Cycle lanes putting ambulance patients lives at risk [Telegraph]

[pete75]

got called a do-gooder.

This seems to me to be a complement, and recognition that you are contributing to the well-being of your community by doing good.
I would welcome you to my neighbourhood any time.

In the UK the term do-gooder is used by many as an insult.

[reohn2]

In the UK the term do-gooder is used by many as an insult.

I think there's a leettle tongue in cheek afoot in some previous posts Pete

[pete75]

In the UK the term do-gooder is used by many as an insult.

I think there's a leettle tongue in cheek afoot in some previous posts Pete

True but the post I replied to was from someone in Canada who may not know how the expression is used here. Or should I say misused - someone doing something like running a food bank or a soup kitchen would be disparagingly described as a do-gooder by many Tory supporters when in fact they are genuinely doing a good thing.

[AdamS]

I see we're into the depressing pre-election period when everything has to be turned into a tribal political point scoring opportunity. I have never heard anyone criticise other people for dedicating their spare time to charity. When used as a negative term it is common for 'do gooder' to be preceded by the word 'interfering'. People use it to describe somebody they believe has took it upon themselves to tell others what they should do. In Chris's case the insult was clearly misguided.

[Mistik-ka]

In the UK the term do-gooder is used by many as an insult.

I think there's a leettle tongue in cheek afoot in some previous posts Pete

True but the post I replied to was from someone in Canada who may not know how the expression is used here.

"Tongue in cheek"? Me? Impossible! I had my sense of humour surgically removed at age 14.

And yes, in Canada "do-gooder" has taken on the same reversal in sentiment it has in Britain. However just because some people wish to say "white" when they mean "black", it doesn't mean I have to follow suit.

[reohn2]

I think there's a leettle tongue in cheek afoot in some previous posts Pete

True but the post I replied to was from someone in Canada who may not know how the expression is used here.

"Tongue in cheek"? Me? Impossible! I had my sense of humour surgically removed at age 14.

And yes, in Canada "do-gooder" has taken on the same reversal in sentiment it has in Britain. However just because some people wish to say "white" when they mean "black", it doesn't mean I have to follow suit.

Well said that man

[Cyril Haearn]

I think there's a leettle tongue in cheek afoot in some previous posts Pete

True but the post I replied to was from someone in Canada who may not know how the expression is used here.

"Tongue in cheek"? Me? Impossible! I had my sense of humour surgically removed at age 14.

And yes, in Canada "do-gooder" has taken on the same reversal in sentiment it has in Britain. However just because some people wish to say "white" when they mean "black", it doesn't mean I have to follow suit.

You may buy a plugin humour card at Aldi for 99 eurocents, do you have Aldi over there? You can get a French sense of humour (sells well in Canada), or any other nationality, why one may even combine several
In German too a *Gutmensch* is understood as an insult, how perverse

We should be ashamed of our society, these do-gooders are saving people from starving, maybe because their benefits were cut because of a missed appointment caused by a cancelled bus

[Flinders]

I see we're into the depressing pre-election period when everything has to be turned into a tribal political point scoring opportunity. I have never heard anyone criticise other people for dedicating their spare time to charity. When used as a negative term it is common for 'do gooder' to be preceded by the word 'interfering'. People use it to describe somebody they believe has took it upon themselves to tell others what they should do. In Chris's case the insult was clearly misguided.

Have you missed that people who give a damn about other people less fortunate and/or try to fight for them are now called 'virtue signallers' even if they actually work hard for charities etc? That's the same thing. And I have indeed heard people called' do gooders' in a disparaging way for doing things like working for free for food banks and charities.

[AdamS]

Yes, it has passed me by. I can only say that it is not how I have heard the term used, but I have no reason to doubt your experience. I cannot understand how somebody can be criticised purely for being charitable. I can see how someone who forms an opinion and campaigns vociferously might fall within some people's definitions of a do-gooder. Such name calling is unjustified and unhelpful, but it is not only those of a conservative disposition who unfairly generalise about people who hold opinions contrary to their own.

