Neither driver willing to give way.

booooring!

Hopefully the judge throws the book at the women.
Bitch of the highest order. She has to lose her license!

Tea 1000

booooring! wrote: »

Hopefully the judge throws the book at the women.
Bitch of the highest order. She has to lose her license!

The wasps will be fairly stirred now!!

as_mo_bhosca

katydid wrote: »

Even if he was not in the wrong, the question remains why everyone was ganging up on the woman and expecting her to move. There were two of them in it, but they surrounded her car, bullied and patronised her. Telling.

There you go using the word bullied again! It's one incident. It is not bullying! Christ on a bike, does anybody know the meaning of this word anymore?

EazyD

as_mo_bhosca wrote: »

There you go using the word bullied again! It's one incident. It is not bullying! Christ on a bike, does anybody know the meaning of this word anymore?

Stop bullying me on my understanding of the word bullied you big bully.

katydid

as_mo_bhosca wrote: »

There you go using the word bullied again! It's one incident. It is not bullying! Christ on a bike, does anybody know the meaning of this word anymore?

You don't think that a load of men gathered around a woman on her own in the car, pressuring her to move although the guy in the other car was also sitting there not moving, is bullying.

Ok. We certainly do have different definitions of bullying.

razorblunt

There were women around the car too.

katydid

razorblunt wrote: »

There were women around the car too.

I didn't see that, to be honest. All I remember from the video is the woman in her open topped car, surrounded by men. Not that I don't believe you. Just that that was the perception.

Little CuChulainn

razorblunt wrote: »

There were women around the car too.

Pawns of the patriarchy

bruschi

katydid wrote: »

I didn't see that, to be honest. All I remember from the video is the woman in her open topped car, surrounded by men. Not that I don't believe you. Just that that was the perception.

seems to be a lot in that video that you didnt see, and lots of things that you want to see.

A woman spoke to her for a while and castigated her, and told the woman in the car if anything happened her teenage daughter who she was on the way to collect, that it was on her head.

There was also plenty of people around the old guys car shouting and roaring at him too. And there is also plenty of people on here saying how the old man was an idiot and in the wrong.

But yet all you are screaming is about the buying the woman got and how she was in the right. This isnt a sexism issue, its 2 utter idiots issue, regardless of their gender.

Tea 1000

Katy still doesn't want to entertain the potential that she might be in the wrong, or the fact that in the screenshot attached, there is one man talking to the woman asking her to back up, and two women the other side of her car talking to each other, and two men and one woman over at the other car, with the two men talking to the man.
But ya, all the men were around the woman's car bullying her...

MarkAnthony

katydid wrote: »

All the more reason for me not to move...

Because I'd call you duck, well that's very sensitive of you!

katydid

Tea 1000 wrote: »

Katy still doesn't want to entertain the potential that she might be in the wrong, or the fact that in the screenshot attached, there is one man talking to the woman asking her to back up, and two women the other side of her car talking to each other, and two men and one woman over at the other car, with the two men talking to the man.
But ya, all the men were around the woman's car bullying her...

She certainly might be wrong; we don't know how far into the tunnel he was when she entered, or what speed either of them was going.

I acknowledged that there were women there, but from my one watching of it my PERCEPTION was that it was just men. I was wrong.

BUT the facts remain that she was being hassled to move. And that in this discussion the focus is on her not moving, not on him, while he is the one who not only is in the wrong or most likely in the wrong, but is playing silly beggars, pretending he can't reverse.

blastman

katydid wrote: »

She certainly might be wrong; we don't know how far into the tunnel he was when she entered, or what speed either of them was going.

Well, this is a quite the departure from your previously firmly and repeatedly stated position.

Barely There

Ironic that the thread contains a lot of men ganging up on a woman to defend a lot of men ganging up on a woman.

katydid

Barely There wrote: »

Ironic that the thread contains a lot of men ganging up on a woman to defend a lot of men ganging up on a woman.

