Why do people do this? 32.3.4.6 - 29

[rosada]

Why do people continue to ask the I Ching yes or no questions when we all know the I Ching does not give yes or no answers?

32.3.4.5 - 29.

[thanks for the edit, Hilary]

 

[Trojina]

Of course Yi can answer yes/no questions. Many long winded questions do boil down to wanting a 'yes' or a 'no'. I ask yes/no questions all the time and understand the answers. After all one is not looking for the word 'yes' or 'no' literally.

If you asked 'shall I go the party, I don't much feel like it' and got 60.1 one might take that as a 'no, it's good to stay in'. If one got 60.2 one might take it as 'yes, go on'.

I agree it might be better for newbies not to use yes/no questions but once a person has established their own relationship with the I Ching I think they can get the drift of meanings via their own preferred question format.

But my question to you is why do you ask why 'people' do things and expect any kind of objective answer ? Makes no sense to me at all. The I Ching answers you, you yourself, your consciousness. Yes it can refer to outer circumstances but mainly your answer will have you in it somewhere, it's addressed to you. Also there isn't generally only one defined reason why 'people' do things, they may have different reasons. I ask in whatever way feels most natural to me. You appear to find it natural to ask why 'people' do things, yet to me that seems pretty odd. Well I suppose it would be dull if we were all the same.

Re your answer 39.3.4.6>29 my first thought is that in the way your mind perceives this question the cast is saying that yes/no answers are sought when a person faces difficulty. But that might be said of all answers. But to my mind this cast needs your consciousness to make sense of it because I see nothing wrong with yes/no questions. I'd certainly discourage asking 'why do people do X' questions though


I'll probably write a blog post on it to allow my thoughts full expansion (here it is, the expanded version http://www.onlineclarity.co.uk/frie...u-can-ask-yes-no-questions-of-course-you-can-!!! ) since I have heard you say before you think people cannot ask yes/no questions. People do have very different approaches to how they ask questions and I think we often find other's approaches quite odd. So there is no reason a person cannot ask anything they feel natural and comfortable in asking provided it is a useful enough question for them to understand or hear the answer. I couldn't work with your questions and you likely couldn't work with mine but there really is no rule that may not ask yes/no questions.

 

[butterfly spider]

Even if we ask a yes or no question we would be mortified if we discovered that there was a definite affirmation in the answer. We actually do not want this - we want to be in control of our own destiny. Behind every yes or no questions lie a myriad of alternatives. Once I asked if I should post a letter (a very important one). I was not actually asking if I should physically put it in the letter box. Rather should I take the path that posting the letter would lead. The casting has nothing to do with the letter so a yes or no was irrelevant.

 

[hilary]

I think if you really, really wanted nothing but 'yes' or 'no' you would be tossing one coin, once. Turning to the Yi implies you're looking for something more.

If you're asking Yi 'Shall I go to the party?' and will take 60.1 as a 'no', then I think your question was really 'What shall I do about going to the party?' At least, that's the question you're assuming Yi is answering... so I reckon that means it's the one you asked.

32 to 29 - like Trojina, I'm not entirely sure whether this is a straight answer. (Next question: 'Why do people cast readings about other people's motives when we all know how monstrously complicated that can get?' )(Yes, I've done that too - once in a blue moon, probably one with pink polka dots, but it has been known…)

Lasting's repeating chasms - a learning process?

Er... 32.3.4.5 changes to 29. Was that it?

 

[Tim K]

They want to keep[32] being in charge of the situation, they are used to it.
32.3 they try to use outside source of information, ignoring intuition
32.4 they just don't know any better, and it's so easy.
32.5 and this leads to modest results, but the key is to be flexible and open, like water is in 29.

32.3 → 40 (Liberation), Richmond: He who is not faithful to continuance meets with disgrace.

40.4 → 7 (Organised Force), Richmond:
Free yourself from your toes, then the friend will come with trust.
Trust your intuition more, less control.

