Old timers rattle zimmers at 'Elderly Persons' sign Campaigning old timers organisation Age Concern is demanding the scrapping of the "Elderly Persons" road sign, which suggests that advanced years come at the price of a hunched back and a hobble to the shops propped up on a walking stick. UK elderly persons road sign The offending image - introduced in 1981 - is described by …
How long until roadworks contractors complain that they're not perpetually standing with a spade dug into a pile of earth?
My bike certainly doesn't look like the one on the road signs, either.
The point isn't to accurately illustrate something, it's to quickly warn of it.
Sign shows a old lady picking the pocket of a blind man to me, bottom line do we also get signs warning of signs ahead or indeed gaggles of children.
Seen some great ones in my time though a quick google and get a fine example of a sign causing what its meant to avoid:
http://robertstevenson.files.wordpress.com/2008/04/silly-sign-22.jpg
These are the same people who would complain in a young lad in a hot hatch buzzed them when they crossed the road.....
The sign helps people realise there are old fogeys, or coffindodgers that may be slower at crossing the road. Maybe we should use these two phrases to appease them....
The Highway Code lists that sign as "Frail Pedestrians likely to cross", not "Beware, militant old gits"
Its not about speed, it about alerting drivers to possible hazards (you'd never believe the damage a Zimmer frame can do)
I'm waiting for militant foxes and badgers to complain that the "Wild Animals" warning sign discriminates against them because it depicts a deer.
and you're walking upright without aids at full walking speed, what does it matter your age is? Drivers don't have to "watch for fast-walking pensioners" so all they need is a sign saying "watch out for slow-walking pensioners" who may exist.
Or do the fully able pensioners want the less able segregated off to a safe area where their disability will not be associated with them?
The amount of power and influence one can acquire through portraying oneself as a victimised minority in this modern PC obsessed world is mind boggling.
The wrinklies are the largest and most powerful demographic already. Do they really need to resort to propaganda in addition to their current social dominance?
The next time I'm crashed into in the supermarket by a trolley or electric scooter I'll have to bear in mind that the poor dear is a victim of social stereotyping.
So, will the 'roadworks' sign - featuring a bloke with a shovel in a pile of Tarmac(R) now be altered to show a range of activities related to the construction industry in general? Because it's SUCH a stereotypical representation of what they do, it really is misleading*.
It's just supposed to be an icon, a symbol, an easily recognisable sign. Not a full graphical representation of the actual subject!
What do they want? Full-colour photos of genuine local pensioners? Will rural areas have the various 'animal-in-road' signs replaced by photos of the specific local breeds, posing in the road?
Bah.
*Not least because it suggests they spend time working.
...The "children crossing" sign could act as a beacon to garry glitter types who would congregate near the signs looking to "help" children across the road.
...And why are the people on warning roadsigns always black.....totally racist....i will be righting to a token black MP about this shocking oversight.
Is this sign stereotyping? Yes. Do people recognize what the stereotype is fro the image? Yes. Do people know full well that not all elderly people are anything like what this stereotypical image depicts? Yes. The problem then? Daily Mail readers who are sick of the ethnic minorities pulling this one all the time and now they want their turn: translate into: morons who have too much time on their hands and are not putting it to good use.
Warning: common sense strikes again.
I would like to complain about the 'school ahead' sign depicting two running children, it is encouraging our nation's youth to run in the road, which is dangerous.
Also, the speed limit signs in miles per hour are discriminating against those of us modern and educated enough to be thinking in kilometres per hour; how can we be expected to stick to a speed limit which requires thirty seconds of mental calculation?
Likewise, I do not like the discriminatory nature of driving laws. Under 17s have a right to use our roads like the rest of us; and the disabled. I think it's just plain wrong that a man born blind, who has no choice in the matter, is not allowed to drive a 20 tonne truck around the M25.
Finally, the 'left turn ahead' sign is belittling those of us with erectile disfunction.
Can I suggest we take all people over the age of seventy and burn them in a huge pyre? We can use the resulting energy to power the country for a while, our energy requirements will fall dramatically (old people use more heating - so Age Concern tell us) resulting in a huge drop in the price of fuel.
Our taxes can be more than halved as we stop paying for their pensions, nursing care, winter fuel allowances, NHS costs etc etc. We will free up babdly needed housing stock for first-time buyers currently priced out of the market. Supermarket queues will move twice as fast.
It's a win, win, win, win solution. There really is no need for us to listen to their shite any more.
