Face coverings to become mandatory in shops in England (includes poll)

[Huntergreed]

An interesting note, cases in Scotland in the last week have been higher than they have over the past month (used to be consistently <10 cases daily, now it's averaging 10-20, with not many related to the Motherwell call centre), could this be related to masks being used incorrectly, increased touching of facial areas due to masks and people not considering the other measures to be as important due to mandatory masks in shops, or is this just a coincidence?

 

[Darandio]

I think that’s rather disingenuous. There are people whom mask wearing is medically impracticable or highly uncomfortable. Whilst they are exempt by law, this doesn’t prevent such people being on the receiving end of vigilantism, ignorance or bad attitude, which is something no one in such a position should have to face.

Faced with such a dilemma, and in the absence of support from the government (a trend we’ve seen right through this where the government has failed to mitigate against side-effects arising from some of its policy decisions), it’s not surprising at all that some people now feel uncomfortable venturing into shops. Especially for a measure which the DCMO recently went on the record as saying may “do more harm than good” and is “not a good idea”.

As the replies to me have been. As i've already addressed since, nobody is banned other than by their own choice, I simply believe it's wrong to suggest otherwise, feel free to disagree.

I'm also seeing neither vigilantism, ignorance or bad attitude, it seems some aren't seeing it either other than anecdotes from social media but not outdoors. Like I already said it's probably better to wait and see what tomorrow brings and see how the experience is for people. My worry is that people like to exaggerate such matters and will inevitably make those already scared to make a trip out more fearful.

 

[MikeWM]

I think that’s rather disingenuous. There are people whom mask wearing is medically impracticable or highly uncomfortable. Whilst they are exempt by law, this doesn’t prevent such people being on the receiving end of vigilantism, ignorance or bad attitude, which is something no one in such a position should have to face.

Faced with such a dilemma, and in the absence of support from the government (a trend we’ve seen right through this where the government has failed to mitigate against side-effects arising from some of its policy decisions), it’s not surprising at all that some people now feel uncomfortable venturing into shops. Especially for a measure which the DCMO recently went on the record as saying may “do more harm than good” and is “not a good idea”.

None of which is helped by the chief of the Metropolitan Police going on the radio and saying she hopes shoppers will be 'shamed' into wearing masks.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53498100

'My hope is that the vast majority of people will comply and that people who are not complying will be shamed into complying or shamed to leave the store by the store keepers or by other members of the public.'

Let that sink in. This is the most senior police officer in the country encouraging vigilantee action. What an appalling state of affairs.

(Of course she shouldn't have the job in the first place after the Jean Charles de Menezes affair, but I disgress...)

 

[MikeWM]

An interesting note, cases in Scotland in the last week have been higher than they have over the past month (used to be consistently <10 cases daily, now it's averaging 10-20, with not many related to the Motherwell call centre), could this be related to masks being used incorrectly, increased touching of facial areas due to masks and people not considering the other measures to be as important due to mandatory masks in shops, or is this just a coincidence?

(...counts the minutes until someone posts 'but it would have been even more if people weren't wearing masks'... )

 

[Darandio]

Let that sink in. This is the most senior police officer in the country encouraging vigilantee action. What an appalling state of affairs.

She should resign immediately, it's that simple.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

A very unfortunate state of affairs, and I hope that the reality when it comes to the chance of being challenged is worse than your fears. I suspect that given a few weeks at most things will settle down...there's a limit to how long most people can be bothered about such things before moving on to the next one.

Unfortunately, 5 weeks after face coverings were mandatory in public transport in Scotland, operators still get tweets from disgruntled passengers to the effect of "xyz was not wearing a mask, check the CCTV and get them fined" or "why was abc not refused travel, they're not wearing a mask!"

 

[Ianno87]

Wandered into Ely City Centre for lunch as I haven't for a while. Definitely busiest I've seen it for a long while - I had to ask some people queueing to get into a shop to move so I could get to the cash machine.

Maybe 20-25% people masked - up on say a month ago, when it was probably about 10%. The more you get I find the more oppressive and unpleasant it feels - everyone seems to be either scowling or looking generally miserable. What a depressing way to continue a depressing year.

None of which is helped by the chief of the Metropolitan Police going on the radio and saying she hopes shoppers will be 'shamed' into wearing masks.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-53498100


Let that sink in. This is the most senior police officer in the country encouraging vigilantee action. What an appalling state of affairs.

