Search

Neighbour's "selfish" parking act sparks outrage

A resident in Leichhardt, Sydney, has taken matters into their own hands and decided to deal with the lack of parking by using orange traffic cones to reserve a space for themselves. But frustrated neighbours were not pleased with this act, as parking on the the busy street is already difficult to find. "It's been ongoing for months and doesn't look renovation-related," they wrote on social media. It is understood that there are no parking restrictions on the street, meaning that residents can park there for as long as they like, if they're lucky enough to find a spot. Social media users were quick to share their thoughts, with many suggesting to just move the "witches hats." Others slammed the resident's parking act as "outrageous" and called him out for his "rude" and "selfish" behaviour. "I've noticed that for months and wondered why people have been so observant of them," one person wrote. "I guess if you're self-entitled and can get away with it," another added. "Remove them when they aren't there, someone will park there," a third wrote. While there were a few others who supported the act, and said that residents were entitled to reserve a parking spot, the Inner West Council has debunked it. They said that reserving street parking using objects like traffic cones or other items and then leaving these objects unattended is prohibited. "Unfortunately, this type of thing does happen in our local government area," a spokesperson told Yahoo. The council has also urged anyone who sees someone using their belongings to obstruct public use of amenities to report it, with fines ranging from $330 to $660. Image: Facebook

Legal

Woman’s “selfish” business class upgrade divides the internet

A woman has divided the internet after telling how she snagged an upgrade on her way home from a holiday, leaving her partner and his child in economy. The 30-year-old woman shared the story of how she landed the controversial upgrade, but explained to her social media followers that there is more to the story than meets the eye. She began by explaining that she had booked a 10-day holiday with her partner, who she called Matt, who she had been dating for one year. The couple wanted to spend some time together, but were joined by Matt’s younger son, who she called Alex, from his previous relationship. “Every now and then I would look after Alex when Matt was at work — we don’t live together but they stay at mine every now and then,” the woman explained. Due to family circumstances, Alex had to join the couple on holiday, as she explained, “The flights were over eight hours long and I have booked the tickets for all of us.” During the flight to their destination, and throughout their whole holiday, the woman explained that she spent most of the time looking after Alex while Matt had “the time of his life”. While the couple were on holiday, the woman discovered that Matt had been unfaithful, and had been cheating on her through most of their relationship. “Some things came to my attention — he was still seeing his ex — which resulted in us breaking up at the end of our stay,” she said. On the flight back home, the three were sitting together when a flight attendant approached her ex, asking if he wanted an upgrade to business class, but before he could respond, the woman interjected. “I mentioned it was me who bought the tickets and used my own account to pay for them, so an upgrade should go to me,” she said. “The flight attendant was trying to argue at first, as she assumed Alex was my child.” “But I told her that’s not the case, and ended up having an upgrade so I can relax after spending all this time looking after Alex.” When they landed, Matt made comments the woman had been “an a**hole” and “selfish”, while some passengers made similar comments. The woman shared the story to Reddit, asking social media users if she was in the wrong by taking the upgrade and was met with mixed responses. One person said, “Damn that sucks... paying for a flight, in a breakup, taking care of a child on YOUR vacation. You by no means are the a******, hell the audacity of the ex is unbelievable. It just p***es me off so much that I can’t even begin to imagine your frustration.” Another added, “I bet it was nice to put some space between you and your brand new ex with such a long flight, too. What was he going to do, take the upgrade and leave his young kid with the woman who he just broke up with? There’s no world in which that makes any kind of sense.” Others suggested the biggest culprit in the situation was actually the flight attendant. “Why would it be ok to leave the mum with the kid but not the dad? Why did they not first offer it to the person who bought the tickets as that’s where the priority should’ve been?” one said. Meanwhile, one person pointed out: “Let this be a lesson." “Never take care of someone’s kid your whole holiday and let them have the time of their lives. You should have let him handle everything concerning his kid except some play time. I would be fuming.” Image credits: Shutterstock

Travel Trouble

“Selfish” husband leaves wife behind for first class upgrade on their honeymoon

A woman has shared her frustration over a journey she took with her new husband to their honeymoon destination. The wife’s “selfish” husband was quick to ditch her on their way to Mexico for their honeymoon after he was offered an upgrade to business class. The woman took to Reddit to share the story of what began at the airport shortly after their wedding, while also explaining that as a frequent flyer, she had racked up a hefty amount of points. In comparison, her new husband is an anxious flyer, who often relies on her to keep him calm during take off and landing. “When I booked our flights I requested to use my points if an upgrade to business class became available, but made it clear I only wanted this upgrade if two seats became available... and then I basically forgot about it,” the wife explained in a Reddit thread. “Then comes the day of our flight. I was so excited for this trip, I checked us in online, all is going well, and then when we go to board, the employee scanning our boarding passes stops us.” “She says it seems that my husband was upgraded to business class, but only him and asks if that is okay.” The wife immediately replied, “No, we are on our honeymoon and would like to stay together”, however, her husband interjected, saying, “No it’s fine, I’ll go to business class.” Approximately 500 of her hard earned points went to his upgrade, while she was left alone in economy for the trip. Stunned by his response, she said: “I look at him in complete shock and he tells me that I fly all the time and have been in business class before, but he hasn’t. So he deserves a chance to experience it. “I see we are holding up the line, so I feel like I just need to agree and get on the plane. “To say I am p***ed off is an understatement.” After boarding the flight, the woman became overcome with emotion over her new husband’s actions. “Within maybe five to 10 minutes of sitting there, trying to hold back tears because my husband left me alone on our flight during our honeymoon — and use my points for his upgrade no less, he starts to text me saying he feels anxiety over flying.” Instead of expressing sympathy, she decided to ignore his texts. “I stopped looking at my phone,” the wife said. Just one hour into the flight, her husband began looking for her in economy class. “He comes to the back of the plane to find me, offers me half of his business class breakfast and asks me why I was ignoring him... because he was scared and needed me to tell him it’d be okay since I am such an experienced flyer,” she explained. “I told him maybe he should have thought about that before leaving me alone before our honeymoon even really began.” “He gets angry, tells me that this may be the only time he gets to fly business class and he was giving me half his breakfast to make up for it so I could at least be supportive of his genuine fear.” When they landed in Mexico, she tried to just “move on and forget” about what her husband did so they could enjoy their honeymoon. “But he guilt tripped me about not comforting him via text before take off and now I am wondering if I am being unreasonable and should have just let him enjoy his time in business class and assure him it’d be okay?” she wondered. She asked the internet whether she was being the a**hole for not being supportive of her husband. Many jumped to the wife’s defence, with one suggesting, “Definitely not the a**hole. Tell your husband actions have consequences and since he wanted to be in business class without you, he gets to fly without you. The fact he did this on your honeymoon trip just makes it worse.” Image credits: Getty Images

