Displaying emotions

I think it's all more nuanced than this - and however we react does not mean necessarily that we are more or less likely to do something practical to help. They are I think two different and unrelated things. We can't infer that crying in private = doing something practical quietly ( and vice versa). And I agree with Maizie leaders should show presence and empathy. That's not judgemental, more a basic requirement of leadership ( and her comment was about leaders not the general public)

But some make it their business , and if it's judgemental to say one doesn't need to publicly show cincern then you Maizie are being judgemental in your post by claiming a show of empathy is what matters.

I don't agree MazieD as I think the thread was just trying to show that we are all different and not joining in with an out pouring of emotion should not be judged as not caring.

We are all very different in how we react to bad news/tragic events. Hugging, kissing and weeping in public, might be some peoples way of dealing with it, whereas, someone else might prefers to cry in private whilst quietly doing something practical to help.

I don't see that it's anybody else's business how people show their emotions. I think this is a very sad thread that has just given people a chance to be judgemental about other people's motives in a rather unpleasant fashion.

I do think it is up the the 'leaders' in a country to show concern and support for citizens in such tragic and overwhelming circumstances, if only to let them know that their plight isn't being ignored and that they will be helped. Whether they do it by hugging, a touch, or just listening is up to their individual style. It is their presence and empathy that matters. Ignoring the people most affected is not good.

I think most of this emotional outpouring is the invention of the media and the young who think due to the media it's a requirement and the way to behave. The press do not cover and promote the British stoical and dignified approach to tragedy. My father who suffered and saw many horrors in the war didn't keep trotting them out, he downplayed them or didn't go into detail - I don't need to know more detail than it was hell. Escapees from the Tower saying it was Hell won't sell papers or news reports though, so the press are encouraged to go into graphic detail for our mawkish tendencies, the outpouring of raw emotion demands similar in return to appear empathetic. I'm not unfeeling I have cried at the loss of life, but sorry if I was in a disaster I wouldn't mind the PM or the Queen leading the Nation in a message of sympathy etc. Even a "private visit" that's their job, but various celebs, local dignatories and politicians - most of whom should be jailed after this or the publicity seeking hugs of strangers is not required. I would expect that an Army field kitchen would have been sent for survivors and rescuers to use, the LA and WRVS etc to sort out practicalities and enlist other official help when needed etc. And the media circus and rubber neckers can go and gawp at someone else's tragedy. My kids are glued to events wringing their hands and empathising - a young and very American thing encouraged by social and traditional media I would rather help if I can than be a voyeurs, and I prefer to change channels and leave them with some dignity to grieve - I feel it no less but my empathy helps no one. I'd rather pay my respects, help if I can and then contribute to a prosecution fund.

Trisher, I am against those houses being taken, not to protect the rights of the house owners but the reasons put forward on this forum for doing so. There has been no discussion just - let's take the houses off the wealthy, communism at it's worse because it is based in hatred and envy not on justice.

Bravo Margaret, and thank you for replying to the question, I agree with all your post, May was vilified for not speaking to victims the first day, she spoke to the rescue workers to see if they had what was needed .

I don't like the flowers and toys left at scenes, and I cannot hear - I 'feel your pain ' without swearing at such an empty statement, we cannot feel another's pain, fact.

I agree, very good post Margaret and it also gets us back to the OP, as I for one was wandering away from it.

People are saying that TM 'looks ill' and her eyes look 'baggy' etc - yes, she probably has shed many tears but, like the Queen, sheds them in private.

although, may I just say, in response to Elegran, I remember seeing something on the news or another programme about the 'Shared Space' scheme and how dangerous they are for pedestrians as there is no definition between the road and where pedestrians may safely walk.

Good post Margaret??

This thread about displaying emotions and how we feel about them has turned into thread abounding with emotions and some of it doesn't make good reading.

Emotions have nothing to do with hugging which is now so fashionable. Kissing has alsways been a way of life in France where groups of 10 people very often kiss every one before sitting down to a meal.

I hate seeing those mounds of flowers as I can't imagine how a bunch of flowers still in their plastic wrapping can ease any kind of emotion. (The florists are pleased)

I must be more like TM and you can see than she has shed many tears in private and in my opinion that should be enough. She has work to do and gets only criticism,
We are in a sad state when you have to weep in public before anyone believes you have sympathy. She gets a lot of criticism from people who have never been at an office desk where in spite of tears you had to make difficult decisions.

Does that mean you object to it being used to house the people who have lost their homes in this disaster Anniebach. Might be nice if it could do some good for a change.

