Face mask poll

[John Luxton]

The other thread had a number of people openly saying they would lie about being exempt.

To be honest if the idea of wearing a facemask works you up to such a state that you feel stressed then the prospect of wearing one is making you ill - your excuse is then legitimate.

 

[Jonny]

And really the 2 options for no should be:

No - I choose not to wear one
No - I have a legitimate reason to claim exemption

The other thread had a number of people openly saying they would lie about being exempt.

The term "reasonable excuse" is incredibly vague. However, we have not seen the legislation yet.

---

To be honest if the idea of wearing a facemask works you up to such a state that you feel stressed then the prospect of wearing one is making you ill - your excuse is then legitimate.

Good point. However, I would need to see the legislation - not out yet - to comment properly. Also, the government website does not appear to have been updated.

 

[kristiang85]

In my opinion, rather than having two options for "no", it would have been far more interesting
to have two options for "yes" instead:


○ Yes (but only because I don't want to break the law/cause a scene/draw attention to myself)

○ Yes (I have no issues whatsoever wearing them - bring em on!)





MARK

Agreed. This is one of YouGov's tricks - they have a headline saying '80% of people support mask wearing', but in fact the question just asks if people will, and I suspect in the vast majority of people they do it begrudgingly because they don't want the cause a fuss or create confrontation when it's the law.

 

[Jonny]

Agreed. This is one of YouGov's tricks - they have a headline saying '80% of people support mask wearing', but in fact the question just asks if people will, and I suspect in the vast majority of people they do it begrudgingly because they don't want the cause a fuss or create confrontation when it's the law.

The media blurs compliance and support to make it look popular.

 

[John Luxton]

Agreed. This is one of YouGov's tricks - they have a headline saying '80% of people support mask wearing', but in fact the question just asks if people will, and I suspect in the vast majority of people they do it begrudgingly because they don't want the cause a fuss or create confrontation when it's the law.

Sometimes when the law is unreasonable then breaking the law or getting around it becomes legitimate.

We only have to look at how authoritarian regimes both left and right seized power it was because people went along with it.

I wont quote it here but look up the comments of Martin Niemöller and you get the drift.

Personally when it comes to the law I consider myself to be a law abiding person. I am not a natural rebel.

I think you will find a lot of C19 rebels fall into the same category - not the usual "rentamob".

Until C19 came along I would have used water cannon on protestors, restore capital punishment etc.

However, can't disagree with a statement I have seen from time to time since this all started "When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty"

 

[gg1]

To be honest if the idea of wearing a facemask works you up to such a state that you feel stressed then the prospect of wearing one is making you ill - your excuse is then legitimate.

Yes it is, but when your reasons for choosing not to are you thinking they're pointless and you dislike wearing them, that's a personal choice, not valid reasons for medical exemption.

 

[John Luxton]

Yes it is, but when your reasons for choosing not to are you thinking they're pointless and you dislike wearing them, that's a personal choice, not valid reasons for medical exemption.

But it is that that works many people up in the first place because they do not feel as though their opinion is being considered by the politicians.

 

[greyman42]

I will because I don't want to cause a fuss, but I will just wear my old bandana covering which doesn't affect my ears and is very breathable.

How would you be causing a fuss by not wearing one?

 

[alex397]

I refer you to the other thread:

Not really relevant - my point is that you have said the following:

We must not allow ourselves to be restricted again in any form whatsoever.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Nov 2021 ==

Being told to stay at home and self-isolate is a restriction. Should we disregard those restrictions as well?
You then say that we should stay at home if unwell, so going against your own advice of never ‘allowing ourselves to be restricted again in any form whatsoever’.

Of course, if people are hit hard by Covid they will have no choice to stay at home as they will barely be able to move, but other people with Covid have just minor symptoms or are asymtomatic. If they feel ok, but have a positive test, should they just disregard the restrictions?

The best thing for people to do if they are unwell is to stay at home. Not to go round engaging in virtue signalling by wearing flimsy masks.

I feel like the use of ‘virtue signalling’ here is inaccurate and dismissive (of course, I know my opinion will be ‘wrong’).

Many people wearing masks won’t be ‘virtue signallers’ but will simply be following government guidance, and guidance by medical professionals and scientists (and I’m well aware there is mixed views on this in the scientific community). Sure, maybe some will wear masks simply to look good, as you may argue. You will also argue that the guidance is wrong, but my point is people will do it because that’s what the guidance says, not necessarily because they are ‘virtue signallers’.

 

[Trackman]

In my opinion, rather than having two options for "no", it would have been far more interesting
to have two options for "yes" instead:


○ Yes (but only because I don't want to break the law/cause a scene/draw attention to myself)

○ Yes (I have no issues whatsoever wearing them - bring em on!)