Travel Trouble

"Height of selfishness": Photo at iconic beach sparks debate over etiquette

A photo taken at Bronte Beach has sparked the age old debate over whether picnickers should be allowed to reserve picnic tables by dumping their stuff on them. The image taken at one of Sydney's most popular beaches, showed two picnic tables under the same hut with table clothes and bags on them, but there was no human in sight. “There were at least half a dozen of these tables ‘reserved’ for a couple of hours on Sunday morning from very early in the day,” one annoyed beachgoer wrote on Reddit. “We got there at 7am and left a few hours later. No one was using the tables the entire time we were there.” The post has received hundreds of comments from other annoyed picnickers, with one going as far as calling it "unAustralian". “It's not acceptable,” one person said. “You can reserve it by sitting there yourself, but not by leaving an item.” “Yes, you should be actually using it, not leaving your s**t on there to reserve it for later,” another added. “It's the height of selfishness.” “Move their stuff, move yourself in, and say, ‘it was like this when I got here’,” one commenter suggested. “All I see is a free tablecloth and free bag,” another quipped. However, a few others pointed out that there were other available seats, and that there are unspoken rules around reserving picnic spots. "In this instance, it’s probably okay,” one wrote. “The back table is free, go grab it.” "As long as there’s people there minding the tables, not just throwing a bunch of tablecloths down and walking off, I’m fine with it,” another added. “First come first served.” “If I was bringing a few things from the car I might do this,” a third commented. “Like dropping off the tablecloth and backpack before grabbing the esky etc. But I'd maintain line of sight. Anything else isn't justified in my opinion.” A spokesperson for Waverly Council have asked people to "refrain from reserving tables and always have a back up plan". “Waverley is the second-most densely populated local government area in Australia outside of the City of Sydney, and we attract millions of visitors every year, so our recreational spaces are at a premium," the spokesperson told Yahoo News Australia. “On weekends and at other peak times, picnic tables and barbecues do invariably fill up. So we ask people to share our spaces so that everyone can have a turn.” Images: Reddit