I think this thread has reached the same impasse as the one in the tunnel...

nxbyveromdwjpg

Barely There wrote: »

Ironic that the thread contains a lot of men ganging up on a woman to defend a lot of men ganging up on a woman.

If it was a man acting exactly the same way, he'd be getting ganged up on in exactly the same way.

katydid just ignores this, continues to harp on about sexism.

Tea 1000

Barely There wrote: »

Ironic that the thread contains a lot of men ganging up on a woman to defend a lot of men ganging up on a woman.

Kill her with fire...!

katydid

Harlee Incalculable Oceanographer wrote: »

If it was a man acting exactly the same way, he'd be getting ganged up on in exactly the same way.

katydid just ignores this, continues to harp on about sexism.

He wasn't ganged up on in the same way. Watch the video.

Call me Al

katydid wrote: »

He wasn't ganged up on in the same way. Watch the video.

We don't know that. The person filming the incident doesn't go into the tunnel too many times so we aren't privy to what is being said to the male driver all the time.
We can hear pretty much everything being said to the lady because of what she's driving, and the location of the person doing the filming.

nxbyveromdwjpg

katydid wrote: »

He wasn't ganged up on in the same way. Watch the video.

And I ask you, yet again - if he was sitting where she is in the convertible right at the entrance to the tunnel with the easier route out of the way, do you think peoples reactions to him would have been any different?

Clue - the reactions would have been exactly the same. Outside of the crusade in your head, it's not a sex thing. All morons are created equal.

km991148

ye - the woman was a bully and a stubborn moron. The old guy should prob have given his licence back yonks ago and is therefore also a moron. I dont see the sexist angle at all (other than here being called 'love' several times). I actually think a guy in the woman position would have received a harder time.

LDN_Irish

km991148 wrote: »

I actually think a guy in the woman position would have received a harder time.

I'd say the reason the man had all the windows up and wouldn't put them down is because most men carry the knowledge that if you take the piss too much in public someone will get physical with you eventually.

Yeah_Right

Would love to see the US version of this.

3 minutes into the stand off :
To the lady-
"Will you back up so we can all get on with our lives?"
"No."
To the guy-
"Will you back up so we can all get on with our lives?"
"No."

Bang. Bang.
"Right folks, drag the bodies to the side of the road, move the cars and let's get on with our lives."

NothingMan

I have to agree with KatyKid. If you are in the right you should stand your ground no matter how many people it inconveniences. Even if it means parents are late to collect kids, staff are late to much needed jobs or countless people who have had to deal with the sh!t in their own lives and just want to get home to unwind after a long day are held up an extra 40 minutes. Because after all, if you don't stand your ground, especially at the expense of the innocent majority, what kind of world would this be? Certainly one I wouldn't want to live in.





Does my sarcasm come across well enough in text?

as_mo_bhosca

katydid wrote: »

You don't think that a load of men gathered around a woman on her own in the car, pressuring her to move although the guy in the other car was also sitting there not moving, is bullying.

Ok. We certainly do have different definitions of bullying.

There is only one definition. You need to look it up. One incident does not count as bullying! That's a fact, not an opinion.

bruschi

katydid wrote: »

She certainly might be wrong; we don't know how far into the tunnel he was when she entered, or what speed either of them was going.

I acknowledged that there were women there, but from my one watching of it my PERCEPTION was that it was just men. I was wrong.

she might be wrong. right. You dont know. In any case, she is wrong for what she does afterwards, regardless of the legality of it. Just because she may have been in the right doesnt mean she is right for sitting there for 40 minutes just to prove a point.

katydid wrote: »

BUT the facts remain

facts, good.

katydid wrote: »

that she was being hassled to move.

so was the other person involved

katydid wrote: »

And that in this discussion the focus is on her not moving, not on him,

you may not realise, but the reason this is being dragged out is because you are doing so. Pretty much everyone is universally agreed that the man is wrong and should have moved. You seem to keep ignoring everyone who says that.

