"Man Spreading" banned

[unassuming]

Spain has banned "Man Spreading" on public transport.

This is so wrong, anatomically, a man's legs naturally angle outwards, I've tried to not to manspread but it is just plain uncomfortable.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/07/madrid-bans-manspreading-buses/

 

[canada-man]

will there be a revolt against the law?

 

[italianguy74]

Thats like saying women should have their arms crossed on public transports. Its just a ridiculous law to impose on a gender because their anatomy. Some guys can comfortably cross their legs and some can't, we dont all wear the same banana hammock underwear. We dont all have the same size junk either, we should be able to sit in any way that feels comfortable without disturbing the space of other passengers.

 

[Brill]

Guys don't manspread when they drive, of course it's deliberate when sitting on the bus across from a woman.

 

[Jasmine Raine]

Guys don't manspread when they drive, of course it's deliberate when sitting on the bus across from a woman.

You are right about the driving. There are tons of times when men don't spread. However, I don't think it is deliberate all the time and I don't think if it is deliberate it is because of a woman across from them. I think when it is deliberate, it is because they don't want the people sitting beside them, and it creates more space for said person. Same with the shared arm rest in planes. Some people can share, some people are just rude and take over the whole thing.

Now, I know I am not a man, but I don't know a single man who can close his legs at the knees. I am not saying cross your legs, I am saying hold your legs closed. Even when sitting, if you have your legs closed partly at should length apart, legs and feet pointing straight, your cock and balls are not getting damaged. Sorry, but they not. There really is no reason to spread to the degree that I have seen. Men spread so far their knees are touching half way on the other seat.

I do agree this should have had to some to the actual passing of a law. I don't know why some men can not just be mindful and respectful of others around them.

 

[rhuarc29]

:rofl:

Any woman who is offended by a man's crotch, really should be barred from baring their cleavage. Can you imagine if we made a law for that?

All ludicrousness aside, if they didn't frame it as a sexist argument, I'd say they have a point in terms of courtesy. No person should be taking up two spots.

 

[Jasmine Raine]

:rofl:

Any woman who is offended by a man's crotch, really should be barred from baring their cleavage. Can you imagine if we made a law for that?

All ludicrousness aside, if they didn't frame it as a sexist argument, I'd say they have a point in terms of courtesy. No person should be taking up two spots.

This I completely agree with it. I would have never thought of it as a sexist/feminist issue. I would lump in with feet/bags and women's purses on the seat beside or in front. Actually women's purses is a big one if they keep it on their shoulder too. I have seen that. Big oversize purse on the shoulder. She sits ona corner spot with on a seat on the one side, makes it impossible for someone to sit fully beside her. That is equally wrong.

 

[oldjones]

Spain has banned "Man Spreading" on public transport.

This is so wrong, anatomically, a man's legs naturally angle outwards, I've tried to not to manspread but it is just plain uncomfortable.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/06/07/madrid-bans-manspreading-buses/

Too bad. If you need two seats to do it, stand up, is what the transit company is saying.

 

[oldjones]

Thats like saying women should have their arms crossed on public transports. Its just a ridiculous law to impose on a gender because their anatomy. Some guys can comfortably cross their legs and some can't, we dont all wear the same banana hammock underwear. We dont all have the same size junk either, we should be able to sit in any way that feels comfortable without disturbing the space of other passengers.

Nothing to do with manspreading which was the headline-writer's way of grabbing the attention of those first-responders too hasty to actually look into the situation. The transit company made it clear it was about seat-hogging, nothing to do with the macho BS the headline went after (and got)