Travel Trouble

‘Self-love’ might seem selfish. But done right, it’s the opposite of narcissism

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ian-robertson-1372650">Ian Robertson</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-wollongong-711">University of Wollongong</a> “To love what you are, the thing that is yourself, is just as if you were embracing a glowing red-hot iron” <a href="https://archive.org/details/jungsseminaronni0000jung">said psychonalyst Carl Jung</a>. Some may argue this social media generation does not seem to struggle with loving themselves. But is the look-at-me-ism so easily found on TikTok and Instagram the kind of self-love we need in order to flourish? The language of <a href="https://theconversation.com/teaching-positive-psychology-skills-at-school-may-be-one-way-to-help-student-mental-health-and-happiness-217173">positive psychology</a> can be – and often is – appropriated for all kinds of self-importance, as well as cynical marketing strategies. Loving yourself, though, psychological experts stress, is not the same as behaving selfishly. There’s a firm line between healthy and appropriate forms of loving yourself, and malignant or <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-many-types-of-narcissist-are-there-a-psychology-expert-sets-the-record-straight-207610">narcissistic</a> forms. But how do we distinguish between them? In 2023, researchers Eva Henschke and Peter Sedlmeier conducted <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355152846_What_is_self-love_Redefinition_of_a_controversial_construct">a series of interviews</a> with psychotherapists and other experts on what self-love is. They’ve concluded it has three main features: self-care, self-acceptance and self-contact (devoting attention to yourself). But as an increasingly individualistic society, are we already devoting too much attention to ourselves? <h2>Philosophy and self-love</h2> Philosophers and psychology experts alike have considered the ethics of self-love. Psychology researcher Li Ming Xue and her colleagues, <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.585719/full">exploring the notion of self-love in Chinese culture</a>, claim “Western philosophers believe that self-love is a virtue”. But this is a very broad generalisation. In the Christian tradition and in much European philosophy, <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/10848770.2020.1839209">says philosopher Razvan Ioan</a>, self-love is condemned as a profoundly damaging trait. On the other hand, <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/2107991">many of the great Christian philosophers</a>, attempting to make sense of the instruction to love one’s neighbour as oneself, admitted certain forms of self-love were virtuous. In order to love your neighbour as yourself, you must, it would seem, love yourself. In the Western philosophical context, claim Xue and her colleagues, self-love is concerned with individual rights – “society as a whole only serves to promote an individual’s happiness”. This individualistic, self-concerned notion of self-love, they suggest, might come from the Ancient Greek philosophers. In particular, Aristotle. But <a href="https://www.psychologytoday.com/intl/blog/philosophy-stirred-not-shaken/201502/love-yourself-love-your-character">Aristotle thought only the most virtuous</a>, who benefited the society around them, should love themselves. By making this connection, he avoided equating self-love with self-centredness. We should love ourselves not out of vanity, he argued, but in virtue of our capacity for good. Does Aristotle, then, provide principled grounds for distinguishing between proper and improper forms of self-love? <h2>Bar too high?</h2> Aristotle might set the bar too high. If only the most virtuous should try to love themselves, this collides head-on with the idea loving yourself can help us improve and become more virtuous – as <a href="https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1057/9781137383310_6">philosophers Kate Abramson and Adam Leite have argued</a>. Many psychologists claim self-love is important for adopting the kind and compassionate self-perception crucial for overcoming conditions that weaponise self-criticism, like <a href="https://theconversation.com/clinical-perfectionism-when-striving-for-excellence-gets-you-down-43704">clinical perfectionism</a> and <a href="https://theconversation.com/how-many-people-have-eating-disorders-we-dont-really-know-and-thats-a-worry-121938">eating disorders</a>. More broadly, some argue compassion for oneself is necessary to support honest insights into your own behaviour. They believe we need warm and compassionate self-reflection to avoid the defensiveness that comes with the fear of judgement – even if we’re standing as our own judge. For this reason, a compassionate form of self-love is often necessary to follow Socrates’ advice to “know thyself”, says <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-015-9578-4">philosopher Jan Bransen</a>. Positive self-love, by these lights, can help us grow as people. <h2>Self-love ‘misguided and silly’</h2> But not everyone agrees you need self-love to grow. The late philosopher <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/2005/nov/29/guardianobituaries.obituaries">Oswald Hanfling</a> was deeply sceptical of this idea. In fact, he argued the notion of loving oneself was misguided and silly. His ideas are mostly rejected by philosophers of love, but pointing out where they go wrong can be useful. When you love someone, he said, you’re prepared to sacrifice your own interests for those of your beloved. But he thought the idea of sacrificing your own interests made no sense – which shows, he concluded, we can’t love ourselves. <a href="https://www.jstor.org/stable/3751159">He wrote</a>: "I may sacrifice an immediate satisfaction for the sake of my welfare in the future, as in the case of giving up smoking. In this case, however, my motive is not love but self-interest. What I reveal in giving up smoking is not the extent of my love for myself, but an understanding that the long-term benefits of giving it up are likely to exceed the present satisfaction of going on with it." We often have conflicting interests (think of someone who is agonising over two different career paths) – and it’s not at all strange to sacrifice certain interests for the sake of others. This is not just a question of sacrificing short-term desires in favour of a long-term good, but a matter of sacrificing something of value for your ultimate benefit (or, so you hope). <h2>Self-compassion</h2> Hanfling fails to consider the role of compassionate self-love. While we might understand it’s in our interests to do something (for instance, repair bridges with someone we’ve fallen out with), it might take a compassionate and open disposition towards ourselves to recognise what’s in our best interests. We might need this self-compassion, too, in order to admit our failures – so we can overcome our defensiveness and see clearly how we’re failing to fulfil <a href="https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10677-015-9578-4">these interests</a>. Self-acceptance in this context does not mean giving ourselves licence to run roughshod over the interests of those around us, nor to justify our flaws as “valid” rather than work on them. Self-love, as promoted by contemporary psychologists, means standing in a compassionate relationship to ourselves. And there’s nothing contradictory about this idea. Just as we strive to develop a supportive, kind relationship to the people we care about – and just as this doesn’t involve uncritical approval of everything they do – compassionate self-love doesn’t mean abandoning valid self-criticism. In fact, self-compassion has the opposite effect. It promotes comfort with the kind of critical self-assessment that helps us grow – which leads to resilience. It breeds the opposite of narcissistic self-absorption.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/205938/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/ian-robertson-1372650">Ian Robertson</a>, PhD Candidate (Teaching roles at Macquarie & Wollongong), <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-wollongong-711">University of Wollongong</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/self-love-might-seem-selfish-but-done-right-its-the-opposite-of-narcissism-205938">original article</a>.

Mind

"Divorce immediately": Dad sparks outrage over "selfish" flight

A father has been slammed online for his "selfish" behaviour to enjoy a child-free flight. The interaction was captured by a fellow traveller, a mother named Kristine, who observed a mum boarding the plane who was struggling to coordinate her luggage, a restless toddler and a newborn baby. "I helped her get the luggage above and we sat down (in the same row)," the mum said. After Kristine realised the father was seated in another row ahead with another small child, she offered to switch seats so the family could sit together. "He says 'Great, thanks' and sends over another small kid to sit with the mum. He enjoyed a kid-free flight," she wrote in now-viral TikTok video. The footage was taken from the aisle seat prior to take off, as she wrote in the caption, "A little Sunday rage for ya." Kristine said she was astonished by the man's response and initially did not know how to respond. "I was like, 'No, I need the aisle [seat] because my kids are in the row behind and I need to be able to help them out'," she recalled telling the father. The video, which had racked up over 4 million views, had many people up in arms over the man's selfish behaviour towards his wife. "I'd be so mad," one person commented, while another said, "I would have said no that's not what I meant give me my seat back." "The absolute rage I am feeling right now," a third person wrote, while another simply said, "Divorce immediately." However, some men were quick to jump to the dad's defence. "If they switched wouldn't the kid be alone?" one asked. Another said, "What if he were the stay at home dad and mom was finally looking after the kids so he could have a break?" In a second video, Kristine addressed a commenter who deemed the story to be fake and wondered how so many people could side with the man's selfish actions. "This post went pretty bonkers, but what strikes me most of all is how differently it's received by men and women in the comments," Kristine said. "The mental gymnastics that men will do to try defend this guy is unreal." Image credits: Getty Images / TikTok

