Picture this: People exercising at one of those public outdoor gyms, including some rugrats. Some self-entitled arse, lounging on one of the pieces of equipment lights up a smoke.
Seriously? Good move. Way to clear the area, bub. Maybe your kid didn’t mind, but good on the one who let you know that they did.
I’m all for smokers exercising their right to smoke outside—hell, I’ve even done it myself on occasion—but this is right up there with smoking near doorways and in bus shelters. In other words, you have to look beyond the end of your own nose and engage your brain before you flic your bic. —cough, cough
This article appears in Jun 25 – Jul 1, 2015.
I’ve never heard of or seen a public outdoor gym :S is it an adult park for fat people? lol I don’t smoke tobacco, but people should be able to smoke wherever they want outside.
Ah, the falsehood of second-hand smoke… following this logic, those of us who grew up in the sixties should be long dead by now. Oh my god! Maybe I’m just a ghost…
Some people just need to realize that WE LIVE IN A SOCIETY YA KNOW
Take up a position next to him on one of the pieces of equipment and expel a blast of concentrated flatulence into his face. People should be able to fart wherever they want outside.
Outdoor gyms – certain public recreation areas, Albro Lake beach for instance, have simple fitness equipment set up for bored, alienated youth to smoke on, or spandex clad joggers to pose next to whilst performing their stretches and warmups and so forth. Presumably it has been made to be both sturdy and simple -imagine the Samsonite gorilla test – the better to weather the casual vandalism, grafitti and cigarette burns that are the inevitable fate of any attempt to provide a common source of enjoyment in a public space.
It’s pretty sad that smokers are now considered environmental terrorists although cigarettes continue to be perfectly legal. Demonization complete.
They can only hate Coast commenters so much…
Is that really why the moderator discriminates against so many commentors? Braidable body hair?
Sounds like somebody needs to check her privilege.
“But, the only rights the rad-left are fighting for, are the power to determine what rights the rest of us can be entrusted with.”
In an otherwise cool, dispassionate, reflective and even-handed comment, I failed to see any support for that assertion in the text itself. Any chance of giving some now?
“Little wonder Jerry Seinfeld won’t do his routine on any campus in the US. – his reason – the current ramrod political correctness among students.”
Is that right? Is that what Jerry said? Do you have a quotation from Jerry in support of your assertion to the effect that he won’t do his routine on any campus in the U.S. because of the current ramrod political correctness among students?
More importantly, do you have any support for your assertion that there exists a current ramrod political correctness among students in the U.S.? It is understood of course that by “support” is not to be understood as simply repeating your assertion in other words but rather understood to mean that you are able to cite published sources in reputable publications in respect to the current ramrod political correctness among students in the U.S.
RSVP
Andrea the Dead Feminist (07/04, 4:35PM)
Thank you for your thoughtful reply. Well Andrea, I guess I might be just abut the neediest motherfucker on God’s green creation but if there’s one need that trumps all the others it’s my need for rational discourse. What that means, Andrea, is that one’s assertions are supported by evidence whether in the form of coherent reasons of one’s own or by appeal to a cited authority with whom one is in agreement. In the latter case Andrea, reasons for such agreement are still required.
In the present case Andrea, that of your assertion to the effect that the only rights the rad-left is fighting for are the power to determine what right the rest of us can be entrusted with was not supported. Who said that, someone from the “rad-right?” Who would that be? Or was it the outcome of your own logically tight chain of reflection on the matter? If that is the case could you demonstrate it for us now?
Many thanks in advance Andrea. Write back soon.
RSVP
TTFbone (5:26PM)
Thank you for your kind reply to my question regarding the current prevalence of ramrod political correctness among the students on U.S. campuses. I must admit I was not aware of this phenomenon and so wondered about the support for your assertion.
The first such support cited was Jerry Seinfeld who apparently made just that claim and in respect to which you are, also apparently, in complete agreement. You advised me to google “Jerry Seinfeld” and “political correctness” but I will take our word that what he had to say about it was empirically supported, passing by the empirical question as to just how one might empirically support such an assertion. (Were thousands of questionnaires passed out to students on U.S campuses asking: “Are you ramrod politically correct?” Sounds unlikely.) So forget Jerry. What about you?
Assuming that you have not slavishly followed Jerry on the question of the prevalence of ramrod political correctness on U.S. campuses you must advance support for your own position. Such support, as I have previously indicated, must involve relevant citation(s) from reputable publications or demonstrate such support in the form of your own tight reasoning on the matter. Of course, if you are simply parroting Jerry on the prevalence of ramrod political correctness o U.S. campuses you must outline and defend his arguments by return post. (I don’t google Jerry Seinfeld.)
Good luck & Godspeed!
To prevent your assertion sinking to the level of hot blow you must
Sorry about the dangling tag but the point, that “hot blow” hits the nail n the head.
Also, do something about that dangling tag. A dermatologist can freeze it with liquid nitrogen until it necrophies and drops off.
Thank you Andrea for sharing your struggle in understanding what I meant by “rational discourse” in spite of the fact that I unambiguously demonstrated its meaning in my previous comment. I thought I had made it clear that you had failed to support your assertion to the effect that the only rights the rad-left are fighting for are the rights the rest of us can be trusted with. It was, after all, the issue which generated the present discussion and which, as a consequence, renders your present comment utterly irrelevant as it too fails to address your seminal but unsupported assertion.
In addition to the provision of reasons for one’s assertions – I have no need to provide such reasons since clearly I made no such assertion – the concept of “rational discourse” requires that one sticks to the point or else all is lost. Judging from your present comment it appears that you will require more time and reflection before posting your next effort. If you have difficulty in understanding what I mean by “sticking to the point” do not hesitate to ask.
Shant, you silly sod. Stick your point where it belongs.
Andrea, I detect bitterness which, given the spanking I was obliged to give you, is not surprising. However, remember that the night is darkest before the dawn. Compose yourself and take more time with your next comment. As I say, I shall be here to help you with understanding the concepts of “rational discourse” and “sticking to the point”. Now, you might want to lie down for spell.