has this ever happened to you?

[afka_bob]

Sorry, Tuggy...

I have no idea what hikling is.

Oops! That should have read "hickling," which is what we city folk...

You must be from the city.

...call heckling (i.e., mocking) "hicks," (i.e., unsophisticated rural inhabitants).

Thanks again, Tuggy, for pointing out my error. My extreme uptightness necessitates that I profusely apologize for any confusion this may have caused.

PS to sierra:
That's not going off -- see below for going off.

 

[Rik]

After all the parents are the ones who have to deal with the questions/aftermath.

I just see it as an opportunity to teach kids what you would like them to know about this behavior. Questions are good.

 

[afka_bob]

I just see it as an opportunity to teach kids what you would like them to know about this behavior. Questions are good.

Yes, of course. And you can imagine our delight at the tsunami as we were looking for an opportunity to teach our little one about charitable giving!

 

[Rik]

Tsunami's happen, people having sex in public happens (like it or not). I'm not saying these are good things or things to encourage but they do provide a teaching opportunity to kids. That's why the kids ask questions! If you answer the questions honestly and backed by your personal values your kids will learn. Learning is the good part of what can come out of an otherwise negative situation. To just hope that bad things won't happen or that our kids will never be exposed to them is naive. Going off to college could be a rude awakening to kids that don't think bad things happen or don't have the knowledge to deal with them.

 

[afka_bob]

Tsunamis happen because of natural forces beyond our control.

People acting inappropiately in public places happen because stupid and inconsiderate people make stupid and inconsiderate choices.

I do and will try to teach my children about these sort of people (how to avoid them if possible and how to not be one of them), but I still don't have to accept their behavior as a good thing.

I never saw anyone doing this on a trail and somehow I managed to learn appropriate behavior and how to not go crazy when I went away to school. Maybe my kids can, too.

A ranger can't arrest a tsunami, but the same ranger can and should take action against stupid, inconsiderate people who don't use common sense or courtesy in a public place. So should we, I think. If I were by myself, I would tell them to get a room. If I were with children, I would tell the offending people a bit more than that and I would talk to the kids, too.

I don't want to be niave, but I think kids should have the chance to just be kids and not have to contend with this sort of stupidity and inconsideration.

PS to sierra:
that's going off.

PPS to everybody:
I'm not mad at anybody here, just expressing my opinions with italics.

 

[smitty77]

You must be from the city.

What the heck does that mean?!?!? Let's just throw some more blanket statements around. I don't come from the city, but I agree with Bob. Yes I have a child, but even if I were hiking alone I would find it inappropriate. I don't want to see it. If I did, I'd rent a porno. I don't subject everyone here to various avatars of my arse because I know no one wants to see it. It's called being considerate for others. Something the people in this society have cast aside. It's all about me, me, me. Why should I change my behavior for the sake of others? What have they done for me lately?

Maybe the next time I hike I'll let my dog leave a nice pile on the trail, or even next to someone's car door in the parking lot. Hey, if that's where she wants/needs to go why should I stop her? Maybe that car will be yours Sierra. Maybe you'll hop in and track it all over your car. But hey, don't get too uptight. It's only dog poop. Live hard, play hard, and here's a present from my dog to you.

 

[Grumpy]

Forego the confrontation when kids are with you . . .

I agree wholeheartedly with afka bob when he writes, “kids should have the chance to just be kids and not have to contend with this sort of stupidity and inconsideration.” Folks ought to be discreet in how they go about their intensely personal business, especially in places and spaces accessible to the public or potentially in public view.

But the fact is, not all folks are, nor will they ever be discreet. People who are raising children should reconcile themselves to that fact and learn to deal affirmatively with the indiscretions of others in sight of the kids.

The best you can hope and shoot for, I suppose, is that your own children don't grow up to be people who have sex on picnic tables in the park and popular mountain ledges, or defecate on hiking trails. You won't accomplish this by thrashing the tar out of people you catch in the act, or taking pictures of them hoping they’ll be duly embarrassed, or swiping their clothes, or confronting the jerks, or making a big deal out of turning them in to the authorities.

With kids in tow, your best bet when encountering an incident of indiscretion is to (a) take appropriate evasive action; and (b) engage your own kids to have a heart-to-heart with them regarding the various issues such incidents raise.