Travel Trouble

Selfish selfies: Influencers fined for posing with priceless artworks

Tourists visiting Queensland’s Carnarvon National Park have come under fire, after the wannabe influencers put an historic Indigenous site at risk with their disrespectful holiday selfies. The park’s rock art sites are, according to senior ranger Luke Male, of international importance, and are marked as restricted access areas to prevent tourists from interfering with the “fragile” rock art. However, “some visitors to Carnarvon National Park think the rules don’t apply to them and they’re entering restricted access areas to pose for photos. “In some instances, they are posing in front of Indigenous rock art that is thousands of years old, or they’re actually touching it. “The Queensland Parks and Wildlife Service makes no apology for taking compliance action against people who break the rules because they believe they are influencers.” Over the course of 12 months, six different people have been slapped with fines for entering the restricted areas to interact with the rock face - whether to take selfies or to go so far as to touch it - and 18 more fines have been issued for other offences, with camping in the protected area also landing them in trouble with park officials. Touching the art is considered disrespectful, but isn’t the only reason visitors are asked to keep their distance, as touch can also wear down the work. The likes of sunscreen, perspiration, and hand sanitiser can cause further damage, while dust stirred from people walking through the space can adhere to the rock face. As Male explained of the situation, “the ochre stencil art of the region is unique, diverse, highly complex and spectacular, and the rock art is embedded within sandstone that is incredibly fragile. “It is a great honour and privilege for us to be able to see these rock art sites, and touching them can damage cultural artefacts that are thousands of years old.” He also shared that the park rangers regularly received “information, including photos from members of the public about people who have broken the rules. “People have to understand that the Traditional Owners remain connected to this place and the rock art within it, and they regard the entire Carnarvon National Park as a cultural site.” Carnarvon National Park Traditional Owners Management Group Committee’s Bidjara representative Leah Wyman had more to add on the importance of protecting the artworks, sharing that “our rock art bears thousand-year-old images, and they provide valuable information about the lives and cultures of our people in the past. “They are also important spiritual and ceremonial sites to us, and it is imperative that everyone stays on the walkways to ensure that Carnarvon National Park can be visited by future generations to come.” Another member of the committee and Bidjara woman Kristine Sloman noted that the park itself was a cemetery, and that the sites were locations where family members had been laid to rest, so “getting off the boardwalks and walking around is of the utmost disrespect, and is comparable to attending someone’s funeral and walking on their coffin. “Many people around the world have chosen to close their sacred sites due to destructive impacts, and it would be a great shame to resort to this type of action. “Let’s appreciate, learn, nurture, and respect each other’s cultures and ensure no more of our sacred places are damaged or closed to the public.” Images: Department of Environment and Science

Travel Trouble

“No justification for this ever”: Outrage over one husband’s selfish inflight arrangement

A couple in the United States have landed themselves at the centre of the internet’s attention after the wife made the shocking admission that her husband flies first class when they travel, leaving her behind in economy with their two children. Writing to The New York Times’ ethics column, she wanted to know if she was selfish for thinking their ‘arrangement’ was unfair, noting that while he had offered a compromise of sorts, it did “not really address or solve the problem of the inherent selfishness in his thinking.” As she explained in her message, she and her husband are avid travellers, and he “either pays for, or gets an upgrade into, the first-class cabin”. Even when they travel with their two children - who are 12 and 16 years old - he takes himself off to first class, while they remain in economy. According to her, he justifies it to himself by explaining that it’s “because of the cost”, and that their children “might feel alone” if she were to travel up front with him. “I feel that this is unfair,” she said. “ I don’t think our kids would mind if they were in economy plus and my husband and I sat together in first class. Is that unfair of me to want? “My husband has suggested travelling alone on a different flight ahead of us so that we don’t feel badly about the disparity, but this does not really address or solve the problem of the inherent selfishness in his thinking. Am I wrong?” Kwame Anthony Appiah, the ethicist who responded to her for The New York Times, was of the opinion that “a modern marriage is meant to be a pairing of equals”, with partners treating each other with respect and having equal say in the decision making process. “Your husband has another view,” he said. “He evidently thinks that because he’s the ticket-buyer in the family, his own preferences get priority.” And when the article was shared to social media, people from all over were quick to get in on the discussion, with most leaping to the defence of the wife. “I’d divorce him so fast he’d never get to fly first class again until our kids were grown and through college,” one said. “There is no justification for this ever.” “I'd be calling a divorce lawyer rather than a travel agent,” one agreed. “Wow. And you’re still married to him?! I’d recommend booking your own flights,” came a similar response. Meanwhile, another noted that she “just might be married to a narcissist.” “Oooph BIG YIKES. It’s not about the flight, I’m sure this imbalance trickles into other parts of the relationship,” someone wrote. And as another shared, “recently, my husband was offered the upgrade to first class but declined it because I couldn’t go too. We’ve been married 30 years.” Some, however, took issue with the idea of both parents lounging in first while their children were still left behind, with one noting “she wants to upgrade but still leave the kids in economy? The pair of them sound like terrible parents.” “Frankly, I’m blown away that this mother sees the disparity for herself,” another said, “but is perfectly comfortable experiencing privilege while treating her own children disparately.” Images: Getty

Travel Trouble

Ticked off trekker exposes family’s selfish act

Australian bushwalkers are bristling at one family’s claim over an entire viewing platform in Victoria. A picture, shared to Reddit, shows a family - of at least four - taking over at Wilsons Promontory National Park with their set up. Camp chairs, bags, and meal trays can be seen around them, blocking access to the viewing point for anyone else who might like to enjoy what the park has to offer. The area - well known for its stunning vistas and bountiful wildlife - is a popular weekend retreat for tourists and locals alike, and Parks Victoria have revealed that it gets “extremely busy over summer”. “This family [is] taking up an entire sightseeing platform so nobody else can take photos,” the poster stated. “It’s a long weekend,” he continued below, “so Wilsons Promontory was very busy. A lot of people missed out on great photos and views because these people wanted it for themselves.” One had a simple, if not entirely beneficial solution, declaring that “confrontation is not always wrong.” “As I walked past, a guy said ‘that's just f***ing rude’,” the individual behind the post responded. “Especially in the case of entitled twats, I feel sorry for the kids though, they have parents who convince them shit like this is ok,” agreed another. “This park have rangers?” enquired one. “I'd be getting them to get those a***oles outta there.” “Despite being 2hrs from civilisation, it was packed because it's a long weekend here,” the original poster responded. “There's a huge campground nearby that was completely full. “But I didn't see any rangers all day, just a bus driver shuttling people up a mountain because the car park at the top would have been overflowing if everyone drove up.” Another shared their past experience with the spot, noting that they’d seen the same thing happen before, and that they’d just gone over and taken pictures anyway. “They then realised they were in the way,” they said of their encounter, “apologised, moved a little, and we had a chat about the weather. People do dumb s*** all the time without taking into consideration other people.” “I’m wondering this too if maybe they didn’t connect that it was a specific overlook platform at the time of the pic,” mused one responder. Meanwhile, another only had “never assume malice when stupidity will suffice” to say. Some, however, had a little more compassion for the family in the picture, writing that there were a lot of people “describing how they'd solve this problem. How about ‘excuse me, can I take some photos here?’ like a normal person?” “Exactly. I cringed. Like what if they just thought they stumbled upon the spot and were like ‘let’s picnic real quick’ and didn’t know people were going out of their way to find that spot or just that it’s a viewpoint spot,” another offered in agreement. “I have to sympathise, we’re all humans and hopefully it was not malicious. Just parents trying to have fun with their children?” “Duuuude, seriously,” one more wrote. “The ‘perpetrators’ might not even know [that] what they’re doing isn’t cool. It looks like they hiked out there and saw a decent spot to chill.” Images: Reddit

