“Pensioner groups” have cast off their cardies and are up in arms. From The Telegraph:

The sign, depicting a hunched figure hobbling on a walking stick, was the winning entry in a children's competition in 1981.

Now after 27 years, it is regarded as out of date, condescending and in need of replacement.

Age Concern described the figure as outmoded.

"Very few older people are hunched over, with a walking stick. They are assuming everyone who is old looks like that, and they don't," said Lizzy McLennan, a senior policy officer at the charity.”

Since “pensioner” can mean anyone over sixty, one wonders, as with "the gay community", what members of these “groups” have in common. Of course not all elderly people look like that. But if the sign portrayed a couple of sprightly, i-Pod-toting sixty-somethings out for their morning jog, how would drivers know to mind how they go? Conversely, the sign could denote a couple of hungover twenty-somethings crawling back from a night on the tiles. It could also, as a Times reader observed, mean “beware of pickpockets”.

Commenting on the news, a Telegraph reader writes:

Pictorial hazard signs are childish nonsense. The notion that the nature of the hazard is in any way significant and must be indicated is ludicrous. The driver is obliged to take care always. A need for especial vigilance may be shown with (eg) an exclamation mark (!) alone. In an extreme case the sign may be repeated at appropriate intervals along the approach. "Why?" is so irrelevant that the driver who needs to know should not be driving. Unusual pedestrians should be served by a Pelican crossing, railings &c.

I don’t agree. When the hazard could be anything from falling rocks to a mere “adverse camber”, an exclamation mark is not enough. Beware what? A jabberwocky or a frumious bandersnatch?

As a fully paid-up member of the nerd community, I am interested in road signs and have written about them here. Warning: slippery slope ahead.