A social media post shed light on unconventional park rules in Bengaluru has sparked a lively debate online. A local resident recently took to social media to express exasperation over a specific regulation that forbids jogging in an Indiranagar park. Using the platform to voice her concerns, she questioned the reasoning behind such a restriction and criticized the growing tendency to impose stringent regulations on public spaces across the city.
Accompanying her post with an image on X (previously known as Twitter), she shared a snapshot of a signboard listing various park guidelines, which included instructions like “No Jogging,” “Walk in a Clockwise Manner,” and “No Recreational Games.” Sahana, the concerned citizen, raised questions about these directives, particularly focusing on the ban on jogging in a place meant for exercise and outdoor activities.
In her online post, she expressed shock at the restriction, challenging the logic behind preventing individuals from jogging in the park. She also employed sarcasm to make her point, suggesting that, at this rate, the next rule might involve outlawing Western attire in public parks.
“You must be kidding! Jogging isn’t allowed in Indiranagar park? What’s next? A ban on Western outfits? What harm have joggers ever caused to parks?” she wrote, emphasizing how public spaces in Bengaluru are increasingly coming under excessive control—either by government agencies or local committees tasked with maintaining these areas.
How Did X Users Respond?
The post swiftly gained momentum, generating a mix of responses from other X users. Some individuals resonated with her frustration, describing the rules as “absurd” and “illogical.” Meanwhile, others attempted to offer explanations, theorizing that the restriction might stem from the park’s narrow walkways, which could make jogging unsafe or inconvenient.
One user drew a comparison to another park in Koramangala with a similar regulation, noting that they initially found the rule confusing but later realized it was intended to prevent conflicts over space usage.
“There’s a park in Koramangala with the same rule. I didn’t understand it at first, but later it made sense—it helps in managing space and avoiding congestion,” the user explained.
Another person likened the situation to the necessity of having dedicated lanes for different types of commuters. “Just like cyclists need designated bike lanes and pedestrians require separate sidewalks, you can’t mix everything into a single pathway,” they argued.
A different user acknowledged the constraints posed by the park’s narrow track, agreeing that jogging might indeed be difficult in such a limited space. However, they still found the rule unnecessary, stating, “The walkway inside this park is too small for running, and the total perimeter is barely 200 meters. Jogging properly would be quite challenging, though I still think banning it is a pointless rule.”
While some users criticized the restriction, others found amusement in it. One individual humorously speculated, “I wonder what would happen if someone decided to jog in the opposite direction?”
This incident highlights the broader discussion on the increasing regulation of public spaces and the varying perspectives on such rules.
Accompanying her post with an image on X (previously known as Twitter), she shared a snapshot of a signboard listing various park guidelines, which included instructions like “No Jogging,” “Walk in a Clockwise Manner,” and “No Recreational Games.” Sahana, the concerned citizen, raised questions about these directives, particularly focusing on the ban on jogging in a place meant for exercise and outdoor activities.
In her online post, she expressed shock at the restriction, challenging the logic behind preventing individuals from jogging in the park. She also employed sarcasm to make her point, suggesting that, at this rate, the next rule might involve outlawing Western attire in public parks.
“You must be kidding! Jogging isn’t allowed in Indiranagar park? What’s next? A ban on Western outfits? What harm have joggers ever caused to parks?” she wrote, emphasizing how public spaces in Bengaluru are increasingly coming under excessive control—either by government agencies or local committees tasked with maintaining these areas.
How Did X Users Respond?
The post swiftly gained momentum, generating a mix of responses from other X users. Some individuals resonated with her frustration, describing the rules as “absurd” and “illogical.” Meanwhile, others attempted to offer explanations, theorizing that the restriction might stem from the park’s narrow walkways, which could make jogging unsafe or inconvenient.One user drew a comparison to another park in Koramangala with a similar regulation, noting that they initially found the rule confusing but later realized it was intended to prevent conflicts over space usage.
“There’s a park in Koramangala with the same rule. I didn’t understand it at first, but later it made sense—it helps in managing space and avoiding congestion,” the user explained.
Another person likened the situation to the necessity of having dedicated lanes for different types of commuters. “Just like cyclists need designated bike lanes and pedestrians require separate sidewalks, you can’t mix everything into a single pathway,” they argued.
A different user acknowledged the constraints posed by the park’s narrow track, agreeing that jogging might indeed be difficult in such a limited space. However, they still found the rule unnecessary, stating, “The walkway inside this park is too small for running, and the total perimeter is barely 200 meters. Jogging properly would be quite challenging, though I still think banning it is a pointless rule.”
While some users criticized the restriction, others found amusement in it. One individual humorously speculated, “I wonder what would happen if someone decided to jog in the opposite direction?”
This incident highlights the broader discussion on the increasing regulation of public spaces and the varying perspectives on such rules.