7.5 → 29 (Danger), Richmond:
Wild beasts in the field. There is advantage in catching them. No error.
The elder leads the army and the younger carries corpses. Continuing brings misfortune.
Forget the old methods, be flexible, use open-ended questions.

40.4 and 7.5 really shine the light here, especially 7.5 where king[logic] is interfering with the general's wisdom[subconscious/Yi].
Fear/unwillingness to let Yi do the work, submit to it.


Logical mind tries to keep[32] repeating[29] the questioning, trying many variants, going step by step[29].

 

[goddessliss]

Why do people continue to ask the I Ching yes or no questions when we all know the I Ching does not give yes or no answers?

32.3.4.6 - 29.

Great question rosada - not interpreting the reading, my personal opinion is they're looking for a quick fix and not that interested in looking at the truth. To be honest sometimes I don't bother interpreting because I know they're gonna choose not to hear.

 

[Trojina]

Who are the 'they' here ? I ask yes/no questions and I never ask for interpretations in SR. I am not after a 'quick fix' I just think it is an expedient way for me to ask a question. Rosada's question presupposes a 'they', a homogenous group of people who all think the same way and ask yes/no questions for the same reason. It isn't so. A lot can be understood from a yes/no question. Much can be lost by making out they are 'out of bounds'.



There is absolutely nothing wrong with yes/no questions. As I understood from Lise I think these kind of questions were the earliest kind asked in ancient times such as 'will it rain tomorrow ?'.. They didn't however ask things such as 'what is the motive of everyone in the entire world when they do X ?". They asked questions that were pertinent to themselves and their own lives. So this answer is IMO to do with Rosada's view of people who ask yes/no questions.

I think if you really, really wanted nothing but 'yes' or 'no' you would be tossing one coin, once. Turning to the Yi implies you're looking for something more.

Absolutely. I never said I was looking only for a yes/no. With Yi you always get an added bonus of wisdom and clarity and more to boot. But that doesn't add up to 'thou shalt not ask yes/no questions'. Rosada seems to have the notion it is not okay to ask yes/no question yet she feels it's perfectly feasible to imagine she can gauge the motive of every single living person who asks a yes/no question of Yi

If you're asking Yi 'Shall I go to the party?' and will take 60.1 as a 'no', then I think your question was really 'What shall I do about going to the party?' At least, that's the question you're assuming Yi is answering... so I reckon that means it's the one you asked.

Well actually 'what shall I do about going to the party' actually boils down to yes/no in the end so what's the difference ? I really do think it is nonsense to say yes/no questions should not be asked. There really are far worse questions IMO. I could go and list them in my blog.

 

[Trojina]

Disclaimer what is or is not a 'good' or 'bad' question is an entirely subjective thing. For sure in my view it is far preferable to ask a yes/no question than to ask why all the people in the world do a certain thing. Hence my view is also subjective which is why I'm going to my blog to list the most appalling questions ever asked in my opinion.

 

[rosada]

Hi Guys,
Hmm, that was fun - I guess..
I guess I didn't make myself clear. First off, I consider myself one of the "people who keep asking the I Ching yes or no questions." I was feeling frustrated that I had just gotten a very puzzling answer and realized that even though I knew better, I'd phrased my question as yes or no. So I guess the question should have been "Why do I keep asking yes or no questions even though we all know the I Ching doesn't give yes or no answers." I was trying to protect the guilty.
Anyway, I thought the answer was kinda comforting: 32.3.4.5 Duration to 29. Abysmal: "Why do people Continue to ask these Abysmal questions? Because...When a man has success in his heart everything he does succeeds."
Sounds like the I Ching is saying that if the seeker thinks he'll get a clear answer - even if he asks a yes or no question - well, he will!

 

[goddessliss]

It was a general comment trojina - not everyone that asks yes/no is after a quick fix but personally I think the IChing is a good way to look at ourselves and prefer the tarot or runes for yest/no questions.