[ChrisOntLancs]

i don't think it's that political, i think it's just an embarrassment about other people that appear more generous or whatever than yourself, a response to the belief that this other person thinks they are better than you because of it. when i talk about my volunteering (that i did purely for my cv) i did enjoy helping people, and the enthusiasm might look like smugness. in britain anything can be seen as an affront to anything ....and to be honest it's not uncommon for something to turn out to be an intentional affront to something else.... so i get it ha.

[pete75]

Yes, it has passed me by. I can only say that it is not how I have heard the term used, but I have no reason to doubt your experience. I cannot understand how somebody can be criticised purely for being charitable. I can see how someone who forms an opinion and campaigns vociferously might fall within some people's definitions of a do-gooder. Such name calling is unjustified and unhelpful, but it is not only those of a conservative disposition who unfairly generalise about people who hold opinions contrary to their own.

No but those on the right are more prone to criticizing folk who try to help others for no personal gain. I think the above post mention the term "virtue signalling" , sums it up. BTW the Tory controlled Westminster Council actually tried to bring in a by law banning soup kitchens a few years ago.

[mjr]

Segregated cycle lanes are putting patients’ lives at risk because they prevent traffic moving out of the way of ambulances, medical leaders have warned.

Yet segregated pedestrian facilities (pavements) do not? If a motorist can mount a kerb why can they not cross a lane divider, other than both actions being in the main illegal that is?

They often can and they do, usually without checking whether there's a cyclist in the bit of lane they're pulling into!

The better solution would be to build cycle lanes/tracks wide enough like London and Cambridge whenever possible so blue light vehicles can use them if the carriageway is congested:
[youtube]e6BV9kWFUYU[/youtube]
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6BV9kWFUYU

[AdamS]

I think the above post mention the term "virtue signalling" , sums it up. BTW the Tory controlled Westminster Council actually tried to bring in a by law banning soup kitchens a few years ago.

How ridiculous. I understood 'virtue signalling' to refer to people regurgitating 'right on' opinions rather than people actually doing something good. It is another unhelpful derogatory term though. What is needed is more respect and empathy in politics. Having our own political convictions is good. Viewing people of a different political convictions as self-serving, stupid or immoral is unhelpful at best.

Yes Chris, I know exactly what you mean and it has always baffled me. Why should it matter if someone else is (or thinks they are) more worthy, more selfless, more virtuous than we are? I get the problem with those that would impose their will on others, but if it is just a case of someone acting a bit superior whilst doing good does it really matter? If they are doing good, the more the merrier I say.

[AdamS]

MJR, wow, I've never seen anything like that. It looks really good. I can safely say that my local council's cycle lanes do not delay any ambulances, because drivers generally keep out of the gutter anyway

[Flinders]

I think the above post mention the term "virtue signalling" , sums it up. BTW the Tory controlled Westminster Council actually tried to bring in a by law banning soup kitchens a few years ago.

How ridiculous. I understood 'virtue signalling' to refer to people regurgitating 'right on' opinions rather than people actually doing something good. It is another unhelpful derogatory term though. What is needed is more respect and empathy in politics. Generalised Having our own political convictions is good. Viewing people of a different political convictions as self-serving, stupid or immoral is unhelpful at best.

Yes Chris, I know exactly what you mean and it has always baffled me. Why should it matter if someone else is (or thinks they are) more worthy, more selfless, more virtuous than we are? I get the problem with those that would impose their will on others, but if it is just a case of someone acting a bit superior whilst doing good does it really matter? If they are doing good, the more the merrier I say.

The term 'virtue signalling' was originally applied to people who tried to make themselves look good by saying things they thought sounded compassionate without actually doing anything compassionate. It is now widely applied in the press and on social media to anyone who isn't a certified sociopath.