(Of course she shouldn't have the job in the first place after the Jean Charles de Menezes affair, but I disgress...)

Even as a pro-mask person, the "shaming" comment was bang out of order.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

I have to wonder if those maskivists that are highly vocal about wearing these things, have seen this video

https://www.facebook.com/1195045814...sfnsn=scwspwa&extid=T3PbP9vKDifFSCtJ&d=w&vh=i

Ironically, it’s on Facebook!
I attach some screenshots that give some idea what you’ll see

 

[Darandio]

Unfortunately, 5 weeks after face coverings were mandatory in public transport in Scotland, operators still get tweets from disgruntled passengers to the effect of "xyz was not wearing a mask, check the CCTV and get them fined" or "why was abc not refused travel, they're not wearing a mask!"

Whilst I believe it's none of their business they are doing this from behind a keyboard/touch screen. It's a fair bit different than making a direct comment and making someone feel uncomfortable to the point they don't want to leave the house. I'm certain that the vast majority of those doing this aren't saying a word in public, the same goes for this apparent vociferous pro-mask brigade on social media.

 

[RomeoCharlie71]

Whilst I believe it's none of their business they are doing this from behind a keyboard/touch screen. It's a fair bit different than making a direct comment and making someone feel uncomfortable to the point they don't want to leave the house. I'm certain that the vast majority of those doing this aren't saying a word in public, the same goes for this apparent vociferous pro-mask brigade on social media.

That is very true - I've been out a few times on the bus the past few weeks and no one has (vocally) batted an eyelid at anyone who's not wearing a face covering.

 

[sjpowermac]

As the replies to me have been. As i've already addressed since, nobody is banned other than by their own choice, I simply believe it's wrong to suggest otherwise, feel free to disagree.

I'm also seeing neither vigilantism, ignorance or bad attitude, it seems some aren't seeing it either other than anecdotes from social media but not outdoors. Like I already said it's probably better to wait and see what tomorrow brings and see how the experience is for people. My worry is that people like to exaggerate such matters and will inevitably make those already scared to make a trip out more fearful.

Good post regarding social media. I think the continual quoting of Facebook/Twitter posts and people going round whipping up hysteria about what could happen is deeply unhelpful.

I also have the greatest of sympathy for anyone with anxiety or medical problems around wearing masks. Anything we can say about our own experiences is only going to be anecdotal, but similar to yourself I’ve not seen anyone having a go at people for not wearing a mask.

 

[Journeyman]

As the replies to me have been. As i've already addressed since, nobody is banned other than by their own choice, I simply believe it's wrong to suggest otherwise, feel free to disagree.

I think you're being spectacularly crass here, and failing to understand just how serious this is for a significant number of people who suffer from physical and mental conditions and disabilities. These are people who face monumental challenges at the best of times, and are often severely limited in what they can do. I don't think you even remotely understand the nature of severe anxiety, and how embarrassing and distressing it can be to have a full-blown panic attack in public.

I suggest you go and educate yourself, and then think very carefully about what you've said. The rules as they stand, and the likely way they'll be interpreted, put many disabled people in an absolutely impossible position.

 

[MikeWM]

Whilst I believe it's none of their business they are doing this from behind a keyboard/touch screen. It's a fair bit different than making a direct comment and making someone feel uncomfortable to the point they don't want to leave the house. I'm certain that the vast majority of those doing this aren't saying a word in public, the same goes for this apparent vociferous pro-mask brigade on social media.

I'd agree with that - the social media 'shaming' posts are often accompanied by photographs that were clearly taken surreptitiously. I suspect the chances of an actual confrontation with another member of the public are fairly minimal. That doesn't mean that we should discount the fact that this is something that can cause anxiety in many people.

 

[Darandio]

I think you're being spectacularly crass here, and failing to understand just how serious this is for a significant number of people who suffer from physical and mental conditions and disabilities. These are people who face monumental challenges at the best of times, and are often severely limited in what they can do. I don't think you even remotely understand the nature of severe anxiety, and how embarrassing and distressing it can be to have a full-blown panic attack in public.

I suggest you go and educate yourself, and then think very carefully about what you've said. The rules as they stand, and the likely way they'll be interpreted, put many disabled people in an absolutely impossible position.

You know neither me or my understanding. People are being prevented from doing what they want to do, not banned. I completely agree that it's utterly terrible and wrong on every level but trying to send me to your naughty corner to educate myself doesn't change my view on the terminology being used here.

