| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:It's full of ankle-biters now! | |
| Posted by: | Malcolm Peltu | |
| Date/Time: | 24/06/08 13:13:00 |
| 'feral children' is one of those over-the-top cliches that people seems to resort to when they run out of other arguments. I think introducing the term 'feral' as a new term of abuse was one of the many disservices to the country of Tony Blair. If Russell is right, am I to assume adults who speak loudly on the phone were left to grow up in the wild (which is what 'feral' means)? The more extreme anti-child posters on this thread started by criticising all children, and there have even been comments even against well behaved children. Now some are acknowledging that adults are also badly behaved, but no one is suggesting that we therefore ban adults from places on the basis of the bad behaviour of some. Doesn't this shows the meaninglessness of such generalisations? Isn't the distinction between people who behave in appropriate and inappropriate ways in particular contexts - and the availability of a sufficient range of places to allow choice in where to go (which we are lucky to have in Chiswick)? |