h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

...you're a passenger in a plane, bus, car or other vehicle in which you don't have to make any physical or mental effort?

Some of it may be because you are sitting in more-or-less the same position for a long time. For some reason this is as tiring as a lot of movement. Getting up and walking about whenever possible may help, but not much because the amount of movement in a bus, coach or plane is limited. Sometimes it's the stress of the journey. Being stuck in traffic can be pretty stressful for the passenger, especially if they need to be somewhere else quickly. Then there's the stress of long waits at the station / airport, even if the wait was expected. (I do NOT recommend long waits at Stockholm airport, SkyCity. There is absolutely nothing to do!)

That makes sense, CD - although I still can't quite figure out why my five hours on National Express yesterday have left me still feeling below par today! (Maybe it's age! )
I usually travel by train, but couldn't afford it this time. I did wonder why the woman sitting next to me got up at every brief stop, looking as if she was going to leave the coach but always coming back. Now I know! She was a wiser and more seasoned National Express traveller than me, and was just keeping her blood circulation flowing!

After a particularly bad experience 11 years ago I will never travel National Express again. I had booked a seat on the coach from Luton to Coventry. This originally departs from the Victoria coach station in London. However, when the coach left Victoria it was full (regardless of who had booked seats further down the line) and so it didn't call in at Luton! I ended up being taken back by a different operator who could only take me to Birmingham!

When I tried to get compensation or a refund from National Express their attitude was 'Booking a seat does not guarantee a place on the coach'. !!!

I understand that things have changed since then, but 'Once bitten, twice shy'.

I also understand that National Express uses franchises, which might explain a difference in the level of service from place to place.

I'll certainly use the train in future whenever I can afford it. It took me all of yesterday to stop aching after my journey on Tuesday.
Having said that, I have a train story comparable to your NE one. A few Christmases ago, I pre-booked a seat on a London to Leeds train. My reserved seat number was C52. On the day of the trip, I got on to the train, found carriage C - and then found that the seat numbers only went up to 48! I resigned myself to two and a half hours standing up. Fortunately, I then noticed an unclaimed reserved seat when the train left King's Cross, and claimed it for myself.

At least the train turned up! (And you managed to get a seat in the end.)

Mind you, it wasn't all bad news for me that day. In the evening, when I eventually reached Coventry, I went out to the theatre with my sister, her husband and a friend of theirs. That friend eventually became my husband!

That's a hear twarming story, if only all journeys ended so well. Or would we all be bigamists???

Anyway perhaps journeys are tiring because of the inactivity - I always have to be doing something, even if it is just fidgeting around. If there is lots to look at and other people to talk to I generally find journeys less irksome. I actually quite like the travelling part, sometimes more than the arriving, under these conditions.

I'm sure you're right about the inactivity, Dr.G. That, of course, is the big difference between trains and coaches. At least on the train you can have a walk to the refreshment car and buy yourself an overpriced beer or sandwich. On the coach the other day, I had so little room to move that I had to wait until the woman sitting next to me got up before I could bend down to tie my shoelace!
Cheerful Dragon's love story is indeed heartwarming, though. When I go up to visit my folks at Christmas, perhaps I should propose to the first attractive woman I see at Bradford Interchange station.
Then again, perhaps not. I don't want to spend Christmas in jail.

I am delighted to see that everybody (well, both of you, actually) has made the assumption, because I used the word husband, that I am female and my sister's friend was male. (He still is male, but he's no longer my sister's friend, but that's another story.) This is the case, but there are some very strange people out there (particularly in the States!). It's nice to know you don't think I'm one of them

Well frankly CD, that message you sent me about the reasons you don't go jogging was a bit of a clue as to your gender. (Two black eyes - remember?)
But frankly, I'm not quite sure how to take your last posting. I mean, my best footie buddy is female and so is her long-term partner, but I've never heard her call her other half "my husband". Do explain - I'm puzzled!

Fair comment about the jogging, but Dr G might not have seen that.

However, in a lesbian or gay 'marriage' (which can happen in the States), how do you refer to the partners? I suppose 'husband and wife' does imply a heterosexual relationship, but what else is there?

I see what you mean. I believe they do same-sex marraiges in some Scandanavian countries too. (And why not?)
As for the titles, I'd always assumed it was a case of husband and husband or wife and wife!

I've checked the dictionary definitions of 'husband' and 'wife', and your argument looks reasonable. So, if you didn't already know I was female, you might have thought I was a strange American or Scandinavian in a single sex marriage.

Cheerful Dragon, I fully accept and believe that you are straight, heterosexual and like bonking your bloke. What I don't quite understand is why you're so keen to emphasise this point.

Yes, it was rather an assumption wasn't it. I've even just gone back over the old messages to see if there were any clues. I guess in my frame of reference same sex partners are generally refered to as 'partners' not as husbands or wives. Indeed some people I know in hetero couples refer to their other half as their partner.

Still I had you down as a girlie before then anyway. I have seen your postings before so I must have formed a general impression of you from them too. Besides most blokes would be chip-on-the-shoulder-fire-breathing dragons rather than cheerful...

Shame.

I may be a messy eater at times, but there are no chips on my shoulders. Or any , come to that.

Twenty years on the concept of a man referring to his husband or a woman referring to her wife seems to me at least so banal as to be not worthy of comment. How things have changed...

Indeed. In fact, my description of people in homosexual relationships as "strange" makes me sound homophobic. I'm not. I have friends who are homosexual. I'll be seeing a couple of them this weekend. One of them might agree that he's strange, but not from the point of view of his sexuality.

We have same sex marriage here. I have heard people being declared wife and wife / husband and husband, but not strange and stranger.

"my description of people in homosexual relationships as "strange" makes me sound homophobic"

Relax. Nobody with any sense is going to judge you for things you said 20 years ago. It was a different time. As I said - attitudes have moved on.

(Obviously there are some militant SJW types who absolutely would judge you, but fsck those people.)