Great Western Coffee Shop

From the Evening Standard (https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/lner-train-conductors-ladies-and-gentleman-complaint-non-binary-passenger-b935093.html)


Unless I'm mistaken, the picture used to illustrate that article is a GWR train arriving into Paddington, platform 2

Not Paddington, looks a bit like Bristol TM?

Edited to add: There's a signal part way down the platform, so I'm sure it's Bristol Temple Meads.

The same photo is used for this ES story: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/hitachi-chris-heatonharris-government-lner-tickets-b934101.html
So it's clearly a stock photo used by them for anything rail, and I'd agree with Ollie, it's Temple Meads. And I'm 100% sure it's not Melksham!

It's Temple Meads, or I'm a Dutch person's parent's sibling.

In the hyper-sensitive world we live in now - which are you most upset by

- the LNER's conductor's language
- the reaction to it, or
- the Evening Standard's use of the wrong company's train in the picture.

[this question was intended to be rhetorical]!

Perhaps the complainant would have liked the announcement to say ' Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen,and the transgender person in seat Y Coach X......
It was a good job that complainant wasn't travelling with Yorkshire airlines !

Given that the expression 'Good afternoon, everyone' has been available to us for quite some time now, and is unambiguously all-embracing, one can't help wondering why the railway company employee chose the words they did.

I for one feel excluded by the word 'Gentleman'. I identify as male, and use the pronouns he/his, but few people who know me well would refer to me as a gentleman.

I've never liked being addressed as "mate" and perhaps less so in the zeitgeist of political correctness and "wokeness".

IIRC NCOs (and presumably commissioned officers) have been told not address junior ranks as "lads".

Must be challenging to remember how individuals in a university or school class like to be referred to (especially if they change their minds).

I was called "love" when I bought a up of coffee from someone I hadn't met before the other week - and have at various times been called "hun", "pet", "duck", "darlin" and "sweetie" ...

From the abc School of English (https://www.abcschool.co.uk/blog/terms-of-endearment/)


Fortunately, Lisa now understand British as well as American English ... gone are the days of her being open-mouthed at the "Free Hardcore" sign on a demolotion site, or wondering if we could pop down into the village we lived in to join the Village Skip that was advertised. When my daughter announced that she had dropped her rubber between the seats it took a bit of explaining, especially as Lisa and I had first met on the road outside the London Rubber Company's factory.

As first dates go, that's quite special! :D

I hope you're still Mates... ;D

Rood Eekhoorn doesn't quite have the same ring to it.

When I worked in radio I was always taught to imagine you were talking to one person.  So no “everyone”, “all of you” or “folks”. 

Thus “Good afternoon to you” it was.

I was told the same when in a temporary job with connections to a local radio station many years ago.  Sadly, that was my only career brush with radio, despite having a face highly suited to the medium!

Methinks the non-binary doth protest overmuch, but I suppose I shall have to get used to the reshaping of what was once the English language. Being upset is one thing - telling the whole world that you will sit through announcements with fingers in ears is another. As others point out, language can change around the country - I have been called "Love", "Duck" and "Young man", all of which seem reasonably normal outside of London. If it were done to cause offence, I didn't notice.

(Gosh, this sound like a letter in the Telegraph.)

According to Equality Speaks: (https://equalityspeaks.tumblr.com/)

(https://64-media-tumblr-com.cdn.ampproject.org/i/s/64.media.tumblr.com/0bf82c837276a5c522bece13feda225f/tumblr_o6uwb8C8851sr3pq2o1_1280.jpg)

How about passengers or customers? Or to 'those who can hear this'

He's never rude but we do say 'eak' when he blows his horn!

The Sun newspaper has an opinion on this.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/14947366/train-firm-apologises-non-binary-ladies-gentlemen-announcement/

At least he\she\whatever got a photo in the paper, even if it was the Sun, along with a quote from Tony Blair. I bet Laurence and Charlotte are fun at parties.

In Devon fifty years ago, "lover" and "my lover" were forms of address, usually delivered with a Devon burr.

Still are in my bit. :)

These people are ridiculous - a self righteous little squirt complains about a non-issue and everyone is falling over themselves to apologise - welcome to the age of wokeness and entitlement, where the concept of offence being taken rather than given has been totally forgotten.

OK - this thread seems to have generated considerable heat, with a couple of comments both causing spontaneous combustion and a flurry of feedback away from this board too.

Folks, everyone, there are passionate concerns here, and indeed some of those (for me) go beyond the immediate topic in question.  I can see both 'sides' and indeed have been writing for a future blog on a wider diversity topic - seeing some very real equality issues in my own community. I lost votes in the recent election because of my stance - I was told that to my face.  But I also gained votes (and probably more than I lost) by taking a stance.

It has become, increasingly, difficult to write or speak to offend no-one; much of that is because many of us (and I include myself) were brought up with a lexicon set in its time, with words originating in that time. I have been caught out too, just as the train manager who made the announcement was.

Is it too easy for people to feel aggrieved? Maybe. At one extreme, I could have chosen to be really upset last week by comments passed about the election result - intended to comfort a loosing candidate, no doubt, but a real slap in my face. I just rolled my eyes and noted the view of the author.  At the other extreme, some of the sayings when repeated can and do cause significant hurt - to the extent that people don't / won't stand up - "frightened off" was what I heard; they're not being "namby-pamby" - they're people worn down by the repeated (and sometimes mal-intended) wordings.  And at times when we use wording we have no idea which of these extremes, or somewhere between, is hit.