Travel Trouble

“Arrogant selfish brat”: Ben Fordham calls out Prince Harry

Ben Fordham has dubbed Prince Harry an “arrogant, selfish brat” after he didn’t attend his late grandfather’s memorial at Westminster Abbey. “You know what? I’m gonna say this pretty bluntly about Prince Harry and his decision not to attend,” Fordham said on Ben Fordham Live with Adam Gilchrist during the UK Report. “I mean this is in respect for his grandfather and also he could have been there to support his grandmother,” he continued. “Prince Harry’s decision not to attend just goes to show what an arrogant, selfish brat Prince Harry is. I cannot believe it Adam.” Gilchrist went on to agree with Fordham, adding that Harry should remember that there would only be so many more chances for him to be there for his grandmother due to her ongoing health concerns. “For him not to pitch up as you say for his granddad and to not be there in support of his grandma, there aren’t going to be many more of these events Harry, in case nobody told you that,” Gilchrist said. The Queen was escorted to the abbey by Prince Andrew, a move which many - including Gilchrist - have criticised, considering he only recently settled the sexual assault case launched against by Virginia Roberts Giuffre. “The thing is it wasn’t a completely public event. If it had been, by and large, a state funeral or a state service, I don’t think Prince Andrew could have possibly turned up,” Gilchrist said. “But because it was a sort of semi-private thing, albeit with pictures beamed around the world, essentially a family event with others attending, then you can sort of get away with Prince Andrew being there. “Plus, he clearly is still one of the Queen’s favourites and whatever else he’s done in life, your mother always loves you.” Prince Harry has also attracted much criticism since announcing l said he wouldn’t attend the service for Prince Philip. The former royal said it was because he was told he wouldn’t be granted royal security protection, even if he paid for it. Richard Griffin, Prince Philip’s former protection officer, said Harry’s excuse for not attending was “pathetic”, as reported by <a href="https://honey.nine.com.au/royals/prince-philip-memorial-ben-fordham-takes-issue-with-prince-harry/2db86cd3-30de-40f9-9cd7-8cdd6ae5b252" target="_blank" rel="noopener">9Honey</a>. “All this nonsense about he couldn't’ get protection, as far as I’m concerned that was a pathetic excuse, he should have been there to honour his grandfather,” Griffin said. Griffin added that Harry could have been covered by the security details for his father Prince Charles or his brother Prince William, meaning he didn’t need one of his own. Images: Getty Images / 2GB

Family & Pets

Pope labels couples choosing pets over children as selfish

Pope Francis has called couples who have pets instead of children selfish while speaking to a general audience on Wednesday. The Pope also argued that forgoing parenthood "takes away our humanity" and poses risks to wider society. He made the comments while speaking about Saint Joseph, Jesus' earthly father. While lauding Joseph's decision to raise Jesus as "among the highest forms of love", the Pope veered onto the topics of adoption, orphaned children, and couples that opt for animals over children. "We see that people do not want to have children, or just one and no more", he <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.9news.com.au/world/opting-for-pets-over-children-is-selfish-and-takes-away-our-humanity-says-pope-francis/fc15279d-cfdb-4b58-85d0-5bdcef68bdfe" target="_blank">said</a>. “And many, many couples do not have children because they do not want to, or they have just one - but they have two dogs, two cats … yes, dogs and cats take the place of children. “Yes, it’s funny. I understand, but it is the reality. And this denial of fatherhood or motherhood diminishes us, it takes away our humanity. And in this way civilisation becomes aged and without humanity, because it loses the richness of fatherhood and motherhood. And our homeland suffers, as it does not have children.” <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Dear Pope Francis I’m a catholic who chose dogs over children but I don’t consider myself selfish. Probably doing this over populated world a favour <a href="https://t.co/9AMFs2JS9p">pic.twitter.com/9AMFs2JS9p</a> — dominic dyer (@domdyer70) <a href="https://twitter.com/domdyer70/status/1479116896867794948?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 6, 2022</a></blockquote> Though it may be surprising as the Pope is considered quite progressive, these comments echo the Catholic Church’s teachings about the importance of couples bearing or raising children. Pope Frances said couples who cannot biologically have children should consider adoption. “How many children in the world are waiting for someone to take care of them?” he said. “Having a child is always a risk, either naturally or by adoption. But it is riskier not to have them. It is riskier to deny fatherhood, or to deny motherhood, be it real or spiritual.” His statements have since drawn criticism on social media, with some calling out his comments about childless couples while the church continues to face allegations of sexual abuse against children. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Worry about all those sexual abuse allegations against the church instead of childless people <a href="https://t.co/5ggoAJTpGr">pic.twitter.com/5ggoAJTpGr</a> — Enter The Void (@killl_the_rich) <a href="https://twitter.com/killl_the_rich/status/1478832192591695874?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">January 5, 2022</a></blockquote> The Christian leader has made several controversial statements relating to animals in the past. He made similar comments about couples choosing pets over parenthood in 2014, while comments he made in 2016 that appeared to claim that animals go to heaven were analysed and later called into question. But, he has had plenty of positive interactions too, having been photographed petting dogs, holding birds, and carrying a lamb over his shoulders. Image: Getty Images

