Skip - don't walk and changing "footpath" habits

[String o' beads]

Tyke wrote: In the days of muddy roads and horse muck a man would walk road side so if a cart splashed up any muck the man would cop it saving the womans clothing and dignity. An other explanation dates back to the time that upper stories of building protruded over the footpaths and chamber pots were emptied onto the street hence the term the faecal excriment hit the fan the fan been Anglo Saxon for path edge.     Are you sure? I've always believed this version.http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/407950.htmlBut I agree that the gentleman walking on the outside was to 'protect' the lady.     

[Tyke]

Geordie-exile wrote: Tyke wrote: In the days of muddy roads and horse muck a man would walk road side so if a cart splashed up any muck the man would cop it saving the womans clothing and dignity. An other explanation dates back to the time that upper stories of building protruded over the footpaths and chamber pots were emptied onto the street hence the term the faecal excriment hit the fan the fan been Anglo Saxon for path edge.     Are you sure? I've always believed this version.http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/407950.htmlBut I agree that the gentleman walking on the outside was to 'protect' the lady.      It may not be technically true but I like it better. ; )    

[tyke bhoy]

Tyke wrote: Geordie-exile wrote: Tyke wrote: In the days of muddy roads and horse muck a man would walk road side so if a cart splashed up any muck the man would cop it saving the womans clothing and dignity. An other explanation dates back to the time that upper stories of building protruded over the footpaths and chamber pots were emptied onto the street hence the term the faecal excriment hit the fan the fan been Anglo Saxon for path edge.     Are you sure? I've always believed this version.http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/407950.htmlBut I agree that the gentleman walking on the outside was to 'protect' the lady.      It may not be technically true but I like it better. ; ) Has the edited for content control been turned off?Not actualy on the list tyke bhoy but could be removed depending upon context and intended purpose but, just for you - as above    

[Richard A Thackeray]

Leodian wrote: A footpath habit that seems to have become more common is when there are a couple of people together walking towards you and taking up almost all of the footpath width. As you approach them one will not briefly go in front or behind the other and so to pass you have to go onto the road or squeeze by brushing against a hedge. OK that is also briefly, but still a risk if traffic is passing. If you stop because it is just too risky to go on the road they usually still stay together and then brush past you with no care at what their action may be doing.     That happens a lot to me on my run to work, if I go the 'road-route', as I pass over a railway bridge. Whilst not being a 'hump-back', it's still a sharpish summit & I've got my back to traffic (narrow pavement on one side only) Whether it's the locals around here, but there's very few who will move over & let me past on the pavement - even pensioners!!I'm glancing over my shoulder trying to judge if there's any vehicles approacing (bikes are a nightmare, even though I'm a long-time rider myself - hard to see cause of narrowness)Sometimes there's a grudging step aside at the last second, other times I almost feel a mirror clip me.On the odd occasion, I have clipped shoulders, to a "Watch where you're going!!", or to a torrade of abuse.They can see the traffic not me, & if I did get hit, there's a chance that;1. Any involved driver will tell the Police it looked as though they pushed me into the road.2 As I bounce off the front of the vehicle hitting me, I collide with their ignorant carcass, causing injuries to him/her too!