Let's move on ... take care with our wording, gently inform one another should we slip, and get back to talking about class 365, Railway Cranes, IETs, split tickets, and SRA2.

Thank you grahame.  This is one of those cases which is not so much about the fundamental issue, but in the communication arising from it - at least, it is for me. It's akin to wanting to quietly step back from the hurly burly of public life, then announcing it on worldwide television to make sure everybody knows. It could be easy to react to the message, losing sight of what it was about. (Hopefully, Red Squirrel will explain what I mean).

That said, I'm struggling to find support for younf Laurence amongst among the columnists. We might have to wait for tomorrow's Grauniad.

There's a hospital pass, if ever I was on the receiving end of one..!

As the father of teenagers, I'm very aware that gender seems to be a much more complex issue for young people today than it was when my generation were young. Things were black and white in those days, and I don't just mean the television sets. Queerness was ruthlessly suppressed. Anything that smacked of otherness was 'bad', and non-neurotypical people were systematically excluded.

We have a long way to go, but diversity and inclusion are now increasingly seen as being good for society and good for business. Why would anyone want to stand in the way of that? Maybe we'd have fewer angry old men now if we'd all grown up in a more tolerant, more inclusive environment?

It's worth noting that both Laurence and Charlotte campaign for LGBT+ inclusion on the railway, so perhaps they saw it as 'their job' to look out for this kind of thing?

The problem is that some groups are getting "inclusiveness" and others are not. It seems apparently acceptable to use expressions like "chavs" or "gammons" about some people with not a word of complaint, even though they cover groups like the elderly and disadvantaged who have plenty to struggle with in their day-to-day lives. The concept of respecting others and treating everyone equally seems not to be particularly evenly applied - see for example the opinions expressed in this publication previously quoted in this forum-

https://www.ilivehere.co.uk/top-10-worst-places-to-live-in-england

Personally, I think the residents of the towns named as the 10 worst places to live nominated in this report have much more to complain about than the very small proportion of the population (OK, some are very unhappy or troubled) on whose behalf the complainants here have decided to take offence at a way of drawing attention to an announcement with no malice behind it all.

I am sadly coming to the conclusion that we may be living in a golden (or should I say dark) age of hypocrisy. I do not think it helps create a better, happier and more cohesive society if some quite large disadvantaged sectors are seen as fair game for ridicule yet others are seen as totally sacrosanct. It will simply add to the former's feeling of grievance.

It's also perhaps worth reflecting that of all the many thousands of people who travel by train every day and are subjected to the dreadful trauma of hearing the phrase "Good afternoon Ladies and Gentlemen" ...................one complained.

This is hardly Rosa Parks.

Perhaps we need to rediscover common sense, rather than encouraging and nurturing certain activists perpetual state of offence and outrage.

As a nation, we used to be rather good at that, but I suspect that observation makes me a "Gammon"?

You didn't let me down, though. :)


I would hate to find out that they, or anyone, spends time travelling the country waiting for incautious forms of address on PA systems to tweet about and hopefully get in the papers. I would be of a lower opinion were I to find that such travel is at public expense.

What I missed first time around was that the TOC issued a fatwah four years ago to ban such offensive language, so fair enough, the TM is bang to rights. Said TM might end up being carpeted by said TOC, and might have to call for union representation. I hope he doesn't see Laurence arriving to help, for Laurence is a TM and the RMT rep for such matters. That I find the most reprehensible part of this saga - I had occasion to upbraid a colleague for a misdemeanour in public service on more than one occasion, and have been taken to task myself, but it was always done behind closed doors. Followed by a chuckle over a pint sometimes.

I really think that's pretty unlikely.

Mind, our little "Mom and Pop" business was the victim (yes, I have chosen that word carefully) of an organisation that put us though a series of hoops to set up training for their employee with specific needs - just to be told before they signed the order that the whole thing was a test, and to be congratulated that we had passed.  Felt like a "sting", cost us a lot of time, called in a number of favours to help and, frankly, left me feeling more than a little peeved. To be clear - this example was not a gender issue.

I have found it instructive to look up people's FOI request history to get a feel for them - very much like reading what they do and say on social media.  Again, I have not done this in relation to the principles in the current thread.

The - vast - majority of people are lovely ... and where there comes an issue may be embarrassed about it when they need not be, and  are positive / thankful for it being accounted for.

"Mom and Pop" Graham?

Careful, Laurence might be reading this!

Indeed - both Lisa and I clearly identify with those terms and do not offend ourselves by using them or publicising that identity.

Absolutely - To suggest anything else could be construed as being "Momist" or "Popist".

With of course apologies to any persistent critics, supporters of the Pope, or followers of the pop art movement who may be reading this...

Having been a member of the armed forces I have been called all sorts of things by highly trained senior members of the service, mostly negative and most would not pass muster today. So I can roll with most things, if I ever notice them.

"Customers" and the like reeks of management speak, on transport they are passengers, in the health service they are patients NEVER allow management to forget what they are supposed to be delivering.

"Ladies and gentlemen, boys and girls, the building is on fire. Please leave immediately. For anyone else who isn't listening, I have asked head office to help with other forms of address, and I'll get back to soon as I hear".

Let's see who sits with fingers in their ears if this ever happens.