Family & Pets

"Selfish scumbag" attacked online for massive toilet roll price gouging

NSW police will begin patrolling toilet paper aisles in supermarkets in a big to stop panic buying of essential groceries. The Daily Telegraph has reported that law enforcement will be visible to all shoppers after a meeting with supermarket bosses. NSW Police Deputy Commissioner Jeff Loy told the public they should be able to go about their daily business and bad behaviour was not acceptable. It comes while Australians have unleashed on “selfish” hoarders caught trying to sell essential products like toilet rolls, nappies and hand sanitiser for inflated prices online. The coronavirus pandemic has created an unprecedented fear among shoppers all across the country as they race to supermarkets in a panic buying frenzy. A man caused chaos on Facebook when he announced he was selling individual toilet rolls for $5 each – and packs of 24 rolls for a surprising $100. “Inbox me for toilet paper, Hand sanitiser, nappies, baby formula and antiseptic wipes. Lots of stock. Happy to express post, no pickups,” the post reads. Unsurprisingly, the offer caused a flurry of backlash, with many Facebook users branding the man “selfish” and a “scumbag”. “Should be ashamed of yourself. Clearly you're not. Hopefully you'll realise that what you're doing is a disgrace...” one outraged Facebook user wrote. Another labelled the man a “piece of garbage”. The man’s offer comes just hours before Woolworths announced a major change to its buying restrictions list, by introducing a blanket two limit rule on everything in-store unless stated otherwise. Coles has also capped the sale of chilled milk at two units per shopper. So far, Australia has 560 confirmed cases of coronavirus across every state and territory. Six people have died so far. An ACCC spokesperson told <a rel="noopener noreferrer" href="https://over60.monday.com/boards/63889387/pulses/news.com.au" target="_blank">news.com.au</a> they are unable to “prevent or take action to stop excessive pricing, as it has no role in setting prices”. However, the spokesperson said in some “limited circumstances” excessive pricing can be deemed “unconscionable”. “If a business makes misleading claims about the reason for price increases, it will be breaching the Australian Consumer Law,” the spokesperson said.

Money & Banking

“We all care for one another”: Federer responds to “selfish” claims

Roger Federer has rejected suggestions of moving the Australian Open out of Melbourne amid complaints over poor air quality from the tournament’s qualifiers. Bushfires in Victoria brought the air quality to hazardous levels with visibility plummeting across Melbourne during the opening days of the qualifying of the Grand Slam event. Slovenian Dalila Jakupović quit her qualifying match after suffering from a coughing spell, and Australia’s Bernard Tomic sought medical treatment during his first-round loss <a href="https://www.tennis.com/pro-game/2020/01/smoke-haze-again-forces-delay-in-australian-open-qualifying/86838/">when he struggled to breathe</a>. Canadian qualifier Brayden Schnur said Federer and Rafael Nadal were “selfish” for not speaking out on behalf of all players about the playing conditions. Canadian Denis Shapovalov, who was seeded 13th in the tournament, said he would default a match <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/19/sports/tennis/australian-open-fires.html">if the air quality became hazardous</a>. “You get warnings from the news telling people to stay inside, that it’s not good for your health to be outside, to be breathing this stuff, and then you get an email from the tournament saying that it’s playable and you guys have to go out there and put your life in jeopardy, put your health in jeopardy,” said Shapovalov. “You see the effects on players it has right now, the last couple days, but you don’t know what it’s going to do later in our lives, and how it could affect us if we’re breathing this air in for two weeks.” Organisers released an air quality policy on Saturday following international criticism for allowing players to compete under a blanket of thick smoke haze. The tournament said play would be suspended outdoors if the levels of fine particulate pollution went over the “unhealthy” threshold of 200 micrograms per cubic metre. Federer said he believed the policy provided a “safe” environment for players. “Go in the streets, ask the people if they want it to move from Melbourne or from Australia,” the 20-time Grand Slam champion said. “From what we were told in the player meeting, the Olympic Games and other competitions have the numbers set at 300. Ours is set at 200. From that standpoint, I think we’re moving in a very safe range. We’re not here for six months straight at over 200, 300, you know. That’s when maybe effects really become bad. “I don’t worry too much, to be honest. I worry more for everybody else who is in the fire, in the smoke. Also we can stay indoors all day, quickly go out and play, go back in again. It’s not like we’re stuck outside at all times. I think we’re going to get through it and it should be fine. It shouldn’t move, no.” Federer also suggested that other factors, such as the warm weather, might be to blame. “I think we’re all confused,” he said. “Is it super unsafe or is it totally safe to play? The problem on top of it, it was actually quite hot, too ... some players are not used to playing at 35, 33-degree heat, especially if you’ve practised on the indoor season. “I’m not saying they’re not ready or whatever it is, but it can always hit you. Of course, everything gets put down on it was the smoke. For sure, it can be nothing else. So what can I do? I can go to the office, speak to them.” Federer, member of the ATP players’ council, said he could not “do more” than communicating with tournament officials. “I’m on the council. I’ve been on the tour for so long. I came through the lower ranks, the juniors,” he said. “At the end of the day, we all care for one another.” The statement came after Federer deflected questions surrounding his sponsor Credit Suisse, which had significant investments in fossil fuels. “I take the impacts and threat of climate change very seriously, particularly as my family and I arrive in Australia amidst devastation from the bushfires,” he said <a rel="noopener" href="https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51082875" target="_blank">earlier this month</a>. “I appreciate reminders of my responsibility as a private individual, as an athlete and as an entrepreneur, and I'm committed to using this privileged position to dialogue on important issues with my sponsors.”