The reason I advocate against being confrontational when the kids are with you is that confrontations with people who behave indiscretely or anti-socially very seldom resolve anything. What your kid will witness in a confrontation is Daddy getting ignored (and then what?), or Daddy getting flipped off and/or told to go f*** himself, or an escalation into physical tussle. Think about the effect those things might have on the child. Why risk compounding the “trauma” of witnessing an act of indiscretion with the sight of Daddy being faced down and humiliated or having his bell rung by the bad guy?

Nope, this is a case in which your discretion really is the better part of valor. In fact, the whole issue here really boils down to self control. Controlling your own angry urge to confront and calmly having that heart-to-heart talk with the kids is a good way to model the self control you hope your own children will develop as they grow up.

G.

 

[afka_bob]

Point taken, Grumpy. Confrontation probably would be counter-productive under those circumstances.

 

[Rik]

Tsunamis happen because of natural forces beyond our control.

People acting inappropiately in public places happen because stupid and inconsiderate people make stupid and inconsiderate choices.

Other people's choices, even stupid and inconsiderate ones, are often beyond our control as well.

I do and will try to teach my children about these sort of people (how to avoid them if possible and how to not be one of them), but I still don't have to accept their behavior as a good thing.

I agree with this as noted in my post.

I never saw anyone doing this on a trail and somehow I managed to learn appropriate behavior and how to not go crazy when I went away to school. Maybe my kids can, too.

Never said anything about going crazy.

I

don't want to be niave, but I think kids should have the chance to just be kids and not have to contend with this sort of stupidity and inconsideration

.

I guess my point was that we all need to learn to contend with this sort of stupidity and inconsideration and that this was just an opportunity to teach kids how.

 

[Rik]

Well said Grumpy. I wish I could say it so well.

 

[afka_bob]

Rik, I don't disagree with you.

Other people's [behavior], even stupid and inconsiderate ones, are often beyond our control as well.

Often it is, maybe even most of the time. But if we accept this behavior w/o any sort of resistance, I think it becomes a bigger problem. Peer pressure can have an influence and law enforcement can, too. Neither, sadly, works on tsunamis.

Never said anything about going crazy.

No, you didn't. I was using it in the context of a person not being able to deal with a situation or becoming an inconsiderate jerk one's self.

I guess my point was that we all need to learn to contend with this sort of stupidity and inconsideration and that this was just an opportunity to teach kids how.

True enough.

I think there must be direct and indirect ways of dealing with this issue. I don't think total silence in the face of such behavior is always the answer. Discussion on this board is one thing that can be done. Teaching kids what is appropriate is another. Reasonable efforts to alert authorities is another. If an constantly or often area is used for such purposes, the authorities should know so that they can step up patrols or otherwise pre-empt it.

Litter used to be a common problem, but now everybody knows that it is wrong at least, and is is rarer than when I was a kid. It didn't get that way through total silence. I think in certain circumstances, one could discretely and safely say, "hey, that's just wrong."

 

[amstony]

If you have a problem with the behavior why not call the local cops or USFS.......or the local newspaper. Reporters are always looking to catch a local scandal, it sells print. Plus you never know who they'll catch in the act and with whom!! Take down license plate numbers, or take some pictures (I'd be careful about it) and vehicle descriptions.

If the local gendarmes get enough complaints they'll take action. I am old enough to laugh about it and move on to the next issue, such as getting to the top of the mountain.

However, I agree with those with children just looking to get the kids out and introduce them to hiking, burn off energy and all. My kids are grown up, but I sure did not want them running into this sort of stuff in the woods.

 

[jjmcgo]

Grumpy's smart

What a beautiful child-raising post by Grumpy.

It's not easy raising kids and they love to make it look like you're not getting through to them sometimes but now that mine are grown the feedback I get a lot is that they learned the most when I acted in a responsible, adult manner in difficult situations.

The problem with perverts in parks has gotten so bad I'd probably endorse the idea of a gay state park, if they'd leave the other parks alone.

 

[Waumbek]

What a beautiful child-raising post by Grumpy.

It's not easy raising kids and they love to make it look like you're not getting through to them sometimes but now that mine are grown the feedback I get a lot is that they learned the most when I acted in a responsible, adult manner in difficult situations.