MARK

In my case it's just arguments with Joe Public asking you put your mask on, not with people in authority really.
I'm an easy going fellow but people have tested me during the last lockdown- I stand my ground but they still moan etc..
So it's a Yes from me to stop the aggro, if I'm in a situation of potential conflict.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

I will wear a face-covering because the law requires it. I already have re-usable ones in stock (total = one pack of two masks) and some disposables which I am saving until past their use-by date. I might even give the one used thus far a wash for Christmas. I do not believe that they provide any measurable benefit and are as much use as a string vest over the head. There are however people who have been sat waiting for the opportunity to bring back restrictions. The new variant, despite minimal evidence of the risk it poses, has provided them with the opportunity to relaunch. Boris has rolled over at the earliest opportunity.

Having voted yes, I will not be travelling on public transport, nor will I be going in many shops, until further notice. So the economy can take a hit. Just going out to clear the snow so the Amazon and Tesco vans can get safely to me!

 

[AlterEgo]

I’ll wear a mask only in situations where the law requires it. I don’t like masking and don’t think it’s a useful public health measure but equally it’s not a hill I’d like to die on.

 

[John Luxton]

I’ll wear a mask only in situations where the law requires it. I don’t like masking and don’t think it’s a useful public health measure but equally it’s not a hill I’d like to die on.

And thanks to that attitude we can't break the cycle. It ends when we refuse to comply.

 

[Crossover]

I will because I don't want to cause a fuss, but I will just wear my old bandana covering which doesn't affect my ears and is very breathable.

I am 100% against the mandation though.

My position is similar. I will limit my needs as much as possible (such as not travelling by train, where possible)

 

[gg1]

But it is that that works many people up in the first place because they do not feel as though their opinion is being considered by the politicians.

Hardly unique to Covid.

If you were to ask a random sample of people in the UK 'Are there any issues you consider important where you feel your opinions are not considered by politicians?', I'd be very surprised if the proportion of people answering yes was much less than 90%.

 

[Bishopstone]

Marginal benefit, but for minimal personal cost, so I'm not too fussed albeit I hope this requirement is lifted for the spring.

Sixteen pages on the other current thread about face coverings. Sixteen pages in 24 hours. If the PM had stood-up and said 'no masks, but schools closed until February', I doubt it would have attracted a tenth of the interest here.

 

[bramling]

Yes it is, but when your reasons for choosing not to are you thinking they're pointless and you dislike wearing them, that's a personal choice, not valid reasons for medical exemption.

We don’t really know the answer as it doesn’t seem to have been tested, however “caused me stress and anxiety” would seem to fit the legislation. Coming up to two years in to this, in some cases as least there is likely to be significant basis to this.

Personally I have been very keen to draw a line under the last two years, and could have well done without this latest move, especially as the whole thing is illogical (if so important, why in shops but not in hospitality?) and the timing rather dubiously coincides with Boris having had a torrid time recently and being desperate to shift the agenda away from a focus on his own inadequacy for office.

 

[dk1]

Noticed a much stronger proportion of mask wearers on my trains today & after work in Sainsburys. Obviously many are again to protect themselves & others as the risk is again perceived higher. Then there are those who thought, like I did, that the rule had been brought in immediately rather than from Tuesday.

 

[John Luxton]

Hardly unique to Covid.

If you were to ask a random sample of people in the UK 'Are there any issues you consider important where you feel your opinions are not considered by politicians?', I'd be very surprised if the proportion of people answering yes was much less than 90%.

Yes it is because you are generally not asked to modify your normal behaviour for these issues. We can get say wound up about migrants - but that is a completely different matter. Covid rules push the limits.

 

[AlterEgo]

And thanks to that attitude we can't break the cycle. It ends when we refuse to comply.

It still isn’t a hill I’m going to die on for you.

 

[NeilCr]

A very rare post

Yes I will

Because the law requires it

Because it might make someone else feel more comfortable

Because it's no big personal imposition for me. I rarely go into shops and most of my public transport trips are short. Although I do wear glasses so it is a pain

The poll results (up until now) tend to belie some of the comments about public unrest and protests. I would post more but - in all honesty - some of the aggressive responses to those who disagree are off putting. I get the strength of feeling and that some have had hostility because they don't wear masks - and the comments about the impacts on people's mental health. I suffered myself in the first lockdown - prescribed anti deps although, fortunately, didn't have to take them in the end

But I am not sure that justifies some of the remarks made.

Anyway - just my thoughts. I'll keep lurking and reading - and maybe comment

 

[8A Rail]

Yes is my answer. Why simply, I (& wife) have been carrying on wearing them in shops and public transport anyway, so makes no difference in the circumstances.

However, as I work in retail and in an airport (mmm not for long now ), I have not worn one due to the fact, the greater majority of people (especially passengers) have worn them anyway, otherwise cannot get on an aircraft and until recently, all passengers would have to tested before travel and / or had the vaccine. In some ways, although not perfect, working in an airport can be one of the safer places to work. What happens from Tuesday will be interesting.

 

[Ostrich]

I'll continue wearing a cloth mask in shops and on the High Street, as I've done since the start of this pandemic, TBH. I fully accept they're no panacea, but as far as I'm concerned, "every little helps".

Public transport restrictions are of no consequence to me as our local town bus service was permanently withdrawn in April 2020 anyway.