Silly me, I had forgotten that Royal prerogative trick. English MP's used it to take a whole Welsh valley, flood farms and a village, told the villagers to dig up their dead or accept the graves would be under a resavoir because Liverpool needed more water.

How many homes are needed ?

I know people, mostly younger people who post on Facebook when a so called celeb dies or a tragedy occurs. They put RIP so and so even though they don't know them, it's as if they need to show they have feelings. To me it's all false and just for show. This doesn't mean I don't feel I just don't need to let everyone else know.

This council seems to have a problem with listening to people.

In 2009 the Evening Standard reported:

"BLIND people and the elderly are being put at risk by a council removing pavement kerbs, it was claimed today.

"Kensington and Chelsea has merged the pavements and road outside Sloane Square station and has similar plans for Exhibition Road in South Kensington.

"The "shared space" schemes are supposed to give cyclists and pedestrians more room and encourage drivers to go slower.

"However, residents and disabled groups including Guide Dogs for the Blind Association have launched a campaign to reverse the changes."

Needless to say, the scheme went ahead and in 2015 The Architects Journal reported:

"A new House of Lords report has called for a moratorium on any new ‘frightening and intimidating’ shared space schemes

"Overzealous councils are risking public safety with fashionable, ‘simplified’ designs for shared spaces, according to the document Accidents by Design: The Holmes Report into Shared Space.

"After finding ‘overwhelmingly negative’ experiences from the public, the report’s author, blind paralympic swmming champion Chris Holmes has called for an immediate ban on new schemes.

"Holmes branded the projects, such as Dixon Jones’s innovative Exhibition Road streetscape in Kensington, an ‘architectural conceit’.

"The study claims that of the 523 drivers, cyclists and pedestrians polled by researchers, the overwhelmingly majority were opposed to the schemes with 63 per cent of people rating their experience as ‘poor’. The report also noted a significant under-reporting of accidents occuring in shared spaces."

The cost of this "architectural conceit" (or, as some might call it, "vanity project") has been somewhere in the region of £30 million.

Of course, this is not in the same category as the terrible Grenfell Tower horror but it demonstrates the way in which ordinary people's fears are ignored.

I don't think it is just a problem with Conservative Councils but I think the Kensington & Chelsea Council's behaviour is particularly reprehensible given the vast amount of money it has at its disposal - accrued because it has made substantial cuts to public services and projects.

Every council in the land should have in place a Disaster Control Plan/Major Emergency Plan which should swing into action - what has happened that of Kensington &Chelsea?

Civil Contingencies Act 2004, section 22, subsection 3b gives the government the right to provide for or enable the requisition or confiscation of property (with or without compensation) in an emergency.
It can be done under the Royal Prerogative.

My common sense says the same as McDonnell's and Corbyn's. You CAN requisition in emergencies.
And of course it's to do with politics.
The reason these people are homeless is to do with politics. Shame you can't see that and be on their side.

theconversation.com/yes-the-grenfell-tower-fire-is-political-its-a-failure-of-many-governments-79599

Jen, nothing to do with my politics , are you no longer capable of a civil post?

Compulsory purchase orders can take a long time, the council first have to discuss purchasing the properties, this can take quite some time, if no agreement then the compulsory order which takes time, are the homeless to remain homeless for a few years?

If the properties are an eyesore , meaning been allowed to become inhabitable I think councils can move faster,

So just common sense Jen.

Looking at my map of London, there don't seem to be many school playing fields around, and like I say, 126 families to be rehoused, all in the same area.

www.24housing.co.uk/news/grenfell-survivors-will-be-re-housed-in-local-area/

This is a meeting last week, and it was all about making sure other blocks were safe, but nothing about those homeless families apart from rehousing them in the same area. Where? They say it could take months to even go through Grenfell Tower. After that it will need to be pulled down. That will be next year.
What about them now? They are not just going to disappear.
A fairytale ending would be a group of rich people who own those mansions saying that the council can have them to put the homeless in.
Why not if they are not using them?
Imagine what power you would have over an eternally grateful Tory government.

Sorry that was last year's figure. It was £274 million this year.

Careful, Annie, your socialist principles are well hidden here.
What do you suggest as a solution to housing over 120 families?

Annie not that I'm suggesting it happens, but the council has reserves of £300 million. That's why it's called the wealthiest in the country.

I guess it depends on where the local schools, etc. are when it comes to deciding what is a close enough location for alternative accommodation.

Compulsory purchase order is different to requisition of a property and what council has all those spare millions to buy mansions