"Rucksacks Are Immoral!" The Guardian Taps Into our Pet Peeve

Racked is no longer publishing. Thank you to everyone who read our work over the years. The archives will remain available here; for new stories, head over to Vox.com, where our staff is covering consumer culture for The Goods by Vox. You can also see what we’re up to by signing up here.

?

If you've ever been thwacked with an inconsiderate backpacker's mondo-size rucksack, then you'll know exactly how the Guardian's Hadley Freeman feels:

After many, many years of hardened-on-the-ground research of office commuters I have noticed a strange phenomenon: when a person, male or female, dons a rucksack, they become either completely selfish or oblivious (I am not entirely sure which; further research required, if not exactly desired) and somehow "forget" that they now have a massive hump on their back and proceed to whack people behind and on either side of them with it as they turn to and fro, willy nilly. In their wake lay literally hundreds of fallen commuters strewn through train carriages, felled by the powerful push of the casually brandished rucksack, and yet the rucksacker him/ herself carries on forward, seemingly ignorant of the chaos in their wake.

Freeman is, obviously, completely anti-backpack. Here at Racked, we're undecided. Being shoved around by someone's bag-hump isn't exactly our cup of tea, but we do love the feeling of wearing a good backpack—it frees up our hands, doesn't hurt our backs, and makes us feel young again.

Indeed, it's Racked's stance that: Backpacks don't thwack people. People thwack people.

What do you think? Are you pro or con?
· Rucksacks are immoral. And a short-sleeved shirt with a tie is a great look – for a serial killer. [Ask Hadley]