News

“Vindictive and selfish”: Peter Dutton's harsh words for Malcolm Turnbull

In a new TV documentary series which premieres on Sky News tonight, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton did not hold back when talking about former Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull. The series called <a rel="noopener" href="http://badblood.skynews.com.au/" target="_blank">Bad Blood/ New Blood</a> showcases the rise of Prime Minister Scott Morrison. Dutton claims that Turnbull’s resignation was “vindictive and selfish”. “He chose to leave in a way that John Howard never would,” Dutton said to <a rel="noopener" href="https://thewest.com.au/politics/federal-politics/peter-dutton-spills-beans-on-former-pm-malcolm-turnbull-ng-b881240191z" target="_blank">The West</a>. “In a way that Kevin Rudd didn’t, in a way Julia Gillard didn’t and it was done simply out of spite.” The two part documentary series exposes the details of “spill week” and beyond to David Speers. Part one of the documentary looks at what happened to Turnbull. The documentary reveals how the leadership spill started, which due to a heated argument between Turnbull ally Craig Laundy and Queensland MP Luke Howarth. “When I got there Craig said something like, ‘You’re not supporting this madness, are you’ and then we just had a frank discussion,” Howarth said. “It was pretty straightforward and honest. What I was going to suggest to Malcolm is that actually he resign so we didn’t need a ballot and we didn’t need any division.” Laundy backs up this claim by explaining his side. “We lost our temper,” he said. “It was a tense exchange.” After the exchange, Laundy reached out to Turnbull to warn him about the potential move against him. “Malcolm said to me very clearly I would rather live on my feet than die on my knees,” Laundy said. A snap leadership spill was called the very next morning. The toxic relationship between former Prime Minister Tony Abbott and Malcolm Turnbull is also explored throughout the series. Former Nationals leader Barnaby Joyce said that “it was pathological”. “If you put them both in the room, there wouldn’t have been a metaphorical fight, it would have been a literal fight.” Bad Blood/New Blood airs at 6 pm tonight on Sky News.

News

Woman mocked for "selfish" funeral review

A woman is facing backlash online after expressing her outrage over the food that was available at a family funeral. <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">The user, known as ‘Jan’, submitted a review to TripAdvisor where she expressed her outrage at not having any gluten-free options at Elmbank Hotel in England, where the funeral was held. <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">Despite calling the venue three days prior, the woman was disappointed to find there was no gluten-free bread, leaving her to “munch on some lifeless salad”. <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">She wrote: “I was told they don’t have gluten-free bread but if I wanted to take my own they’d make a sandwich for me!?” <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">“In this day and age, you’d think they‘d get their act together. It’s quite a common dietary requirement.” <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">She also slammed the hotel’s beverage service, saying she had to ask specifically for decaffeinated coffee. <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: center; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;"><img style="width: 500px; height:344.82758620689657px;" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/7820633/1.jpg" alt="" data-udi="umb://media/f73012289b8c4a9a87277a4a8ccfcbea" /> <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">Continuing her bitter rant, she wrote: “I had to sit there, at lunchtime, munching on a chicken drumstick and some lifeless salad. Next stop Tesco’s on the way past!” <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">The one-star review quickly received backlash, with some labelling Jan as “insensitive” and “selfish”. <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">She was also criticised for having no sympathy even though she is gluten-free by “preference”. <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">One user wrote: “Glad you saw fit to add the *by preference. I don’t know a coeliac who could be this insensitive, they know suffering and would never be so insensitive.” <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">One person wrote: “The genuine coeliacs I know would never complain about this sort of thing.” <p style="margin-top: 0cm; background: white; vertical-align: baseline; box-sizing: border-box; font-variant-ligatures: normal; font-variant-caps: normal; font-variant-numeric: inherit; font-variant-east-asian: inherit; font-stretch: inherit; line-height: inherit; orphans: 2; text-align: start; widows: 2; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; text-decoration-style: initial; text-decoration-color: initial; word-spacing: 0px;">Do you think her harsh review is justified? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Technology

Selfish passenger forces Qantas plane to turnaround

A Qantas flight was forced to return to the gate because a passenger refused to put his tablet on airplane mode as required. A fellow passenger called up Melbourne’s 3AW to complain that flight QF2133 from Canberra to Melbourne on Monday night was an hour late as a result. And who was the selfish passenger in question? Apparently, he is a company chief executive. Qantas confirmed to 3AW a passenger on the flight “did not follow instruction with regard to an electronic device” on a flight between Canberra and Melbourne on Friday night and the plane had to return to the gate. The airline added that safety was its top priority. However, it’s not the strangest reason for a flight delay. Earlier in the month, a Qatar Airways flight from Doha to Bali had to make an emergency landing in India after a <a href="http://www.oversixty.com.au/travel/international-travel/2017/11/bali-flight-makes-emergency-landing-after-wifes-shock-discovery/">woman on board discovered her husband was cheating</a> on her and she caused a commotion.

International Travel

Paramedics shocked to find extremely rude note left on ambulance

Paramedics are out there every day, saving lives, but according to one heartless driver, that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t follow the same road rules as the rest of us. Yesterday, the West Midlands Ambulance Service in the UK took to Twitter to share their disappointment after not one but two incidents of paramedics being told to move their ambulances to let drivers pass. “Just heard from one of our staff that two crews were treating a cardiac arrest patient today – the most serious case we can attend – and someone banged on the side of the ambulance asking them to move as they couldn’t get their car out!” the WMAS tweeted, adding that no matter what, patients come first. Sadly, it wasn’t the first such incident of the day. Hours earlier, while paramedics were desperately working to save a man’s life, a selfish homeowner left a disgraceful note on their vehicle. <img width="500" height="333" src="https://oversixtydev.blob.core.windows.net/media/45633/crew-alerted-an-extremely-poorly-patient-to-hospital-minimal-on-scene-time-arrived-at-hospital-t_500x333.jpg" alt="Crew -alerted -an -extremely -poorly -patient -to -hospital -minimal -on -scene -time -arrived -at -hospital -t" style="display: block; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"/> It reads, “You may be saving lives, but don’t park your van in a stupid place and block my drive." According to the ambulance crew, who had been treating a man vomiting blood, they were parked outside the Birmingham property for less than half an hour. “Sometimes we just don’t know quite what to say,” the WMAS said. “Our staff will always try and park considerately, but sometimes, there just isn’t time.” Both cases have outraged social media users, describing the people responsible as “disgusting", “selfish” and “narrow-minded”. Tell us in the comments below, what do you think about the note? Is it ever acceptable to berate emergency services like this?

