Would You Intrude on This Couple

[MissUndastood]

I would never presume that I had privacy rights in any public park.

 

[PFlamingo]

No one said the couple went there for privacy, nor was there any indication that they were in any way annoyed by the family. Why is everyone assuming the couple expected to have the park to themselves? Also, the couple was there first. It's not like the family was there playing and the couple sat down and started giving them dirty looks.

And no, I would have gone to a different area, especially if it was a big park with lots of other space for the kids to play. Just because it's a public park doesn't mean people can't expect to have a nice, quiet lunch in a secluded area. Can we all say, "Serenity Bay"?

 

[Carly_Roach]

It's not a question of intruding, entitlement or privacy, but rather a question of being considerate of your fellow human beings. Personally, I would have gone to another spot and been considerate of the couple who obviously wanted to be alone, but that's just how I was raised. We were taught to do unto others as you'd have others do unto you. I have a lifetime of experience putting myself in other people's shoes and asking myself how I'd feel if someone did that to me.

Unfortunately, this appears to be a lost moral as people are no longer considerate of others. The new mantra seems to be the cynical and self-absorbed "Do unto others before they do unto you".

But as for me and mine, we will continue to be considerate of those around us.

 

[msjprincess]

No one said the couple went there for privacy, nor was there any indication that they were in any way annoyed by the family. Why is everyone assuming the couple expected to have the park to themselves? Also, the couple was there first. It's not like the family was there playing and the couple sat down and started giving them dirty looks.

And no, I would have gone to a different area, especially if it was a big park with lots of other space for the kids to play. Just because it's a public park doesn't mean people can't expect to have a nice, quiet lunch in a secluded area. Can we all say, "Serenity Bay"?

If she wasn't annoyed I doubt she would be using words like "invading" and "intruding" and posting a thread about it

 

[MIGrandma]

So it sounds like I would have to climb this hill before I could see the picnic table? If so, once I climbed that hill, I probably wouldn't have wanted to drag the kids down it and then go to a different area. Once I've climbed a hill, I'm committed. Otherwise, yes, I would have avoided them, but I wouldn't really consider it "intruding" on them to be in the same area of a public park. Maybe they like that area.

No, maybe I didn't explain it well enough in my original post. The ground was pretty level at that spot until you got to the edge where it went downhill to that secluded area by the lake with the one picnic table. So you could see the secluded area when you were by the edge, then go downhill to it, then have to walk back uphill to get back to the major portion of the park.

If she wasn't annoyed I doubt she would be using words like "invading" and "intruding" and posting a thread about it

You're right, I definitely was annoyed. The older I get the less tolerant I am of loud children. The park was so nice and quiet, then we found this nice secluded area that was even better. And when I heard them starting to come down the hill I was wishing they wouldn't. They had the entire rest of the park to play/walk around in, why they had to choose the area where we were at was what I didn't understand. Now if that had been the only place to see the lake, I would have understood, but it wasn't. Then the kids were running around in the small area and being very noisy, and right up beside our table. Then Grandma comes down the hill and wants to take pictures. I leaned over to DH and whispered "they'll probably ask us to take a picture of all of them next." Thankfully they didn't. I just like space, and with the park being totally empty I just didn't understand why they felt they had to be right beside us. It was annoying, I'll admit it. And I never would have done that to another couple had it been me with my young children. We would have gone down further away so as not to intrude on the couple trying to enjoy their lunch in peace and quiet.

 

[Acklander]

When I bring the kids to the park, I sort of let them lead the way, so if the kids had headed towards the area where the couple were eating, then I'd be following along behind them to that area.
I wouldn't have thought of it as an "intrusion" since it was a public park.

 

[Cooky]

.

 

[Carly_Roach]

It's called being considerate of other people.

What if the situation were reversed and the park was empty and the children were playing a game and the couple decided to sit down in the middle of where the children were playing?

It's not about privacy, it's about being respectful, courteous and considerate of other people.

Anyone remember "The Golden Rule"? Many cultures, religions and philosophies have different versions of it:

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.

Well said.

 

[C.Ann]

It's not a question of intruding, entitlement or privacy, but rather a question of being considerate of your fellow human beings. Personally, I would have gone to another spot and been considerate of the couple who obviously wanted to be alone, but that's just how I was raised. We were taught to do unto others as you'd have others do unto you. I have a lifetime of experience putting myself in other people's shoes and asking myself how I'd feel if someone did that to me.