 

[Liselle]

What an interesting thread! I think I'm agreeing with everyone, in different ways (am therefore declaring wishy-washiness a virtue ).

• Re: asking why people do things: out of utter exasperation and a near-fender bender, I once asked Yi the following:
  "WHY do people back into parking spaces?!? Why would anyone do that?!!?"
  
  I got 16.5 > 45 ('Constancy, sickness. Persevering, not dying' (Hilary's translation)), which after reading Hilary's commentary I took to mean that "they" think they're accomplishing a goal which they're actually not accomplishing. (Hilary's commentary: "So you persevere doggedly in trying to make this image real, in the hope that real life will tell the story you want it to – and you do keep it from dying, though it never quite comes to life.")
  
  I think this answer makes perfect sense, and I think Yi addressed the question just fine. It may not cover every single instance of every single person who ever does this, but I think it's an accurate general summary.
  
  
• Re: asking yes/no questions: I do try to avoid it, along with other not-great question forms, but there are times when it seems more torturous and "abyss"-like (29) to try coming up with a "properly"-formed question than to just ask what you want to know, directly. Sometimes it seems like a difference without a distinction, as Trojina said.
  
  
• Yes/nos are habits (32), as Ashteroid alluded to re: 32.4, and they're perfectly fine in normal life; people think in those terms naturally. But (29) you kind of have to re-learn question-asking when talking with Yi, as Hilary said - it takes practice.
  
  
• Agree that this is not particularly good for new people. Learn the right way first; form good habits before deviating from them. Then when someone like Trojina asks a yes/no question, she is not tempted to see the answer only in terms of "good/bad," which seems like it could be a pitfall of yes/nos.
  

[P.S. Would it be worthwhile to fix the title of the thread? Would that help the hexagram search feature?]

 

[butterfly spider]

I had a dice once with two blanks and one yes and one no side. It was from a game..
I used it for decisions for a while ... And it used to drive me potty.
If I got the blank sides I used to get a sense of relief

 

[sooo]

Most of my questions can be boiled down to a yes or no question, but as with a child asking his parent if they can wear their new sweater before it was intended to be worn as a gift, I'm not only looking for a strident yes or no, I'm also looking for and even anticipating a 'but why not?, which implies I was expecting an explanation of why it would be more appropriate and polite to wait. Questions such as this usually have a sense or an energy of need and desire for a certain result, and I believe it is this that my answers are mostly aptly applied to. A softer version of Lofting's emotional I Ching. Both Rosada's and Lisa's answers seem to be speaking not to the question but to the emotion, i.e. , behind their questions. Rosada's answer something of 'steady your heart, don't have a cow, man!' And Lisa's 'Look at you, freaking out over how someone chooses to park. Get it to together, girl!'

And if I ask if today is a beneficial day to travel to the bigger town to do weekly shopping, and receive 60.1, it's not necessarily saying no, but rather, step outside your limited thinking, consider for yourself and weigh the pros and cons. I may then think, 'it is Monday morning. Chances are their shelves will not yet be stocked with fresh food,' and reach a conclusion to wait a day or two when the food suppliers make their rounds to restock the shelves. Thinking outside the box. I'm not the only one here with a history of receiving 60, lines 1 and 2, I'm sure. Weigh the advantages and don't limit yourself or paint yourself into a yes or no corner.

I think the question we ask is often not nearly as important as the energy and motivation behind why we are asking it. But that said, a direct answer to the question should also be weighed, because it's a possibility, especially when we have our head together, which seems to be Yi's (and the noble within's) foremost concern.