katydid wrote: »

while he is the one who not only is in the wrong or most likely in the wrong,

you say above you dont know, so not a fact

katydid wrote: »

but is playing silly beggars, pretending he can't reverse.

that isnt a fact either. You dont know. Neither do I. But what I do know is they are both idiots and both deserve the criticism. Yay. She stood her ground. He moved, and was useless at doing so. Does it make her feel better now? Was it worth it?

katydid

bruschi wrote: »

she might be wrong. right. You dont know. In any case, she is wrong for what she does afterwards, regardless of the legality of it. Just because she may have been in the right doesnt mean she is right for sitting there for 40 minutes just to prove a point.

facts, good.


so was the other person involved



you may not realise, but the reason this is being dragged out is because you are doing so. Pretty much everyone is universally agreed that the man is wrong and should have moved. You seem to keep ignoring everyone who says that.



you say above you dont know, so not a fact



that isnt a fact either. You dont know. Neither do I. But what I do know is they are both idiots and both deserve the criticism. Yay. She stood her ground. He moved, and was useless at doing so. Does it make her feel better now? Was it worth it?

People here only speak about the man when I point out that he was equally if not more in the wrong. The focus is on the woman. It's as simple as that.

I have no idea how she felt. If it were me, I would feel good to see that a***ole having to back down.

Redser87

I remember with huge fondness a very kind man who helped me out of a tight spot two days after I got my licence. I wasn't used to driving alone and I was getting very anxious trying to get out of where I was so that the next person could get in - it was busy. He moved my car for me and I must say, the people waiting were very patient. I don't understand why someone didn't hop into the man's car and reverse it for him.

Kev.OC

katydid wrote: »

People here only speak about the man when I point out that he was equally if not more in the wrong. The focus is on the woman. It's as simple as that.

I have no idea how she felt. If it were me, I would feel good to see that a***ole having to back down.

For the umpteenth time, the focus is on the driver who was closer to the exit of the tunnel. One driver seemed old and incapable of reversing, so it's only natural that people would try and reason with the second driver, especially considering the second driver was the one closer to the tunnel exit. The second driver was completely unreasonable in the face of the first drivers apparent lack of basic driving skills.

Also, the second driver, coincidentally, happens to be a woman. If it was Connor Mc F*cking Greggor, people would still be trying to get that person to move.

Gender has sweet f*ck all to do with this. Driver one should be taken off the road for lack of competency. Driver two should be fined for willingly and massively inconveniencing a lot of innocent bystanders.

bruschi

katydid wrote: »

People here only speak about the man when I point out that he was equally if not more in the wrong. The focus is on the woman. It's as simple as that.

no, it's absolutely not. You are so blinkered it is unreal. People were talking about the man long before you came in with your sexism agenda.

katydid wrote: »

I have no idea how she felt. If it were me, I would feel good to see that a***ole having to back down.

it would make you feel good? says enough for me. Hopefully I would never have to encounter some stubborn types like you on the road. I cant understand why someone would chose to be so confrontational and fuelling a situation just to prove some sort of point that could very easily be resolved with a bit of calm and reasoning. What good does it do?

katydid

bruschi wrote: »

no, it's absolutely not. You are so blinkered it is unreal. People were talking about the man long before you came in with your sexism agenda.



it would make you feel good? says enough for me. Hopefully I would never have to encounter some stubborn types like you on the road. I cant understand why someone would chose to be so confrontational and fuelling a situation just to prove some sort of point that could very easily be resolved with a bit of calm and reasoning. What good does it do?

People were talking about the man first, then they focused on the woman.

The person being confrontational was the man who refused to reverse and pretended he couldn't.



Anyway, as I said before, this discussion has reached an impasse and is going nowhere. So I'm going elsewhere.

paleoperson

fwiw, I read in the youtube comments section that the man couldn't reverse for some reason. Either the car wouldn't reverse or he didn't know how to put it into reverse.

The man is far more down the tunnel than she is, hence he must have been in the tunnel before her. Unless she has some other argument for right of way it's not looking too good for her.

anewme

paleoperson wrote: »

fwiw, I read in the youtube comments section that the man couldn't reverse for some reason. Either the car wouldn't reverse or he didn't know how to put it into reverse.