The key thing to me is - let's just respect everyone else's views. Life's too short to get into a slanging match about it.

Right, I'm off to start practicing my Pavement Dance moves again

 

[John Luxton]

It still isn’t a hill I’m going to die on for you.

And we wonder how totalitarian regimes gained power. I despair!

 

[NorthWestRover]

Oh please.

 

[yorkie]

Marginal benefit, but for minimal personal cost, so I'm not too fussed albeit I hope this requirement is lifted for the spring.

Sixteen pages on the other current thread about face coverings. Sixteen pages in 24 hours. If the PM had stood-up and said 'no masks, but schools closed until February', I doubt it would have attracted a tenth of the interest here.

More posts is not necessarily an indicator of more interest; in this case it is more conflict.

There was very little conflict on this forum about schools; some people disagreed with me in the early days about whether or not schools should be open but as time went on it became less of a conflict and more of a universal agreement that schools should remain open.

Not really relevant - my point is that you have said the following:

Being told to stay at home and self-isolate is a restriction. Should we disregard those restrictions as well?
You then say that we should stay at home if unwell, so going against your own advice of never ‘allowing ourselves to be restricted again in any form whatsoever’.

I do not think there should be any legal restrictions relating to this. If someone is ill they should choose to stay at home. It is not appropriate to insist someone isolates just because they have been in close contact with someone who tested positive; if you accept that level of authoritarianism you are part of the problem this country faces at the moment.

Of course, if people are hit hard by Covid they will have no choice to stay at home as they will barely be able to move, but other people with Covid have just minor symptoms or are asymtomatic. If they feel ok, but have a positive test, should they just disregard the restrictions?

There should be no such restriction. Obviously at some point it will go (perhaps around April), but it should not exist now.

I feel like the use of ‘virtue signalling’ here is inaccurate and dismissive (of course, I know my opinion will be ‘wrong’).

How is it not virtue signalling if you have been wearing face coverings in shops (when not required to) then go to a pub and don't wear one? It's an absolutely blatant example of virtue signalling.

Many people wearing masks won’t be ‘virtue signallers’ but will simply be following government guidance,

If they are legally required to wear a mask except if exempt and do not feel an exemption applies or feel uncomfortable about claiming one, that is not virtue signalling on the part of the wearer; it is virtue signalling on the part of the policy and those who called for, support and created such policies.

and guidance by medical professionals and scientists (and I’m well aware there is mixed views on this in the scientific community). Sure, maybe some will wear masks simply to look good, as you may argue. You will also argue that the guidance is wrong, but my point is people will do it because that’s what the guidance says, not necessarily because they are ‘virtue signallers’.

Any decent scientist who understands that Sars-CoV-2 is transmitted through tiny aerosol particles will understand that if the aim is to avoid transmission, an effective tight fitting mask that is designed to filter such particles would be required, and that wearing loose fitting, flimsy masks which are not designed to filter aerosol particles will not protect anyone from transmission of the virus.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 28 Nov 2021 ==

And we wonder how totalitarian regimes gained power. I despair!

That is not a fair criticism.

I admire people who will not be going to shops or travelling by public transport during this time and I also admire people who will be claiming exemptions or simply refusing to comply, but it is simply not realistic to expect that everyone is going to be in a position to do either of these things.

The reality is that most people will still be in shops and on public transport and most of those people are going to be reluctantly wearing a face covering (even if that means wearing an incredibly thin useless piece of cloth)

I wish it wasn't so, but we have to be realistic.

I understand your frustration but we cannot blame people for going along with this.

By all means blame those who called for it, and those who implemented it, and those who are happy for it to be this way. But not ordinary people who just want to avoid hassle in their lives.

 

[AlterEgo]

And we wonder how totalitarian regimes gained power. I despair!

It’s just a mask, and the more pseudo-moralistic responses I get like this the less I feel inclined to move my backside an inch to support you.

 

[John Luxton]

It’s just a mask, and the more pseudo-moralistic responses I get like this the less I feel inclined to move my backside an inch to support you.

Remember Martin Niemöller I am not pseudo-moralistic at all.

 

[VauxhallandI]

I won’t be wearing one and I look forward to anyone challenging me.

 

[John Luxton]

The reality is that most people will still be in shops and on public transport and most of those people are going to be reluctantly wearing a face covering (even if that means wearing an incredibly thin useless piece of cloth)

I wish it wasn't so, but we have to be realistic.

I understand your frustration but we cannot blame people for going along with this.

By all means blame those who called for it, and those who implemented it, and those who are happy for it to be this way. But not ordinary people who just want to avoid hassle in their lives.

People with this stance are as complicit as those who are imposing it.

It is obvious from peoples' votes that there is approx 60% in favour (how many of these are "I won't rock the boat" people is not clear I presume a good few are).

BUT around 44% are saying no.

That is a significant minority.

If I recall correctly last year the numbers against restrictions from what I could pick up was around 19% to 20%.

It has more than doubled in a year.

We do not need to push much harder for it to be all over.

Far fewer people persuaded a government to drop the Community Charge.