Search

‘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

“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

“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

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

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

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date

Search

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

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

“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

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

Selfish passenger forces Qantas plane to turnaround

Paramedics shocked to find extremely rude note left on ambulance

If you prefer this seat you're selfish

Selfish person takes the crown for most annoying passenger

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date

Search

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

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

“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

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

Selfish passenger forces Qantas plane to turnaround

Paramedics shocked to find extremely rude note left on ambulance

If you prefer this seat you're selfish

Selfish person takes the crown for most annoying passenger

Join Over60