 

[Liselle]

I'm not only looking for a strident yes or no, I'm also looking for and even anticipating a 'but why not?, which implies I was expecting an explanation of why

Yes. That's more or less something I've noticed about me and my readings, maybe because of my relative inexperience - sometimes I'll want the opposite of what I get. If I get a pretty straightforward yes or no, I might at times whine, "But whyyy?" (which as you say is probably already contained in the answer, if I'd look). But if I get a less direct answer, it can sometimes seem (to me) as if Yi's skipped a crucial step. E.g. if I can only actually either "do" or "not do" something, such as go or not go, it's sometimes really hard for me to tease that out of the reading, and I end up asking, "But what is the advice?"

Both Rosada's and Lisa's answers seem to be speaking not to the question but to the emotion, i.e. , behind their questions.

Well...maybe I'm looking at them wrong, but I think those two readings did answer the questions directly. Rosada's: I think everyone here picked up on different parts of it. Mine: "People (the back-in parkers) aren't thinking it through well enough to realize they're not accomplishing what they think they are." I don't think my parking answer had anything to do with me; I think Yi answered the question.

 

[Trojina]

•Re: asking why people do things: out of utter exasperation and a near-fender bender, I once asked Yi the following:
"WHY do people back into parking spaces?!? Why would anyone do that?!!?"

But the obvious reasons people reverse into parking spaces is surely

a. they can make a speedier easier getaway when they leave.

b. there are occasions it's actually easier to reverse in than to go in head on

Why does it bother you that people reverse into parking spaces ? Nothing to do with Yi here I'm just baffled ? Does it annoy you that have to wait for them ? If so then the 16.5 would be about your attitude, Yi saying 'it won't kill you' perhaps. I've never even considered reversing into a parking space could annoy anyone. I generally don't because for me it's harder unless a and b above apply.

I wouldn't see the 16.5 as describing what people do but rather your own position in the issue. Also re

•Re: asking why people do things: out of utter exasperation and a near-fender bender,

Why would you ask Yi when you can find out simply by ordinary means such as asking those who reverse their cars in why they do it ? ('fender bender' so you don't like reversers because they are dangerous ?)

 

[sooo]

But if I get a less direct answer, it can sometimes seem (to me) as if Yi's skipped a crucial step. E.g. if I can only actually either "do" or "not do" something, such as go or not go, it's sometimes really hard for me to tease that out of the reading, and I end up asking, "But what is the advice?"

I hear you. But then I ask, why would the Yi be partial one way or the other? Whereas it always can offer an objective image of our own mental/emotional condition.

I ask mundane questions all the time. Okay, I live alone and sometimes like to bounce ideas off someone that I know understands where I'm coming from. These questions are entirely subjective. I receive an answer like 54. Huh? How does that answer "which of those two speakers would sound best in my amp?", or perhaps in an attempt to outmaneuver the Yi with, "which of the two speakers would I like better in my amp?" It simply doesn't know, or care. 'What sounds better' is a subjective call, and only I can answer that question. Therefore, 54 becomes something like, "it's up to you to select this temporary bride." Or perhaps throw the question back to me with, "which do you think you'll like in the long run?" I feel such a question deserves such an answer, so I'd typically chuckle and think, 'well, I had that coming to me.'

 

[rosada]

One might ask the I Ching, "Why do people eat beans?" and while it's true each individual might have a separate reason - "They're healthy", "That's what I could afford", "I like them" etc. - still the I Ching can give an answer that can apply to everyone, maybe 27. Ya Gotta Eat.

So thus we experience that when we're frustrated or feeling out of touch or that things aren't right, that there's been a mistake, consulting the I Ching can lift us passed all the conflicting points of view and take us to an all inclusive perspective, the source of all that comes after - and often when we reconnect with Source we then can figure out the particulars to our own situation without them being specifically spelled out in a hexagram.

I think some types of questions seem to reveal more helpful answers, but who's to say? All roads lead to God if you have God in your heart. Sometimes people will ask me when I suggest we consult the I Ching about this or that situation, "Oh? Can you ask the I Ching that?" and I say, "No matter what I ask, I've never had the book burst into flames."

 

[anemos]

"

WHY do people back into parking spaces?!? Why would anyone do that?!!?"

