theironroad
Established Member
Bit pedantic. Many female people in the industry call themselves actor's and it is now widely regarded as a non gender specific term.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Actress tips water over man sat in seat for not giving it up
- Thread starter northwichcat
- Start date
- Status
Bit pedantic. Many female people in the industry call themselves actor's and it is now widely regarded as a non gender specific term.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I would say Miriiam Gargoyles looks more like an actor and doesn't behave like an actress but I question if she is either.
Arrogant people like her need taking down a peg or two. Had it been me also with a bottle of water I would have tipped it over her. Eye for an eye and all that. I hope the lad sat tight after the assault.
Last edited by a moderator:
323235
Established Member
I was however I am not going to give my seat up to an ignorant , disrespectful idiot regardless of their complaint.
If they are deserving I would definitely let them sit down. What I would like to know is how far away the nearest free seat was? How bad is her arthritis? Should she have been travelling along by train with lots of luggage if It was that bad Why did she not have travel assistance ?
Surely a celebrity could even afford to pay someone to travel with them
I have been on the receiving end of this type of behaviour - I have permanent balance organ damage and at times I can't always stand for too long when my balance is bad or I have an ear complaint / infection and I was made to feel bad for choosing to remain seated when an older person who was capable of standing was standing because I was young and the bus was full.
Last edited:
Just because someone is young or appears healthy doesn't mean they actually don't need the seat. My brother has a spine condition and begins to shake and becomes unsteady on his feet if he has to stand up without moving around for more than 5 minutes or so, especially on a moving vehicle. I can remember a few instances of elderly people making remarks about him not standing up, and he got very embarrassed when I explained to people. Hidden disabilities are not given much thought by most people.
As for the incident in question, I would reserve comment but I took a disliking to the actress involved after watching her in the latest BBC series. I can fully imagine her doing such a thing.
As for the incident in question, I would reserve comment but I took a disliking to the actress involved after watching her in the latest BBC series. I can fully imagine her doing such a thing.
Last edited:
IanD
Established Member
I don't agree with her actions (and don't agree that she's national treasure or even a good actor) but why should she have to provide evidence of her ability to stand? If she asked nicely (which is not clear nor likely in this instance) eg "I'm sorry but I can't stand for long periods, could you please let me sit down?" then that should be sufficient. Maybe we should all carry a doctor's note and/or our full medical history on a vellum scroll to satisfy your curiosity.
bramling
Veteran Member
That's fine, however one also shouldn't have to provide evidence of need to remain seated either. Everyone potentially has their own needs and requirements. In this incident the youth had every right to be left alone in peace.
In an increasingly populated country, these sort of conflicts will occur more and more frequently.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Indeed.
The conversation should have gone:
"Can I have that seat please? I can't stand for long"
"I'm afraid I have a disability myself"
"OK, I'll sit over there then".
That was all that was needed. Nothing more from either party. No embarrassment, no assumptions, no confusion. Just a rational conversation between two people ascertaining each others' needs to an adequate level.
The conversation should have gone:
"Can I have that seat please? I can't stand for long"
"I'm afraid I have a disability myself"
"OK, I'll sit over there then".
That was all that was needed. Nothing more from either party. No embarrassment, no assumptions, no confusion. Just a rational conversation between two people ascertaining each others' needs to an adequate level.
Next we'll be arguing about the use of the words 'railway station' and 'train station'...!
But if she could simply accept the situation and go to the other seat, then that's what she could have done in the first place.
The whole thing still comes over to me -- from what we have heard here -- as about someone with an over-strong sense of self-importance and entitlement. My sympathies remain entirely with the seated man.
theironroad
Established Member
Now you're being silly, we all know that would never ever happen just like customers/passengers....
chris89
Established Member
Now you're being silly, we all know that would never ever happen just like customers/passengers....
Haven't seen Voyagers mentioned either yet :P
Either on topic, i still stand by what i put earlier anyway, the Guy was in the right.