They lived through a period of extra-ordinarily low housing and fuel costs and have come out of it with zero provisions for their own retirement - instead choosing to sponge off the current generation who are already hard pressed by massive housing costs, at least in part caused by them!
Improve Britain. Burn a Granny!
.. and take its tablets. The sign means that infirm people may be about. I SAID INFIRM PEOPLE MAY BE ABOUT. It doesn't mean that all old people are infirm. Those in good health don't need any special consideration.
If you want to see a daft sign, have a look at the tram sign and work out where the tops of the wheels are.
I think my town needs one that accurately conveys the message "Teenage girl with impossibly-tight-ponytail and pushchair laden with Greggs-scoffing offspring likely to lurch outwards in front of car in a desperate attempt to get a) into primark b) some compo c) across the street to smack that slapper Kerry coz she was looking at me well funny.
Mines the one with peaked cap and jackboots next to it.
This is incredibly old news. Over 5 years ago the elderly started moaning about this. There's even an old folks home which has a selection of stupid signs including an OAP with a walking stick on a skateboard.
Sadly any hope for me finding the original story has been lost to the recent re-issuing of this tired old thing.
I hope it enjoyed it's day out. Time for it to go back to the home, I think.
It was the organisation "Age Concern" that complained about this sign... how many elderly folks complained? How many of them are actually offended? I'm guessing very, very few.
It's like the numpties that don't want Christmas decorations in shopping malls in case it offends the any of the non-Christian communities. I've never yet met a Muslim/Hindu/Seikh who was even remotely offended by Chrimbo deccies... and I live in Wolverhampton.
All these elderly bashers, have they forgotten that were it not for the elderly who fought (and died) for us to keep Britain afloat we would be a different and a lot worse nation now?
I for one am happy to pay my taxes in honour and recognition of what our elder members of society sacrificed in order to make a future for us.
"Will rural areas have the various 'animal-in-road' signs replaced by photos of the specific local breeds, posing in the road?"
Hah! Giggled a little at the thought of some gerbil or similar critter on its hind legs in the road with it's little paws up and it's mouth wide open in shock. Looking like when someone lampoons the "being run over by a bus" stance.
Now THERE'S a road traffic icon I could admire!
PS Erectile dysfunction? Mine only gets down to a right angle when I'm "ready" if I weigh the little bastard down with a towel!
PH is wondering...
So where in a town are there NOT likely to be people that may cross a road slower than others?
More crossings and more care from drivers please. I hear a 20mph train thundering down the road safety track!
That'll be great wont it. Then we can do 20mph 24hrs a day like we already do in some areas, for schools that are...
(a) Empty through holidays (25% of year).
(b) Empty coz it's night time
(c) Not spewing kids onto the road coz they are hard at work inside!
Be honest drivers. How many times have you seen a pedestrian waiting to cross a road, in the rain, while you trickle along in slow traffic that would cost you nothing to halt for a short while. You never know, it may even lighten your mood as someone thanks you.
This reminds me of the fuss created by the brown Tourist Destination signs when they were introduced. Places like Marwell got uptight because they didn't have any elephants.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2002/20023113.htm#sch14
There are some pretty niche attractions that get their own sign. How many tram museums are there, for example?
(Question rhetorical. Please don't go find out.)
It's seems Lizzy McLennan is not the only one jumping the gun. Who says this said depicts anyone Age Concern should be looking out for?
The quote from the BMJ seems confused, also. How is the sign implying anything about expectations of those with advancing age?
A very quick check on Direct.gov explains the meaning as "Frail (or blind or disabled if shown) pedestrians likely to cross road ahead". No mention of old.
It may not be a great sign, but what should be used instead to alert drivers quickly that vulnerable people are likely to be crossing? Physically 'frail' and possibly blind or disabled is exactly what that sign says to me.
Get that chip off your shoulder, Lizzy.
We need a sign with the silhouette of a person on one of those mobility scooters, preferably while waving a cane in the air.
Here in the States, stretches of road that are likely to have farmers driving tractors are identified by a man driving a tractor... wearing a straw hat... which I doubt many farmers wear these days. Normally that wouldn't annoy me, except that it seems like the obvious alternative would be to just have a sign with the silhouette of a tractor - I think that would get the point across... :\
.....'Moaning Bunch of Tossers'.
Next the electricity companies will complain that their Eco electricity isn't shown as a green lightning flash on signs warning of the risk of electrocution.
Let's just take down the offending signs and let Darwinian behaviour take its toll.
It's not the ones that died for us that bother me. It's the ones who survived and won't stop moaning about what a shit-hole the country has become that piss me off. Apparantly, it's all down to the teenagers, who've only been in the country less than twenty years and have no power to change anything.
