would be that it would correspond roughly to a transition within the medical profession from prioritising the mother ("she can try again") to prioritising the baby ("must be perfect, she may not have another chance") during childbirth along with parallel social changes (delaying having children, having less of them)... should such things be observed...

Essentially, back in the old days, children were less important. Nowadays we have less of them and they are treated as a social priority, given more rights, better protected...

Not making a judgement on which approach is better, BTW.

Cheers,
W.

I agree. These days many kids are inserted into little bubbles of privilege or put onto pedestals and led to believe they can do no wrong. My dad who was a teacher from the early 70s until the late 90s used to talk about how attitudes to kids had changed in that time. When he began as a teacher, if kids were unruly he could call on parents, get them into the school and have a meeting which little Johnny would attend. Teacher and parents would give little Johnny a good talking to and make it absolutely clear that his behaviour would not be tolerated.

He said that towards the end of his career before he retired, he would call kids and parents in for a meeting and sometimes the parent would side with little Johnny and get into a stand up argument, in front of the kid, with the teacher! Their child could do no wrong. Many of these kids were the same ones which made zero effort at their studies, even though they were told that if they left school with an E grade in GCSE Art they would end up as road sweepers and litter bin emptiers, it made no difference, there was a general attitude that life had provided for them so far and somehow it would continue to provide for them after school.

You see it in the streets too, parents with enormous pushchair things literally mow you down. Woe betide you if you get in the way, privileged parent and little darling in pushchair coming through. Or screaming kids running wild on buses and Tubes, parents looking lovingly on as little Johnny runs screaming up and down the carriage etc.

Of course not all kids and parents are like this, but some certainly are.

Dudu

spen666 wrote:

Had to travel in by public transport today. tube and train and noticed on tube that carriage seats were all occupied by a class of school kids aged circa 10- 11 years old. Thus all adult had to stand.

This is not an unusal phenomenom. I often see parents with their children occupying seats whilst adults including pensioners are having to stand.

Indeed, I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down, or complaining loudly how no adult has given up their seat for their child.

When I was a child, it was the opposite way round and children were only allowed to occupy seats if they were not required for adult usage. It used to be a condition of carriage on the nationalised bus services pre de regulation ( not sure re Tube/ trains).

So, when did the change happen?

I've not noticed this happen in my public transport use, which mainly involves journeys between the Thames and the southern edge of London. I've certainly never seen an adult expect another adult to let their children sit down (not that children are usually interested in doing anything that involves not moving).

On the contrary, on many of my bus journeys I'm surprised to find young people standing up and offering me their seats. But then most of my fellow passengers are Portuguese.

Spen, if you want a seat, get London buses nos. 77, 87 or 196.

dugliss

daviesee wrote:

Probably about the same time they stopped respecting others....




and started demanding it from others...........

Are you disrespecting me???

DonDaddyD

Sigh....

I wasn't taught but told that it was the decent thing to give up your seat to a pregnant or elderly person. I wouldn't, unless the person had a clear physical disability, give up my seat or expect to give up my seat for a person aged between 10 - 65 (unless properly granny frail) and I wouldn't expect my child to either. Equally I wouldn't expect them to give their seat to my child.

As for children being put on a pedalstal... they are the future so should be nutured and not brushed aside as invalid until they're adults.

Also Heady, its long since been proven that chastising a child does more harm than good. Before the rest of you corduroy wearers get uppity, yes it might not have done you no wrong, but then you aren't subject to the same social influences as the kids are of today.

Dudu

re-cycles wrote:

bails87 wrote:

In reality, I imagine it might be because kids are more likely to fall over, or get knocked over than taller, stronger adults, having encountered some of the grumpy creatures that inhabit the tube. And a 'pensioner' isn't necessarily that frail anyway.

As a child I was expected to give up my seat for old folks, which always annoyed me as they didn't even pay to use the bus! Whenever I questioned this my folks gave me the lecture about "if it wasn't for that generation we'd all be speaking German!".

With the recently retired folks theres not that argument, all they've given us is a lousy infrastructure, huge debt and mass pollution. They can stand up and be grateful they're allowed on public transport at all!

I never used to get the "stand up for old people" bit when I was a kid... but now I'm old people, I do.

When you're over about 55, especially if you work for a living, you NEED to sit down when travelling. Otherwise, it hurts.

BTW, why should my generation be denigrated when we've spent 40 years working solidly, at first for much lower rewards and lifestyles than are expected these days, paying our taxes and national insurance and saving for our old age?

DonDaddyD

lost_in_thought wrote:

I don't know when exactly it happened, but I was born in '83 and was told by my mother to only sit down if nobody older or better than me was standing.

"Oi! off to the back of the bus... where you belong"

I'm glad Tony Blair's first term happened.

rjsterry

WGWarburton wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Had to travel in by public transport today. ... I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down,
...
When I was a child, it was the opposite way round ...
So, when did the change happen?

My guess would be that it would correspond roughly to a transition within the medical profession from prioritising the mother ("she can try again") to prioritising the baby ("must be perfect, she may not have another chance") during childbirth along with parallel social changes (delaying having children, having less of them)... should such things be observed...

Essentially, back in the old days, children were less important. Nowadays we have less of them and they are treated as a social priority, given more rights, better protected...

Not making a judgement on which approach is better, BTW.

Cheers,
W.

