You couldn't just, like, place the wheelchair at the sides??
You couldn't just, like, place the wheelchair at the sides??
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.wtf/post/10145550
50 comments
-
-
What exactly does that back part do for someone sitting on a chair?
-
It holds the little sign up
-
-
A wheelchair's backrest does not have zero depth, so with this design the rollchair user has to sit slightly in front of the people on the left and right. Utter shit.
-
What would the symbol for "no homeless" look like? A house crossed out twice?
-
What would the symbol for “no homeless” look like?
✝️
-
-
You know, in theory
-
-
That's the first time I've ever double-taked a sentence before. Nice.
-
🏠 inside 🚫 inside another 🚫 ?
-
You could probably just get away with the “no” over the home. “You have no home”, “this is not your home” simultaneously.
-
-
I've seen no camping signs with a tent crossed out and of course no loitering signs are a classic excuse to harass homeless people
-
-
I have never seen anything like that before. Looks ridiculous.
-
Yeah, it's possible/probable that it was a dick move by some planning committee. But if I were wheelchair bound, I could imagine that being a) acknowledged and b) in the middle --- instead of always off to the side --- could be nice.
-
How many wheelchair users have backless chairs? Like, this isn't even a good design if it WAS actually intended for them. With that back part any wheelchair user would end up sitting slightly forward from the people sitting on the actual bench seat, possibly a good 6+ inches forward if it bumps into the handles on the back.
-
-
This feels like a disguised way to not let people sleep on the bench.
-
Yes, that's what the text says.
-
Wow, I completely erased that part of the image from my mind.
-
-
Interesting strategy if that was the point of it, considering the wholly intact bench in the background of the photo.
-
-
Hostile architecture
-
this is what we call, excessively stupid design.
It could be both disability accessible, and just, a fucking bench, because benches have always been accessibility enabled, because they're fucking benches.
-
“2 guys sitting on a bench 2 feet apart cause they’re not gay “
-
Just freaking make single chairs. Stop making weird benches. If you want a bench, make a bench. Someone might lay on it. If you don't want a bench, Christ on a cracker, don't make a weird bench! Just make chairs!
-
I can already imagine someone raving about this fantastic design on LinkedIn
-
The bench in the background isn't like that. You would think it they were trying to prevent someone from sleeping there, it would be that way too.
-
This feels more like a "won't somebody think of the
childrendifferent-abled?" at a council meeting
-
-
Sometimes the dumbest things are done by thoughtful people "Just trying to help"
-
Yeah.. I'm surprised by how commonly people repost this everywhere.
If you want to include them, they can also sit across from the bench.... Or next to it
-
So, I like the idea of trying to make wheel chair users be included, I do, but this doesn't actually do anything for them. If it had a little table or something similar then at least they could argue that it might help them despite being obvious hostile design. But no. It's just ✨accessible✨.
-
And the backing will keep wheelchairs with handles from backing in fully.
It's purely anti-homeless masquerading as social awareness. Disgusting and the product of a sick mind.
-
-
They don't need a backrest 🤦♂️
-
They could just put chairs instead lol.
-
50 comments
You know what the one thing a wheelchair-bound person never needs?
A fucking chair.
No, you see, it’s not a full chair, just the backrest. Just in case their wheelchair backrest needs to rest.
Oh, and here i was thinking they found a way to cut costs on wheelchairs by removing the backs -- necessitating these backless-wheelchair-accessible-wheelchair-backs for those that need to give their backs a break.
You know what wheelchair users also sometimes like to do in the middle of a long day?
Fucking lie down.