Certainly it can't possibly be their fault, what with them having lived here for eighty years and having voted for government after government....
Problem is, they didn't stand in line to get signed up thinking "y'know, I think I need to make sure that Mark in the 21st century isn't living in a nazi hellhole.". They were thinking
a) Oh shit, can't I get out of this
b) the bastards killed my nan
c) my family needs my protection
"Solution
By James Bassett
Improve Britain. Burn a Granny!"
Is that a Final Solution, or just A Modest Proposal
----------------------------------------------------
"Finally, the 'left turn ahead' sign is belittling those of us with erectile disfunction."
Not to mention upsetting those of a right wing persuasion!!!!
=====
Paris cos she doesn't know what an "Old Person" is....
"All these elderly bashers, have they forgotten that were it not for the elderly who fought (and died) for us to keep Britain afloat we would be a different and a lot worse nation now?"
Presumably at the bottom of the Atlantic - I didn't realise this landmass floated on the dead bodies of pensioners... it's all so obvious now, this would explain why sea levels are rising as pensioners are living longer!!! GREAT SCOTT!!
I choose the accurate representation of a rescue helicopter as it lowers down more elderly bodies to the coast....
I've come around to the p.o.v. that all traffic signage needs to be eliminated, with the sole exception of directional signage (e.g. "Walnut Creek next exit"). There is so much trivial, non-functional signage now that we may as well throw out the baby (very small) with the bathwater (lots of it).
Some examples from "around here" (Victoria, BC):
I. A sign reading "Slow: deaf person in neighborhood". So they have a deaf git who doesn't know not to walk in the traffic lanes?
II. A pictograph for "no passing" -- impossible to figure out what it is. If a pictograph isn't instantly recognizable it's a failure. Don't know who the dimbulb was that thought this one up. May be due to the Canajun tendency to favor pictographs over language as a way of dealing with the inherent bilingualism of the country, but I doubt any Francophone fails to understand "stop" and any Anglophone driving in La Belle Province fails to understand "Arret" in a red octagon.
III. Stupid plastic bag signs on wire frames on fairly major road reading "slow - children at play". When there are no children visible at all! Do the parents not teach their darling snowflakes not to play in the street?
IV. BC has gotten rid of billboards but replaced them with standardized "tourist attraction" signs. I don't know if "tourist attractions" have to pay to have one posted, but you see things like "tourist attraction - potter", "woodworker", and other nonsensical non-attractions.I suspect that these "attractions" are not really commercial enterprises, and that these signs generate little or no traffic. Moreover, the forest of such standardized signs is just as ugly as the billboards they have functionally replaced.
V. And then there are the signs saying "dial 1-800-555-1212 for current road conditions" and the ones that give a web URL for the same purpose. These can only be interpreted as trying to get drivers to use cellphones and in-car web access while at the wheel. Excuse me?
Clearly the people in charge of traffic signage in BC have forgotten, in their attempt to create a snowbound nanny state, that every extraneous sign is one more distraction for drivers, who themselves already have enough on their plates coping with traffic-choked highways. Too many extraneous signs and drivers start to ignore all signage.
Then where are we?
Footnote: the buses that say "Sorry I am . . . not in service" on their display, resulting in the key message "not in service" being displayed less than 50% of the time. I'll stop before I rant any more.
It would be amusing to erect Register-like signs warning of exclamation points and black helicopters.
We need a new warning sign, an icon which adequately depicts that there may be stupid, asinine, self-aggrandizing politically correct twats with nothing better to do than assume they speak for everyone, in the vicinity. So as we know to speed up and aim for the useless wastes of oxygen if we see one.
"The point isn't to accurately illustrate something, it's to quickly warn of it."
EXACTLY! I see a sign like this, I know what the potential hazard ahead is and can drive accordingly and look out for people who might not be able to cross the road quickly. Don't care what age they are, I'd rather not have them as a hood ornament.
The alternative is the utter crapness that is an average "informative" sign here in the US.
"Watch for turning vehicles". OK, but wouldn't a simple icon of, I dunno, a side-junction, have told me that already?
Or my personal unfave: "Stop for school buses loading or unloading children. State Law." By the time I've read and processed all of that in it's mixed condensed font sizes all squeezed onto a road sign (and I'm a fast reader) I've most likely mown down the kiddies crossing the street then slammed into the back of the bus at 55mph. I suppose I could always plead dyslexia...