 

[The_Train]

I wore my face covering when I did my weekly shop last Sunday and felt no more uncomfortable than I usually feel in a supermarket so it is not a concern for me. And talking of no concern, I shall not care one jot if I come across people not wearing one (whether they have a reason or not as I won't know either way) and I most definitely won't be seeking to 'shame' anybody this coming Sunday when I next venture to the supermarket.

One thing that does interest me though is the number of people on here suggesting that they won't visit a shop until the face covering rule has been removed. I hope this is a reflection of the feeling across the population as it might mean that there are a lot less people at the supermarket and me and my face covering might actually 'enjoy' (that is probably a bit extreme haha) going around the supermarket in a more stress free environment

 

[Journeyman]

You know neither me or my understanding. People are being prevented from doing what they want to do, not banned. I completely agree that it's utterly terrible and wrong on every level but trying to send me to your naughty corner to educate myself doesn't change my view on the terminology being used here.

Prevented, banned, whatever - I'm not getting into semantics here, the effect is the same. It's an unintended effect, but going to shops isn't a luxury, for most of us it's essential.

No-one chooses to exclude themselves from society, it's usually forced on them by circumstances they can't control.

Please show some empathy. Have you seen what things like complex PTSD can do to people? The last thing they need is a heap of stuff that makes their lives even more difficult, on such flimsy justification.

 

[Bletchleyite]

She should resign immediately, it's that simple.

Why?

Everyone who is required to wear a mask must wear one. It is indeed to their shame if they do not, just like it is to the shame of any criminal to commit any crime.

People who are exempted need not and should not be shamed for not doing so.

 

[Huntergreed]

Why?

Everyone who is required to wear a mask must wear one. It is indeed to their shame if they do not, just like it is to the shame of any criminal to commit any crime.

People who are exempted need not and should not be shamed for not doing so.

Because encouraging self-led vigilantes to shame those who may have a perfect reason for not wearing a mask into feeling guilty is not morally right and this should never be said by the highest ranking police officer in the UK.

 

[Journeyman]

Why?

Everyone who is required to wear a mask must wear one. It is indeed to their shame if they do not, just like it is to the shame of any criminal to commit any crime.

People who are exempted need not and should not be shamed for not doing so.

Yet you've spent ages deciding how the rules should be interpreted, who should be exempted or not, and inventing pointless, difficult hoops for the exempted to jump through that the government is not insisting on.

You know what? If I see anyone not wearing a mask, I'm going to assume there's a good reason. I won't challenge them, I won't question them, I won't shame them. I'll leave them alone.

 

[sjpowermac]

I wore my face covering when I did my weekly shop last Sunday and felt no more uncomfortable than I usually feel in a supermarket so it is not a concern for me. And talking of no concern, I shall not care one jot if I come across people not wearing one (whether they have a reason or not as I won't know either way) and I most definitely won't be seeking to 'shame' anybody this coming Sunday when I next venture to the supermarket.

One thing that does interest me though is the number of people on here suggesting that they won't visit a shop until the face covering rule has been removed. I hope this is a reflection of the feeling across the population as it might mean that there are a lot less people at the supermarket and me and my face covering might actually 'enjoy' (that is probably a bit extreme haha) going around the supermarket in a more stress free environment

It’s interesting you should say that about wearing a mask. Several times I’ve completely forgotten to remove a mask on exiting the station/a shop, today I actually got all the way home.

I’m in complete agreement with you, I’ll wear a mask but I regard what anyone else does as completely up to them: it’s their business.

 

[Darandio]

Why?

Everyone who is required to wear a mask must wear one. It is indeed to their shame if they do not, just like it is to the shame of any criminal to commit any crime.

People who are exempted need not and should not be shamed for not doing so.

Because of the latter point of your post. As far as I can see she has made no attempt to address any exemption and has gone full gung-ho in encouraging the shaming of anyone who refuses to wear one. As you well know, you, me or the man in the street would have no idea whether someone is exempt and it's none of our damn business whether they are or not. Yet she has effectively given free reign to the public to make their own choice and shame accordingly.

 

[The_Train]

It’s interesting you should say that about wearing a mask. I wear one to walk through the railway station on my way home and several times I’ve completely forgotten to remove it on exiting the station, today I actually got all the way home.

I’m in complete agreement with you, I’ll wear a mask but I regard what anyone else does as completely up to them: it’s their business.

