Newber-Friendly

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by nononono
Is it not merely a variant on holding the door for women and letting them pass first? It seems consistent, not an overcorrection.

No, the crowding situation and inability to freely maneouver on either side of the door makes it different. Out and to the side works if the man is not getting off the elevator at that floor (i.e.: he is just clearing the door for those who are getting off), but if he, too, is getting off he just needs to bloody well get off and clear the door entirely while waiting for whomever he is continuing with. I note that either "stand to one side" or "out and to the side" in that situation make it awkward for the man to lead his female companions once they are out of the elevator, which is his obligation under "ladies first" rules properly practiced (at best, he and his lady friends will be rearranging themselves directly in front of the elevator, thus back to the blocking the door problem).

Of course, this is all applicable only to social situations. "Ladies first" never, ever applies (or applied) in the workplace. Confusing social and business manners is bad manners.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
TM: I concur that determining who is more tired than you is entirely subjective and therefore can't be mandatory. Still, it's good to try, and hope that others will do the same when it's you coming off a 40 hour day. Generational distinctions can be tricky as well (witness 70-year old Russians in hotpants and face-spackling coming from brighton beach - well, that's not tricky but you get the point) and don't inherently imply weakness, but still. (Giving seats to families who can't otherwise corral and control their children is just basic self-preservation.)

I have no problem with what you just posted. If someone looks tired, I often get up and give them my seat. If I'm exhausted, I'm not giving up my seat to a 40 year old woman just because she's a 40 year old woman. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
In retiring the ladies precedence rules, however, I note that I am far from alone among women who find a man standing up when a woman (any woman) joins or leaves their table to be unbearably sexy. People get laid for less.

Women like you and nonononononn find it sexy. Other women think you're a rube or are trying too hard. Most women couldn't possibly care less about it or get annoyed if you do it past the first date.

I have no problem with men who do this stuff. If it gets them laid, I'm all for it. Good job. It's the expectation that men need to do this or they're somehow impolite that pisses me off.

TM

[ltl/fb]

I had some really awesomely delicious cupcakes on Saturday. If anyone stood out of my way when I was heading for them, I am pretty sure that it was because they were scared, not because I'm female and/or might look pregnant when I'm not sucking in my tummy (or possibly when I am).

[robustpuppy]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Full of fury, signifying nothing, considering I've already said I give up my seat to the elderly, disabled and pregnant. But you sound pretty tough, if that makes you feel better.

Fuck off. I am not giving up my seat to someone simply because they're older. And I sure as hell am not giving up my seat for women just because they're female. Your definition of "polite" is outdated or just plain wrong. What the fuck about me sacrificing my comfort for women who are perfectly capable of dealing otherwise has to do with civil society?

If I held on to the outdated belief that women shouldn't compete in sports because they are not built for it, should be accompanied in public at all times for their own protection, shouldn't be allowed to vote because they don't understand the issues or any other outdated approach that led to the "polite" rules you're bitching about, maybe I would give up my seat. But women are not helpless and expect my respect, so demanding special treatment in these categories, while demanding equal treatment in all others is fucking bullshit.

Suck a dick. People who expect it make it more irritating for those of us operating on common sense rules.

Bullshit. One, I didn't say you shouldn't give up your seat to someone who looks like they need a rest. I said giving up a seat to a woman because she's a woman is bullshit. So is giving up a seat to someone simply because they're older.

Two, I often give up my seat and it makes me and the person I'm giving the seat to feel good. In fact, my young daughter is instructed to give up her seat for anyone who is prego, elderly or worse as well and it makes her feel good too. That's about it. No one else gives a fuck.

So stop acting like these are rules that everyone should follow. They're mostly stupid and serve no point other than to give people like you something to scowl about and mutter under their breath about their fucked up views on "politeness."