It's like the sign above your head that reads "Mind the step" and distracts you long enough to fall down/up it.
How about replacing all road signs (except directional ones) with one that reads 'Drive carefully'?
And while they're doing that, booking people for driving 'without due care and attention'.
What's wrong with those signs, they tell a litte story...
"Caution, bendy road ahead, which may be slippy, if it's raining or snowing. The road is uneven, and the verges are soft. The road is also tight, and you may see Stags shagging a ram!" Oh and something to do with the post!
But if you're hurtling at 60mph, perhaps all you'll get is
Caution....slippy....verges....tight...shagging!
Pais.... need I say any more?
Not all elderly people are black.
Not all elderly people dress in black
Not all elderly people stand against white backgrounds
Perhaps most importantly of all:
Not all elderly people are two-dimensional.
That is reserved for the WOC* complainers.
*Waste of Organic Carbon
As an oldie myself, I've been working up to a rant about road signs for a
while now. Thank you for reminding me.
A little while ago I came across a road sign which read 'Road liable to
flooding'. How bloody useless is that? I need to know if the road is
flooded/impassable or not. It's no use telling me that it might be flooded
on certain occasions because that doesn't help me at all. Let's suppose I
continue on my journey, still unaware of the prevailing condition until I
find myself immobilised and hip-deep in dirty water. Might I expect to see
another road sign at this point saying "See, we told you" because that would
be just as bloody useful. You might just as well say 'Cows liable to
explode'.
The second one I saw which inspired a totally mystified reaction was on the
outskirts of Buckingham. It reads "Street lights not in use" and it's
attached to a streetlight. This message dropped me into a philosophical maze
and left me there. Firstly, to whom is the warning addressed? If a motorist
is going along in broad daylight and sees the sign then it conveys no useful
information at all. The motorist does not need the streetlights because it's
broad daylight. Switch to night time scene then. The same motorist, perhaps
on a return journey notices the sign a second time, looks around and can
confirm that the streetlights are not working. The sign has not helped him
since it is obvious without consulting the sign that, from the lack of
street lighting, the streetlights are not working. Therefore the sign forms
no useful function. Alternatively the motorist might not see the sign at
all because it is dark, and the streetlights are not working hence the sign
cannot be seen. Its function is negated by the same phenomenon the sign
itself warns of. Let's suppose a man is walking his dog along this road. The
first thing he notices is that the streetlight are not working. He is
perturbed. Perhaps there has been a power cut. He is concerned about his own
safety since in the absence of any street lighting he may be struck by a
passing car who has not observed his presence in the gloom. AS his concern
gathers he notices the sign, perhaps in the lights of a passing car and
hurries to read it. Doing so, either by the lights of passing cars or using
a pocket torch he sees the street lighting is not in use. He is thus assured
that his dim perceptions of his surroundings are not due to any sudden
dimming of his own faculties but because the street lighting is not in use.
This may comfort an older dog walker and thus be the purpose of the sign
but it's a far-fetched proposition you'll agree.
So somewhere in Buckingham there is an official who has ordered that sign to
be manufactured and placed there at a cost to the public but with no
benefit. The sign achieves absolutely nothing. Who is this official? Has he
no supervision? Is his supervisor frightened of him or something? But wait,
there's a bigger question. The street in question has street lighting but it
has been turned off. By whom? Who is risking the life and limb of night-time
dog walkers by this neglect. Who ordered the street lighting erected in the
first place and shouldn't he have checked if it was required? The paradox
merely becomes deeper and more baffling each time it is explored.
While driving last night, I noticed the sign in question with a plate under it saying "Blind people". I initially wondered whether the blind would be similarly offended [1] at the sight of the sign, before realising the fundamental flaw in that idea.
[1] Actually, it's not the elderly being offended, it's some 26 year old being offended on behalf of the elderly
its OK folks , my eyes are so bad now I cant read signs when driving,so no offense poss`. I am however concerned for j ``bertie`` basset up the column there.
I wonder if his attitude will affect his chances of experiencing the delights of age?
Obviously no idea what things were like more than 12.7 years ago.
Maybe its just sour berries,cos we used to go up t` motorway at 120mph [lotsa Kph]
--no cameras;drink anywhere, smoke anywhere. speak freely. and photo anything.
and d`ya know if we hadn`t built things,drilled oilwells and put up LOTS OF SIGNS.
It would be a sh*ttyer place for``you lot``.
and in closing, grannys smell really awful when burnt and are very polluting,please do your ``green`` research properly.
PS are you the guy in that old granny-crossing-airbag video? by any chance
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