Unfortunately, this appears to be a lost moral as people are no longer considerate of others. The new mantra seems to be the cynical and self-absorbed "Do unto others before they do unto you".

But as for me and mine, we will continue to be considerate of those around us.

This..

And although technically it can't be called "intrusion" because it's a public park, I would have felt like I was intruding - considering the rest of the park was basically empty..

I actually find it odd - that of all the places available, these people chose the one spot where someone else was having a picnic..

 

[okeydokey]

Maybe you happened to choose the area of the park that the family was used to going to. It could be there special p[lace too.

I probably would have steered my kids away, but I can't imagine being annoyed that some other family was near me in a public park. And I would have happily taken a group photo of them.

 

[Cooky]

.

 

[pansmermaidzlagoon]

I would not have seen it as intruding but, yes, I would have given them some space considering there was plenty of other places to go.

it is a public park, but at the same time it was quiet. No reason to interrupt their lunch and no reason not to give a little space.

 

[mill4023]

Obviously it's a public park and there is no right to privacy.
But it's not a matter of rights. It's a matter of common courtesy.

If that particular spot had the best view of the lake or the best access to the water or had some other unique characteristic, than I wouldn't be annoyed at others for "intruding" on my privacy. But if it was just one of a number of equally desirable spots for enjoying the lake, then most people with common courtesy would have picked another spot.

It is just like the examples people gave of movie theaters. If you walk in to the theater and there is only one other couple there, would you really go sit right next to them? Of course not. You'd pick a spot that gives them some space.

 

[MarkBarbieri]

...If that particular spot had the best view of the lake or the best access to the water or had some other unique characteristic, than I wouldn't be annoyed at others for "intruding" on my privacy. But if it was just one of a number of equally desirable spots for enjoying the lake, then most people with common courtesy would have picked another spot....

That's matches my feeling. I would assess the area and go to the place that best suited my desires. Part of that assessment would be minimizing the disturbance of ther people and their disturbance of my group. There could be lots of other factors, though - best backdrop for taking pictures, best beach for playing in the sand, wind direction, shade, etc. So I would have prefered not to be near the other couple, but I wouldn't have ruled it out either.

 

[tlbwriter]

Obviously it's a public park and there is no right to privacy.
But it's not a matter of rights. It's a matter of common courtesy.

If that particular spot had the best view of the lake or the best access to the water or had some other unique characteristic, than I wouldn't be annoyed at others for "intruding" on my privacy. But if it was just one of a number of equally desirable spots for enjoying the lake, then most people with common courtesy would have picked another spot.

Sure, if it truly WAS just one of a number of equally desirable spots. But we don't know that. This spot could have been special to that family. We can't make assumptions about them.

 

[Cooky]

.

 

[Carly_Roach]

Many people don't want to be considerate of other people, as long as they get what they want.

Absolutely! I'm seeing more and more of this every day: People doing the right thing only if it's convenient for them to do so; people being nice to each other only when their desires have been satisfied first; practicing tolerance ONLY when it makes the practicer look good to other people.

On the bright side, other people's bad behavior keeps me (or tries to keep me) focused on my spiritual beliefs. I have to keep re-learning that I cannot control the actions or behavior of others. The only person I can control is myself.

 

[MM27]

What were they doing that required privacy? In a public park I would have no thoughts that they were entitled to a section of a park for just the two of them.

I guess I need to get my mind out of the gutter because I was thinking really dirty thoughts about this

Public parks are just that PUBLIC. Yeah the kids could've gone somewhere else. I think the mother or at least the grandmother should've herded them off to another section to look at the water, but unless they sat down at the table with you and started eating your stuff, I don't think you have much to say.

 

[MIGrandma]

I guess I need to get my mind out of the gutter because I was thinking really dirty thoughts about this

Public parks are just that PUBLIC. Yeah the kids could've gone somewhere else. I think the mother or at least the grandmother should've herded them off to another section to look at the water, but unless they sat down at the table with you and started eating your stuff, I don't think you have much to say.

That's exactly why I didn't say anything. I know it's a public park, and like I said before, had it been crowded I wouldn't have given it a single thought. But with it being empty I just wished they would have gone to another area instead of directly beside us, and with the kids running around it just made lunch a little less pleasant than it could have been, that's all.

 

[LisaNJ25]

What were they doing that required privacy? In a public park I would have no thoughts that they were entitled to a section of a park for just the two of them.

My husband works for a county park. You could only imagine the type of "private time" in the public parks he comes upon.