TM

Translation: When I sit, and she stands, her ass is in my face.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
Full of fury, signifying nothing, considering I've already said I give up my seat to the elderly, disabled and pregnant. But you sound pretty tough, if that makes you feel better.

Fuck off. I am not giving up my seat to someone simply because they're older. And I sure as hell am not giving up my seat for women just because they're female. Your definition of "polite" is outdated or just plain wrong. What the fuck about me sacrificing my comfort for women who are perfectly capable of dealing otherwise has to do with civil society?

If I held on to the outdated belief that women shouldn't compete in sports because they are not built for it, should be accompanied in public at all times for their own protection, shouldn't be allowed to vote because they don't understand the issues or any other outdated approach that led to the "polite" rules you're bitching about, maybe I would give up my seat. But women are not helpless and expect my respect, so demanding special treatment in these categories, while demanding equal treatment in all others is fucking bullshit.

Suck a dick. People who expect it make it more irritating for those of us operating on common sense rules.

Bullshit. One, I didn't say you shouldn't give up your seat to someone who looks like they need a rest. I said giving up a seat to a woman because she's a woman is bullshit. So is giving up a seat to someone simply because they're older.

Two, I often give up my seat and it makes me and the person I'm giving the seat to feel good. In fact, my young daughter is instructed to give up her seat for anyone who is prego, elderly or worse as well and it makes her feel good too. That's about it. No one else gives a fuck.

So stop acting like these are rules that everyone should follow. They're mostly stupid and serve no point other than to give people like you something to scowl about and mutter under their breath about their fucked up views on "politeness."

TM

Yeh, NY sucks.

But if someone is so fucking important that basic courtesy doesn't matter, I still don't see how the standing/sitting distinction is worth getting riled over. On the other hand, the difference between standing near the door or having to push all the way in -- that's worth fighting for. The Preggos can have the seat - just give me the quick exit near the door.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
Even most people here adhere to the "women get off the elevator first" rule -- is it really that archaic? Where isn't it observed (in office buildings populated in large part by fairly highly paid professionals)? New York? DC? Chicago? SF?

ETA I mainly care that there is an understood rule. Because it's just massive confusion in crowded elevators making many stops when there isn't an understood rule.

In crowded elevators this rule is dumb as hell. If you're standing right next to the door and you have to get out first, why the hell would you move to the side and let the woman in the back go first? That makes absolutely no sense. And it is highly annoying to everyone else in the elevator.

TM

[Replaced_Texan]

So there's a debate going on here in Houston between a homeowner and a bar. Homeowner is irritated with the bass coming from the bar; bar says they've been playing music for the last six years, way before homeowner moved to the area.

A noise complaint last month (incidently a few days after I saw The Hold Steady at the same bar) resulted in an cop going into the bar to quiet down a Two Gallants show. Accounts after that are fuzzy, but you can watch on You Tube if you put in Houston Taser and Walters on Washington in the search function. Or read about it at Myspace here. (Links for the lazy You Tuber here.)

When all was said and done, three people ended up Tasered (including a 14 year boy who started convulsing and foaming at the mouth), the lead singer for the Two Gallants ended up running for it, a 90 year old bass was destroyed, the Two Gallants drummer ended up spending a night in jail, and the Decemberists to announce that they're not coming to Houston until the situation has been resolved.

Putting aside the necessity for HPD remedial training on how to handle noise complaints (Jesus fucking Christ, the Two Gallants were out of control?), should the relatively new homeowners prevail over the bar that's been there for awhile? The homeowners mention that the bar has recently been attracting a different crowd, but Walters has been holding shows for years.

I will note that I know the homeowners and I find it very interesting that the Houston Chronicle article neglects to mention that their baby was born in July. I don't know whether or not the number of complaints went up with the birth of the baby, but I wouldn't be surprised.

[ltl/fb]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
In crowded elevators this rule is the dumb as hell. If you're standing right next to the door and you have to get out first, why the hell would you move to the side and let the woman in the back go first? That makes absolutely no sense. And it is highly annoying to everyone else in the elevator.