The man is far more down the tunnel than she is, hence he must have been in the tunnel before her. Unless she has some other argument for right of way it's not looking too good for her.[/QUOT

The majority of media reports said she was in the right as did some people speaking to her in the video so they must know the rules for the junction. If both met at the tunnel and she had right of way instead of him giving way, he barged through, then he was in the wrong. We don't see the video from the start, so it's not clear.

Hi viz man was a jerk shouting and patronising her and made things worse. If someone spoke to me like that, I would not move.

Some of the comments on here ARE sexist( ail aul ones in their thirties are the worst drivers).

I felt sorry for two guys who spoke to the woman trying to say even though you are right it's not worth this. I thought she might have moved then as they were calm and measured in their approach.

Both drivers seemed in a world of their own be oblivious to the nuisance they were causing, it's a bit strange.

The man should not be in the road if he can't drive properly.

MarkAnthony

katydid wrote: »

People were talking about the man first, then they focused on the woman.

The person being confrontational was the man who refused to reverse and pretended he couldn't.



Anyway, as I said before, this discussion has reached an impasse and is going nowhere. So I'm going elsewhere.

I thought you made out you weren't going anywhere. :pac:

as_mo_bhosca

katydid wrote: »

People were talking about the man first, then they focused on the woman.

The person being confrontational was the man who refused to reverse and pretended he couldn't.



Anyway, as I said before, this discussion has reached an impasse and is going nowhere. So I'm going elsewhere.

Did you look up the definition of bullying?

paleoperson

anewme wrote: »

The majority of media reports said she was in the right as did some people speaking to her in the video so they must know the rules for the junction. If both met at the tunnel and she had right of way instead of him giving way, he barged through, then he was in the wrong. We don't see the video from the start, so it's not clear.

Alright, so there's that. But a bit of common sense is required also, just because it's a technical right of way doesn't mean you get to act badly. It's important to be aware of how the flow of traffic is going to go better, right of way or not.

I don't know why you're bringing up sexism. I don't think there's any evidence for that and I also don't think there's any possibility for such evidence to come up so seems futile. It's like if a black person and a white person were involved in an incident and you disagreed with the people saying the white person was in the right, would you call that racism? I'm just not sure where you're getting it from.

anewme

paleoperson wrote: »

Alright, so there's that. But a bit of common sense is required also, just because it's a technical right of way doesn't mean you get to act badly. It's important to be aware of how the flow of traffic is going to go better, right of way or not.

I don't know why you're bringing up sexism. I don't think there's any evidence for that and I also don't think there's any possibility for such evidence to come up so seems futile. It's like if a black person and a white person were involved in an incident and you disagreed with the people saying the white person was in the right, would you call that racism? I'm just not sure where you're getting it from.

I'm not talking about sexism in the video, I think they partly thought the woman was an easy touch and would move, coupled with the fact that she was nearer the exit and the fact her car was open top made her easier to approach so I think it was a combination of all three. The hi viz man yelling just f***** back up love comes across as a sexist patronising git though he might just be like that in general.

I'm talking about the comments in this thread saying that aul ones from their thirties on driving their (husbands) expensive cars are the worst drivers on the road. So a woman in her thirties (a) can't drive and (b) if she is in an expensive car then a man must have bought it for her. That's sexism.

Tea 1000

The real tragedy here is that both of them own the cheapest and slowest versions of their respective cars.

jem

Both appeared to be tick a**h****.
It is beside the point which is male and which is female.

Common sense would say that the person that was nearest the entrance would reverse in order to get the matter over. That didn't happen.
A lot has been said about the older person and not being able to reverse. None of us know why this is.
It could have been his lack of driving ability.
It could have been that he had arthritis and he couldn't turn his neck enough to look backwards quite frankly no one knows.

What ever the reason I would suggest the local police should be having a chat with each and telling them to cop on in future.