Insurance

If you prefer this seat you're selfish

While the middle seat on planes generally doesn’t win many fans, travellers are generally fiercely divided about what offers the better option out of the aisle or window seat. And according to phycologists, your preference says a lot about your personality: If you choose an aisle seat According to University of Washington professor Jonathan Bricker, PhD, if you chose an aisle seat you’re generally going to be someone who values their freedom. “You know you have the ability to get up and walk around without having to ask anyone or climb over your seat mate,” Professor Bricker says. But apparently also be a sign of an introversion Professor Bricker added: “In a large group of people, introverts feel physically uncomfortable and tend to want to stay on the periphery — they don’t like to be surrounded by people or objects on all sides.” If you choose a window seat The window seat is a tricky one. It’s arguably the comfiest seat on the plane with the extra gap between the armrest and the wall, and a spot to lean on. But the person sitting here also has to ask whenever they’re going to the bathroom. “Passengers who favour the window seat like to be in control, tend to take an ‘every man for themselves’ attitude towards life, and are often more easily irritable,” Dr Becky Spelman, chief psychologist at Harley Street’s Private Therapy Clinic told The Telegraph. “They also like to ‘nest’ and prefer to exist in their own bubble.” Behavioural Psychologist Jo Hemmings added: “Champions of the window seat tend to be more selfish as well as less anxious, seasoned flyers who are more confident in disturbing others.” What do you prefer, aisle or window?

International Travel

Bruce McAvaney’s “selfish” confession

He’s got one of the most recognisable and beloved voices on Australian TV, so when Bruce McAvaney was forced to take time off earlier in the year to treat his leukaemia (notably during the Australian Open), his absence was felt country-wide. Now, in a tell-all interview on cricket commentator Mark Howard’s podcast Howie Games, the 64-year-old legendary caller made a “selfish” admission. “I didn’t miss me not saying something,” he said of missing being on the panel at the Australian Open. “But I missed that camaraderie and the feeling of being part of a team. I kept thinking ‘gee won’t the boys and girls be excited now that Federer got through to the semi-finals’. It was the perfect storm, it was incredible.” “I’ve got to be honest, I went outside and cooked a BBQ for about 10 minutes because I couldn’t bear it – it was tricky. [I couldn’t bear] that I wasn’t there.” Howard, a commentator for Channel 10’s Big Bash League, admitted he felt similar when watching matches without McAvaney’s iconic voice. “I hate to say it,” he said. “But I’m almost hoping it’s not a great game, because you want to be at the great game.” McAvaney agreed, saying, “There is a selfishness to it, you can’t help it. I mean, I’ve gotta say I was thrilled and delighted at the [Federer vs. Nadal] final, but there was a little part of me that wouldn’t have minded Gilles Muller playing David Goffin.” “You do have to get used to the fact you’re not going to be front and centre – and it’s not easy. But I think the first one’s always the hardest, so next summer I’ll probably be a bit more relaxed. It was tricky and not as easy as I made it out to be.” “I’ve always had a bit of a philosophy that no-one can really impact on me, (either a) boss or a young one coming up. When I say they can’t impact on me, I respect them – all the people I’ve worked for underneath [Channel] 10 or Seven. I acquiesce to the philosophies of the network but there’s nothing they can do to me that will take any enjoyment away from me because there’s always going to be a Melbourne Cup.” “That enjoyment is very personal. It’s mine, it’s for me. It’s a strange thing and it sounds very selfish, but it’s the way I’ve worked – it’s just the way I am.” Despite his cancer diagnosis, McAvaney told News Corp in March he’s feeling “well”, and still plans to call at the Gold Coast Commonwealth Games, the Pyeongchang Winter Olympics and the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Did you miss hearing McAvaney’s commentary during this year’s Australian Open? Share your thoughts with us in the comments below. Image credit: Phil Hillyard/Herald Sun.

Retirement Life

Selfish person takes the crown for most annoying passenger

We all have our fair share of horror travel stories but one plane passenger has experienced quite a gross ordeal. San Francisco woman Jessie Char was excited to discover there were two empty seats next to her on her JetBlue flight. However, her luck quickly took a turn for the worst when two swollen feet appeared from the row behind and rested on the vacant armrests beside Jessie. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Today, I flew on the set of a nightmare. <a href="https://t.co/PNI4KmQvTG">pic.twitter.com/PNI4KmQvTG</a> — Jessie Char (@jessiechar) <a href="https://twitter.com/jessiechar/status/887541422336876544">July 19, 2017</a></blockquote> Jessie chronicled the incident on Twitter to share with others the pain she was going through on her flight. The passenger’s thoughtless behaviour got even worse when Jessie claimed the foot reached over to open a window. Jessie tweeted, “The left foot reached over and opened a window.” Have you experienced selfish behaviour by a fellow passenger on a flight? Let us know in the comments below.

International Travel

Our Partners

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Contests

Entertainment

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Property

Games

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Neighbour's "selfish" parking act sparks outrage

Woman’s “selfish” business class upgrade divides the internet

“Selfish” husband leaves wife behind for first class upgrade on their honeymoon

"Height of selfishness": Photo at iconic beach sparks debate over etiquette

‘Self-love’ might seem selfish. But done right, it’s the opposite of narcissism

"Divorce immediately": Dad sparks outrage over "selfish" flight

Selfish selfies: Influencers fined for posing with priceless artworks

“No justification for this ever”: Outrage over one husband’s selfish inflight arrangement

Ticked off trekker exposes family’s selfish act

“Arrogant selfish brat”: Ben Fordham calls out Prince Harry

Pope labels couples choosing pets over children as selfish

"Selfish scumbag" attacked online for massive toilet roll price gouging

“We all care for one another”: Federer responds to “selfish” claims

“Vindictive and selfish”: Peter Dutton's harsh words for Malcolm Turnbull

Woman mocked for "selfish" funeral review

Selfish passenger forces Qantas plane to turnaround