I got 16.5 > 45

When I can park that way , I do it to prevent a silly accident I.e. it allows me to see the "unforeseen " car, (45) as car mirrors suffer from that illness (16.5) called blind spot.


As for the 32>29, Imo, is about a premise its no true so persisting on that you cant exit the pit.

 

[Liselle]

But the obvious reasons people reverse into parking spaces is surely

a. they can make a speedier easier getaway when they leave.

b. there are occasions it's actually easier to reverse in than to go in head on

Why does it bother you that people reverse into parking spaces ?

One reason it bothers me is that a high percentage of the time they do a lousy job of it and are crooked or off-center enough that it impinges on an adjoining space. And they either don't notice, or don't care to fix it. That is annoying if spaces are at a premium (and regardless, I think it's plain rude to sprawl your car all over. If everyone did that...)

Your point about speedier exits - I'm sure that is the reason they do it, and I think that's exactly what the reading was talking about (see the end of this post). Yes, it's factually true that it's quicker to pull frontwards out of a space than to back out. But it misses the bigger picture, when you add up the total time involved.

Think about targets, maneuvers, and their relative difficulty:

width="250" style="width: 250px"
|-
| Target:
|
|-
| Small parking space
| Difficult
|-
| Larger space
| Easy
|-

width="250" style="width: 250px"

|-
| Maneuver:
|
|-
| Backing up
| Difficult
|-
| Pulling forwards
| Easy
|-

I think it makes more sense, and takes significantly less total time, to combine the difficult target with the easy maneuver, rather than marrying the most difficult of each.

I can think of exceptions, too. For example if you're an emergency vehicle, and speedy exits are absolutely critical. Or if your house is on a busy street, where backing out might be near impossible. However none of that is true for the people who park at my apartment building, or for people parking in the grocery store lot.

('fender bender' so you don't like reversers because they are dangerous ?)

Yes. I nearly had an accident with someone who was doing this, which is what provoked me into doing the reading. Granted, it was a really unusual combination of circumstances with me and the other driver, which will probably never be repeated, but all the maneuvering required to back in can be confusing to people who have no idea what you're doing until you're well into it. (That is, the first thing the person does is drive right on by the parking space, then they stop suddenly and start backing up.)

Why would you ask Yi when you can find out simply by ordinary means such as asking those who reverse their cars in why they do it ?

Because I'm not there when they're doing it and I don't know who they are. Also because I wouldn't want to go up to perfect strangers and ask them such a question . Would you? I suppose if I was already parked, and someone did this right next to me at that very moment and was crooked in a way that affected me - I might point that out. (Re: the near-accident, I think we were both so relieved nothing actually happened that neither of us thought to interrogate the other. We both just left.)

But if I'm ever riding in the car with someone I know, and they do this, I'll ask them.

Anyway - the reading - what I thought Yi was saying (thanks to Hilary's commentary) was that backwards-parkers think they're saving themselves time, when really it's taking them significantly longer overall. They have an inspiration (16), which they are "constant" to even though it's factually a bit "ill". Maybe the "not dying" part is that when they do save themselves a tiny bit of time leaving, they're inspired all over again and forget how hard the backing-in part was.

(Is that more than anyone wanted to know about parking? )

 

[Liselle]

I hear you. But then I ask, why would the Yi be partial one way or the other? Whereas it always can offer an objective image of our own mental/emotional condition.

I ask mundane questions all the time. Okay, I live alone and sometimes like to bounce ideas off someone that I know understands where I'm coming from. These questions are entirely subjective. I receive an answer like 54. Huh? How does that answer "which of those two speakers would sound best in my amp?", or perhaps in an attempt to outmaneuver the Yi with, "which of the two speakers would I like better in my amp?" It simply doesn't know, or care. 'What sounds better' is a subjective call, and only I can answer that question. Therefore, 54 becomes something like, "it's up to you to select this temporary bride." Or perhaps throw the question back to me with, "which do you think you'll like in the long run?" I feel such a question deserves such an answer, so I'd typically chuckle and think, 'well, I had that coming to me.'