TM

I just want a consistent rule. At least this one gets a good chunk of people out of the way, so that the person in back isn't still trying to get out as the doors shut. Anyway, if you are in the front, and the elevator is crowded, just get the fuck off for a few seconds.

Cupcake?

[greatwhitenorthchick]

Originally posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Yeh, NY sucks.

What exactly about TM's post was an indication that NY sucks? I don't bash the place where anyone else lives -- I find it extremely annoying when people who don't even live here bash it. I would not choose to live in a place that sucks.

[patentparanyc]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I just want a consistent rule. At least this one gets a good chunk of people out of the way, so that the person in back isn't still trying to get out as the doors shut. Anyway, if you are in the front, and the elevator is crowded, just get the fuck off for a few seconds.

Cupcake?

The visitors receive a sticker/badge upon arrival. One time in the elevator one of the visitors was sticking it to his blackberry and we were all staring at him while he was pressing. That crap doesn't come off. Sure enough he tried to disengage the sticker....wasn't happening.

[greatwhitenorthchick]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
Of course, this is all applicable only to social situations. "Ladies first" never, ever applies (or applied) in the workplace. Confusing social and business manners is bad manners.

Now we are dancing on the head of a pin. So in the office there is no "ladies first" but when I go to the head of the department's apartment for a cocktail party, it's a social situation so all of a sudden I become a helpless female? This sounds like a situation ripe for disaster.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally posted by ltl/fb
I just want a consistent rule. At least this one gets a good chunk of people out of the way, so that the person in back isn't still trying to get out as the doors shut. Anyway, if you are in the front, and the elevator is crowded, just get the fuck off for a few seconds.

Agreed. I'm all for people getting the fuck out of the way of other people.

TM

[Penske_Account]

Originally posted by nononono
Only if you let them wiggle around a bit.

Of course. I am a giver.

[Bad_Rich_Chic]

Originally posted by ThurgreedMarshall
I have no problem with what you just posted.

I know, you secretly agree with me about everything. Tease.

If I'm exhausted, I'm not giving up my seat to a 40 year old woman just because she's a 40 year old woman. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Because she's a woman, or because you are asserting that a 40 year old would fit into the "older generation than you" category? If the former, I concur, that's why the old rules got retired. If the later, I ... will refrain from comment on the state of your "boyish" good looks.

Come on, you can admit it - anyone who would qualify as a generation older that you and me also could be argued to qualify as elderly. Or at least qualify for a senior discount at the movies.

[nononono]

Originally posted by Bad_Rich_Chic
No, the crowding situation and inability to freely maneouver on either side of the door makes it different. Out and to the side works if the man is not getting off the elevator at that floor (i.e.: he is just clearing the door for those who are getting off), but if he, too, is getting off he just needs to bloody well get off and clear the door entirely while waiting for whomever he is continuing with. I note that either "stand to one side" or "out and to the side" in that situation make it awkward for the man to lead his female companions once they are out of the elevator, which is his obligation under "ladies first" rules properly practiced (at best, he and his lady friends will be rearranging themselves directly in front of the elevator, thus back to the blocking the door problem).

Of course, this is all applicable only to social situations. "Ladies first" never, ever applies (or applied) in the workplace. Confusing social and business manners is bad manners.

Disagree. There may be a box of manners trotted out for each instance, but certainly there is significant overlap. Door-holding, provided it isn't accompanied by unmannerly but gender-based leering, is certainly appropriate regardless of the situation.

And to the arrangement and rearrangements after the elevator-door dance, I've seen this all flow quite smoothly, so I'm certain it isn't impossible.

I will agree it's ridiculous to twist oneself (or someone else) like a pretzel merely to meet the letter of the mannerly law (I've seen men literally run ahead, leaving the female companion companionless, in efforts to make a dramatic show of holding the door for her; this is silly).