That's her reputation generally. She is also on record as saying she hates "young people".
HMS Ark Royal
Established Member
And ironically spent a decade filming for Harry Potter
Deepgreen
Established Member
Or even actors.
bramling
Veteran Member
Ah, now we've got to the bottom of it.
Perhaps she remembers being an obnoxious youngster herself, and assumes that's what all "young people" are like. Unpleasantness is not related to age, she demonstrates this very well indeed.
Dr_Intoxicated
Member
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2014
- Messages
- 448
As a youngster I was indeed told to stand up for older people, but these days I am now somewhat older myself.
It seems that things have changed and the attitude of some parents these days is that I should stand up so their little darlings can sit down or even worse stand on the seats. But that is a whole new can of worms.
It seems that things have changed and the attitude of some parents these days is that I should stand up so their little darlings can sit down or even worse stand on the seats. But that is a whole new can of worms.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Unless in a priority seat where I am required to do so, I will not move for anyone who is rude about it, whether they appear to need the seat or not. Politeness costs nothing.
You know what if someone asks me if they can have my seat I'll generally give it. I trust in people better nature and am physically able to stand for a while. If people begging ask me for money I will generally make a judgement call. I have no problem saying no to either if I can give an honest answer though.
theironroad
Established Member
As most young children don't pay anything to travel on trains, tube etc I'm often shocked when you see 2 or 3 kids and a parent or two occupying seats with adults standing.
Scotty
Member
Would you rather the kids were running about, or blocking the aisles?
The cost of the ticket does not include the right to sit down so unless the adults have reserved a seat they have no more right to a seat than the children.
Assuming the child is under 5, then yes they do:
"Up to two children under five years of age may accompany each fare-paying passenger free of charge, unless the Train Company you want to use specifies otherwise in their notices and other publications. However, children under five years of age who are travelling free may only occupy a seat which is not required by a fare-paying passenger."
Once the child hits five and buys a child ticket, then you're right.
So does that mean its ok to make a child of 4 stand whilst an adult sits ?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
As with air travel, if a ticket is not purchased for a child of 4, they sit on the knee of the accompanying adult. If the adult wishes them to occupy a seat, they purchase a ticket. Indeed, this may be to their advantage if to do so would allow the use of Family Railcard discount! Entitlement to a seat is, if travelling free, the same as the entitlement of a bag to occupy a seat, i.e. if someone wants it regardless of the availability of others then they move.
(FWIW I think this should not be permitted for air travel, as sitting on the parent's knee means they *will* be crushed beneath the adult's body in an accident)
Last edited:
Deepgreen
Established Member
Yes, in the appropriate circumstances - that's what the rule says. Plus - they don't have so far to fall if they faint!
What about fat kids or even the more corpulent
Why is it then right for the parent/guardian who is not entitled to have a seat then have a seat so that them and the child under 5 can sit on their lap. Or do a parent/guardian with a child under 5 have the entitlement to a seat over a generic ticketholder
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
A farepayer (or user of a relevant non-staff free pass in some cases) has more right to a seat than a non-farepayer. Someone who has a disability has more right to a seat than someone without.
Beyond that, it is pure discretion. If you want a seat for a 4-year-old, pay a fare for them.
There is no special accommodation for a fat person, any more than there is special accommodation for a tall, heavily built bloke (me) who will not fit in some airline seating nor in 3+2 without also occupying a bit of the adjacent seat or the aisle.
Last edited:
Then, as a fare paying ticket holder they still have no right to a seat.
Obesity is considered a disability. Even where you say about people with a disability having rights to a seat over the more able bodied person it is still a grey area. Where priority seats exist then yes as that is specified by the TOC.
What about a Freedom Pass holder ? It's free travel so what about their rights to a seat over say, a Gold Card holder ? Or are we back to square one where being old doesn't automatically grant you any right to a seat.
I know where my moral compass points
- Status