Yes, I think it could probably mean any of those things, or maybe 54 could simply mean "the second one," if that description would mean something to you (?).

But I really don't see anything wrong with asking questions like, "If I bought this speaker, how would I feel about it in the long run?" Maybe it's just me, but there are times when I really don't know how I feel about something until I've lived with it for a while, and you don't always have that luxury with purchases. (Not to mention, there might be unknowable factors. Maybe it will break - Yi could tell you that.)

I'm not saying Yi cares or is partial, in the way I think you mean those things.

P.S. If we get answers which boil down to "bug off and don't ask me something so silly," could it be reasonable to conclude that Yi didn't have anything more substantive to say? Could that be information in itself? "This speaker is fine; that speaker is also fine; I won't be making any serious errors either way; there really is nothing more to base this on than my own whim..."

 

[Trojina]

I love your chart Lisa

Now I come to think about it I have always wondered why people reverse in to parking spaces but it was at a subliminal level. My father always reversed in to spaces and so did the other men in my life and I guess I grew up thinking it was the 'right' way to do it. When I learned to drive I wasn't too good at reversing into spaces so I've always usually gone head in. I had this nagging feeling when I was younger that I wasn't parking right by not reversing in then I wondered why it was better anyway ? Since then the issue faded into the back of my consciousness. Thank you for bringing it to light

Now and then a space seems far easier to reverse into that going nose in so I will do it now and then. My spatial sense is quite poor so I don't do it often.

Now you have explained I can see that 16.5 the way you do.

Because I'm not there when they're doing it and I don't know who they are. Also because I wouldn't want to go up to perfect strangers and ask them such a question . Would you?

Well no I suppose not but next time I see someone reverse in I might. I think I asked my father and he said because when we came back to the car we can drive straight off without messing about.

But if I'm ever riding in the car with someone I know, and they do this, I'll ask them.

Me too. Let's compare notes.

Anyway - the reading - what I thought Yi was saying (thanks to Hilary's commentary) was that backwards-parkers think they're saving themselves time, when really it's taking them significantly longer overall. They have an inspiration (16), which they are "constant" to even though it's factually a bit "ill". Maybe the "not dying" part is that when they do save themselves a tiny bit of time leaving, they're inspired all over again and forget how hard the backing-in part was.

Yes I can see how you came to that interpretation now.

(Is that more than anyone wanted to know about parking? )

Parking is a big issue here. I'm so paranoid re parking I don't leave the car until I can see I'm not too close to anyone/blocking anyone in and so on.

 

[Liselle]

Yes, I can certainly see if that's the way you learned, or what people close to you customarily did, it would seem normal and fine to you. I have a sneaking suspicion, though, that your father et al was actually good at it, vs. "kids these days" who don't seem to give a hoot whether they're in their space decently (my perception).

Yes I can see how you came to that interpretation now.

Well, I would never (ever) have gotten it from just the text, without Hilary's specific commentary (thank you, Hilary). Even then it took me quite a while to be able to put it in words. I'm glad I had this one, though, because you're right that often the line does mean "it won't kill you" with possibly a bit of sarcasm. I also had 16.5 once where it meant very simply that someone literally was not going to die, and I needn't worry. So now I know of three distinctly different "flavors" of 16.5, which is a good thing.

I am horrible at backing cars so I do it as little as possible. Parallel parking - also a nightmare. (I suppose a better attitude might be to practice, but so far I can't be bothered to. )

 

[butterfly spider]

Re reversing parking
When I took my advanced test about 10 years ago the examiner said that he could tell who had taken their advanced test just by looking at the position of their car in a car park. What walley would drive straight in he said - if you have had a couple of drinks and are just on the legal limit and Mr Plod sees you attempting a reverse manoeuvre - much better just to get in and drive out.....it's obvious really????