I've not made it all the way home but there has been a couple of occasions where I have left the local and been halfway home before realising I was still wearing it. Also, I was stood on the platform the other week (face covering on) and a little fly landed on my hand and it took me ages to figure out why nothing was happening when I tried to lightly blow it off As my face covering is a gaiter/snood, it really doesn't feel like I am wearing anything special - more like wearing a very light scarf!

And yes, your final sentence is exactly my thinking as well

 

[Journeyman]

Because of the latter point of your post. As far as I can see she has made no attempt to address any exemption and has gone full gung-ho in encouraging the shaming of anyone who refuses to wear one. As you well know, you, me or the man in the street would have no idea whether someone is exempt and it's none of our damn business whether they are or not. Yet she has effectively given free reign to the public to make their own choice and shame accordingly.

Absolutely - she's effectively said we should feel entitled to heap scorn and abuse on the sick and disabled! Does anyone feel some hate crime coming on?

 

[The_Train]

People who are exempted need not and should not be shamed for not doing so.

And how do those people who want to make themselves feel big and clever by shaming others know who is and isn't exempt from wearing one?

 

[Huntergreed]

Absolutely - she's effectively said we should feel entitled to heap scorn and abuse on the sick and disabled! Does anyone feel some hate crime coming on?

Not only hate crime - state approved hate crime!

She should at the very least be making a statement of apology.

 

[Journeyman]

Not only hate crime - state approved hate crime!

She should at the very least be making a statement of apology.

I hope she's held accountable when a vulnerable person is assaulted as a result of her comments. I'm not one for invoking Godwin lightly, but there was a certain government in the 1930s that felt quite comfortable declaring war on the vulnerable. We need to think about that.

 

[Darandio]

Absolutely - she's effectively said we should feel entitled to heap scorn and abuse on the sick and disabled! Does anyone feel some hate crime coming on?

I think it will certainly happen via social media where people can hide behind their device, which is abhorrent in itself. Out in the street, i'm not so sure. I guess we'll see from tomorrow how much that interview comes back to bite her.

 

[sjpowermac]

I've not made it all the way home but there has been a couple of occasions where I have left the local and been halfway home before realising I was still wearing it. Also, I was stood on the platform the other week (face covering on) and a little fly landed on my hand and it took me ages to figure out why nothing was happening when I tried to lightly blow it off As my face covering is a gaiter/snood, it really doesn't feel like I am wearing anything special - more like wearing a very light scarf!

And yes, your final sentence is exactly my thinking as well

A snood? Very fashionable! As a temporary measure I’ve gone for the disposable blue masks, to match my eyes and I’m almost done with designing a custom one with a Class 68

I’ve not observed any ‘shaming’ going on at all. I’d say if there is any awkwardness it’s in the other direction aimed at people wearing a mask (though possibly my lockdown hair cut might have been at play there!).

 

[bramling]

Whilst I believe it's none of their business they are doing this from behind a keyboard/touch screen. It's a fair bit different than making a direct comment and making someone feel uncomfortable to the point they don't want to leave the house. I'm certain that the vast majority of those doing this aren't saying a word in public, the same goes for this apparent vociferous pro-mask brigade on social media.

I’m afraid this isn’t quite so. Whilst you’re right that most is via social media, we’ve certainly had issues on the railway with confrontations over masks. Then there’s the ones who won’t say anything but will give a dirty look or perhaps a passing flippant off-the-cuff comment.

Whilst it's certainly the minority, by the same token one probably won't have to go too far before encountering this, especially the dirty looks or flippant comments -- nobody should expect to receive this, especially to find it encouraged by clumsy wording from someone who should known better (who herself has an "interesting" history and has found herself on the receiving end of mob justice).

 

[Darandio]

I’m afraid this isn’t quite so. Whilst you’re right that most is via social media, we’ve certainly had issues on the railway with confrontations over masks. Then there’s the ones who won’t say anything but will give a dirty look or perhaps a passing flippant off-the-cuff comment.

Whilst it's certainly the minority, by the same token one probably won't have to go too far before encountering this, especially the dirty looks or flippant comments -- nobody should expect to receive this, especially to find it encouraged by clumsy wording from someone who should known better (who herself has an "interesting" history and has found herself on the receiving end of mob justice).

Possibly. Although the only related anecdotes i've seen have been railway related which doesn't surprise me because when people cross that gateline they seem to assume a whole new persona whether that be about fellow behaviour, masks or tickets, general etiquette goes flying out the window as well. I haven't seen it in regards to shopping though but maybe that will change tomorrow. We'll see.