The problem with perverts in parks has gotten so bad I'd probably endorse the idea of a gay state park, if they'd leave the other parks alone.

Did I miss something in this thread? Who is talking about gay perverts in a park? In any event, I wasn't talking about gays or perverts when I referred to Dartmouth kids in the woods. They were boys and girls doing what boys and girls do when they get some freedom from home and think they're alone way out in the woods. Perfectly natural.

Grumpy's advice rings true about turning your back and walking on as a good role model (talking later, of course). It's a good tactic in both the human and animal world. Ever notice how the leader dog in a pack is not the one that fights every little trespass by another dog but just turns his or her back on some of it and walks away? And notice how the other dog can be kind of mystified by it and just sit down submissively? Not fighting every little hassle in the animal world is economical, and economy wins.

 

[afka_bob]

Yes, W-bek, you did miss when this facet of the topic was broached by others in posts #2 and #6.

I'm less concerned with one's orientation than where one chooses to practice it, but if some have noted the heterosexual offenses on civil behavior, I think it would not be very, well, inclusive to exclude homosexual ones from this discussion -- and solicitations (as related in posts #2 and #6) are beyond any sort of excuse.

And I guess your second point covers why there are no dog police -- oh wait, there are police dogs!

I think the lead dog in the pack has already made it clear he can eat the other dogs for lunch so he doesn't need to fight every little fight -- with that particular pack. Put him in a new pack every weekend and see what happens. Other than that, an excellent analogy, of course!

 

[Waumbek]

Sorry, I was talking about leadership not dominance. (That's the distinction the dog trainers make.) And it was observed in wolf packs not dog packs and then extrapolated to dog packs. I did not make that clear. Yes, it may be that initial dominance is most economically reinforced by leadership (walking away). But it was an eye-opener to me to try "leadership" rather than "dominance" on a misbehaving dog. Turn your back, and the annoying behavior stops. I think the pigeon-people call this "extinction behavior." It comes in useful with people sometimes. Not always, of course. There's no one simple way to make the world right.

 

[Jasonst]

Yes, you did -- the topic was also broached in post #6.

I'm less concerned with orientation than location, but if some wish to note the heterosexual offenses, I think it would not be very, well, inclusive to exclude homosexual ones from this discussion.

And I guess your second point covers why there are no police dogs -- oh wait, there are police dogs!

I think the lead dog in the pack has already made it clear he can eat the other dogs for lunch so he doesn't need to fight every little fight -- with that particular pack. Put him in a new pack every weekend and see what happens. Other than that, an excellent analogy, of course!

Hey AFKA - you are on my list of people on this site that I hope to run into someday on the trails. Do you by any chance have a British accent? The way you love to pontificate and take these "moral" stands - reminds me of Peter O'Toole or Michael Caine...

 

[afka_bob]

If we do meet on the trail, I hope you're wearing pants.

Jasonst,

Sorry, no British accent -- but I do love to pontificate!

If I were to think about it too long I would probably be disturbed by the "quotes" around "moral" and fear for our future. So I won't think about it too much just now.


Waumbec,

If "leadership" works, that would be great. I apologize for this digression, but when you speak of "leadership" rather than "domination" within the context of canine leadership, can there be such leadership without any (even implicit) domination? In any case, wider-spread leadership practice can help ensure that the dogs* and pidgeons we meet on the trail will be well-behaved.


*This is not intended in any way as an anti-dog slap -- nor against pidgeons and the people who love them.

 

[Ned Kipperson]

Sorry to butt into the little spat, but why not?
How about this, Al. Walk by, look at it in disgust, and then pretend to puke all over the place. Some props might be nice.
Weird Al, it's good to see you're finally back on the trails after so many years of making music. Do you remember your song "Nature Trail To Hell", it's the reason I started hiking and hunting.

 

[dave.m]

Kindly take this rec.backcountry

I'm as much of a fan of a well cast troll as the next guy. I also think that thread drift and off topic posting are natural and generally good.

But honestly....

How can this forum be so uptight that it disallows "For Sale" and "Lost Item" threads with regularity while still allowing this sort of drivel?

Rec.backcountry still exists and I'm sure Weird Al will get all of the feedback he desires there. Hint: discuss the evils of mountain biking. But please, take the discussion there. My kill files work better there.