Think you've hit the nail on the head there: less of them/harder to get them(what with leaving it late and so on) = more precious. Sounds a bit brutal put like that, but then these are pretty primal urges we are talking about here.

the_hundredth_idiot

re-cycles wrote:

As a child I was expected to give up my seat for old folks, which always annoyed me as they didn't even pay to use the bus! Whenever I questioned this my folks gave me the lecture about "if it wasn't for that generation we'd all be speaking German!".

It's only been 70 years since the war - does anyone really think us Brits would have got the hang of another language so quickly?

DonDaddyD

rjsterry wrote:

WGWarburton wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Had to travel in by public transport today. ... I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down,
...
When I was a child, it was the opposite way round ...
So, when did the change happen?

My guess would be that it would correspond roughly to a transition within the medical profession from prioritising the mother ("she can try again") to prioritising the baby ("must be perfect, she may not have another chance") during childbirth along with parallel social changes (delaying having children, having less of them)... should such things be observed...

Essentially, back in the old days, children were less important. Nowadays we have less of them and they are treated as a social priority, given more rights, better protected...

Not making a judgement on which approach is better, BTW.

Cheers,
W.

Think you've hit the nail on the head there: less of them/harder to get them(what with leaving it late and so on) = more precious. Sounds a bit brutal put like that, but then these are pretty primal urges we are talking about here.

How are there less children today than say 10, 20, 30, 40 years ago when there are more people in World today, more people in England, more people in London and the schools are literally overflowing with children.

Hell, bassjunkie has so many kids he could fill a small island near Fiji.

rjsterry

The Hundredth Idiot wrote:

re-cycles wrote:

As a child I was expected to give up my seat for old folks, which always annoyed me as they didn't even pay to use the bus! Whenever I questioned this my folks gave me the lecture about "if it wasn't for that generation we'd all be speaking German!".

It's only been 70 years since the war - does anyone really think us Brits would have got the hang of another language so quickly?

From a linguistic point of view, we kind of are speaking German (or Germanic) anyway, with a bit of French vocabulary added in.

Monkeypump

DonDaddyD wrote:

Also Heady, its long since been proven that chastising a child does more harm than good. Before the rest of you corduroy wearers get uppity, yes it might not have done you no wrong, but then you aren't subject to the same social influences as the kids are of today.

Ahem... what a load of old cobbs. Must resist urge to open can of worms... rant... etc. :evil:

Paulie W

rjsterry wrote:

WGWarburton wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Had to travel in by public transport today. ... I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down,
...
When I was a child, it was the opposite way round ...
So, when did the change happen?

My guess would be that it would correspond roughly to a transition within the medical profession from prioritising the mother ("she can try again") to prioritising the baby ("must be perfect, she may not have another chance") during childbirth along with parallel social changes (delaying having children, having less of them)... should such things be observed...

Essentially, back in the old days, children were less important. Nowadays we have less of them and they are treated as a social priority, given more rights, better protected...

Not making a judgement on which approach is better, BTW.

Cheers,
W.

Think you've hit the nail on the head there: less of them/harder to get them(what with leaving it late and so on) = more precious. Sounds a bit brutal put like that, but then these are pretty primal urges we are talking about here.

There are I think more not less children around at the moment both absolutely and as a % of total population - these numbers are about to fall but there's never been so many teenagers in the UK!

rjsterry

Paulie W wrote:

rjsterry wrote:

WGWarburton wrote:

spen666 wrote:

Had to travel in by public transport today. ... I have seen parents asking adults to give up their seat so the child can sit down,
...
When I was a child, it was the opposite way round ...
So, when did the change happen?

My guess would be that it would correspond roughly to a transition within the medical profession from prioritising the mother ("she can try again") to prioritising the baby ("must be perfect, she may not have another chance") during childbirth along with parallel social changes (delaying having children, having less of them)... should such things be observed...

Essentially, back in the old days, children were less important. Nowadays we have less of them and they are treated as a social priority, given more rights, better protected...

Not making a judgement on which approach is better, BTW.

Cheers,
W.

Think you've hit the nail on the head there: less of them/harder to get them(what with leaving it late and so on) = more precious. Sounds a bit brutal put like that, but then these are pretty primal urges we are talking about here.

There are I think more not less children around at the moment both absolutely and as a % of total population - these numbers are about to fall but there's never been so many teenagers in the UK!

Than when? I know I am partly responsible for another mini-baby boom, but compared with the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, when a lot of the attitudes to children held by my grandparents' generation developed, the population as a whole was a lot younger, and having BJUK-sized families was not uncommon. I should probably go off and trawl through the censuses (sp?) before I make any more unfounded claims, but there you go.

Headhuunter

Monkeypump wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

Also Heady, its long since been proven that chastising a child does more harm than good. Before the rest of you corduroy wearers get uppity, yes it might not have done you no wrong, but then you aren't subject to the same social influences as the kids are of today.

Ahem... what a load of old cobbs. Must resist urge to open can of worms... rant... etc. :evil:

So you're saying that children should not be chastised? Never? I think that does just as much if not more damage than telling them off. I'm not demanding the return of corporal punishment and certainly some parents spend more time shouting at their kids than they do praising and encouraging but there needs to be some balance. I don't see how the way the world has changed in the last 20-100 years makes 1 iota of difference to basic values we should instil in our kids. Yes they are the future but they also need to be grounded!