Seriously I hate parking and it is so much easier reversing in than attempting to negotiate badly placed vehicles later on

 

[butterfly spider]

Just looked at my advanced driving notes and definitely they would expect you to reverse into a space unless it was dangerous to do so .... You would not fail necessarily but you would be asked why you had not reversed in ...

 

[Liselle]

I STAND BY MY LOGIC.

Seriously, though, no one has ever told me I should back into parking spaces. Not parents, nor driving instructors, no one. Maybe we had to do it in the driving test, just to demonstrate we possessed the skill, but the routine is/was to pull in head first.

But maybe it's taught differently in different places? Where I live I've seen backing-in done more in recent years - and done badly, as I explained - so I assumed it was somehow a trend with younger people.

Yi's answer (I'm sure) was addressing the issue as it pertained to my locality, because that's what I was complaining about. So at least from that reading I don't think driving schools around here are now teaching students they should back in, or Yi would have answered me differently, I think.

But I suppose we could add "preparation for tipsiness" to the list of exceptions? uch:

 

[Tim K]

In my driving textbook[2007] it is clearly stated that backing-in, in tight spaces, gives greater maneuverability.
For mall parking that may not be the issue, but on a narrow crowded street with a space on your side you have to maneuver the car on T trajectory and it's only possible if you back-in (90 degrees).
And the same goes for driving out of that space - it's only possible to drive forward or else you hit the adjacent car.

The same with parallel parking - when the space is tight - you just have to back in.
The longer the car the more you feel the difference, because the rear wheels don't turn, they tend to cut the corner.

upd: Aah, found the book. The second reason is safety - you create a REAL hazard when backing-out on the street, you can't see other cars.

And about your fender bender situation - just keep the distance, if something happens in front of you (anvil falls from the sky, a child comes out from behind the car parked on the side) you should always have enough space to stop completely.

p.s. This thread has gone completely off the rails, I hope Rosada forgives us for turning it into driving school.

 

[Liselle]

Yes, we've agreed that there can be situations where it makes sense to back in. I can't really discuss particulars because I personally don't come across those situations.

When I asked Yi, though, I got the answer I got, and I still think it means what I thought it meant in that context. The reading won't apply to every instance of anyone anywhere, but I think it applies to what I was complaining about.

And - if people are going to back in, please do it right and don't let your car every which way in the parking space.

 

[anemos]

upd: Aah, found the book. The second reason is safety - you create a REAL hazard when backing-out on the street, you can't see other cars.

Yes, that's what I saw at the 16,>45 reading a few posts back. 45- unforeseen. How more explicitly could yi respond? ???

 

[Trojina]

The same with parallel parking - when the space is tight - you just have to back in.
The longer the car the more you feel the difference, because the rear wheels don't turn, they tend to cut the corner.

Oh yes. Believe it or not I didn't know what the term 'parallel parking' meant. I do now. Where I live I always have to reverse to parallel park on the roads. There simply isn't enough room to drive in head on, the spaces are very tight. You could not physically do it if you tried to go head in.

I thought Lisa was just talking about reversing in to spaces in car parks and so on.

 

[butterfly spider]

Why do people do this

Someone looking at this thread could be forgiven for thinking it was about parking issues---
It is to a certain extent. The original yes no issue is a bit like parking a car - there is a space and different folk attempt to park in different ways - some will do it well others will make a hash of it. Should I reverse or drive straight in is a question of choice and interpretation

I will always reverse in if I can and if it is safe to do so - especially if it is likely to be late or dark on my return - that is my choice. It is also my choice to choose to take public transport whenever posssible and park away from crowded areas and avoid charges and difficulty manoeuvring - and then walk or get the bus. I am lucky I have this choice. Why people attempt to drive round and round supermarket car parks finding a space is beyond me. Disabled bays are there for folk who need them

Then again it is my choice to cycle whenever I can and avoid the ever increasing problem of parking!