For the last couple of years I've noticed a small but apparently growing number of establishments that ban children.  I see more restaurants and a few stores that expressly state that children are not allowed even if accompanied by an adult.  This week Jetblue kicked a family with an out of control toddler off of the flight.

Personally I think it's about time.  The "family friendly" business model is great for Disney, Chucky Cheese and the like.  But many businesses have coddled the clueless/inconsiderate/stupid parents who leave their children stuck in yard ape overdrive to disrupt other guests.  Businesses are starting to get it because people are voting with their wallets.  

On occasion my wife and I used to go to a very nice piano bar for a drink and to listen to some live music.  Somehow people got the idea that a bar at 10:00 on a Friday night was an appropriate place to bring infants and antsy toddlers.  Needless to say we don't go anymore.  Perhaps when the owners realize that children don't drink eight dollar martinis and don't tip perhaps they will jump on the child free bandwagon.

So are people for or against banning children?  Should policy be based on the individual's behavior?

Views: 618

Replies to This Discussion

+1.  Not everything was wine and roses back in the day.  But, as with many social constructs, the pendulum has swung too far back.  The less flexible conformity society of the 50s has given way to the I gotta be me, to hell with everybody else mentality.

Can somoene tell me what the hell post modern even means

Down boy.

I know there never was a "golden, perfect past."

My point was that during the quite large changes in social mores and expectations that really took off in the mid-to late 1960s (and to quote a book title, "Hell, I was there!") a lot of metaphorical babies got "thrown out with the bath water".  And I had a bit of an early reputation as a "brat" back then.

This Community is rife with postings demonstrating the result of a sizable minority of individuals putting on what amounts to a "(Bleep!) them if the can't take a joke, and besides, it's their problem if they don't like it, attitude in their public interactions with strangers .

That's not nostaglia for days gone by...It's more a regret that just enough folks don't have a clue.

Rather goes to an interesting phenomenon I've observed on the commute train.

Inevitably, the person offering a seat to an elderly person, a physically disabled person (the cane or crutches is a clue!), or a very pregnant woman is...a WOMAN!

(FYI, I'm normally standing during my commuter train ride.)

Well, I think it also boils down to the fact that a lot of the people that post on this site are persnickety weiners who like to erect strawmen of poorly mannered or "unmanly behavior" because frankly, there is something missing from their own self-identity.

Time and time again, I've read these posts detailing instances of behavior that is stretched to hyperbole in terms of extremity  or frequency by either a desire for concurrence from likeminded scolds or a level of hypersensitivity that borders on a social disorder.  I'm certain I live in the same world as  these posters, but not of that world. 

Sure, some people can be rude- but never, in my view, have I observed this rudeness transcend to the point that it becomes troubling. 

However, I realize from the ads for tweed, straightrazors, and old-timey gadgets that there wills be an element of eccentricty, and perhaps persnickety weiner-dom, intrinsic in participation in this site.  That, for me, is the "Children's Menu."  Hence, by agreeing to participate, I am also agreeing to overlook the natural annoyance that such behavior brings with.  I could always decide to simply not post here, but I have not- so I don't get to demand that the odd ducks who are certain that the Amish have the right idea in raising kids, or that everyone will be interested in cataloging etiquette breaches that they have observed during the week, should be banned or charged double. 

 

 

"pot, meet kettle."

 

That doesn't make sense, does it? It just sounds like it should.

I understood it.

Explain, with examples.

Edited to Add: "Please"

He's saying you too are a persnickety weiner who erects straw men.  I won't try to form my own opinion, but that's what "pot, meet kettle" must mean here.

Well, of course.  But that sort of comment needs to make sense in context- otherwise it's just a like so many other things that people say because it's much easier to reach into a trove of unoriginal snappy quips (Pot, meet kettle!TMI! tl, dnr!)than to make a point.

My comment was, "persnickety weiners who like to erect strawmen of poorly mannered or "unmanly behavior" because frankly, there is something missing from their own self-identity." 

Even absent the last part, which just tacks a value judgment onto an observation, I don't really do that.  In fact, including this one, there are at least three topics on active list that involve some form of what I'm talking about.

tl;dr.

I think that if you show up in a restaurant with a children's menu, you are aware of where they stand on this issue. 

RSS

Latest Activity

Josh replied to Bruce Uall's discussion What can we do to Increase Acceptance of Shirtlessness in the group The Shirtless Man
"yes.... same goes for working on a construction lot. Usually one take his shirt off - and mostly other do the same within minutes."
23 minutes ago
Salt Dragon replied to N Fan's discussion I could have died while hiking today, don't be stupid like me
"Thanks for the story, I had a similar experience once which was also humbling. "
1 hour ago
Sam K replied to Sam K's discussion Should freedom of speech apply absolutely to the internet? in the group The Great Debate
""The internet... is the largest experiment in anarchy we've ever had. - Eric Schmidt "
2 hours ago
Sam K added a discussion to the group The Great Debate
Thumbnail

Should freedom of speech apply absolutely to the internet?

It goes without saying that freedom of speech as mentioned in the 1st Amendment was drafted long before anyone could have envisioned the internet.Interestingly many states do have their own local laws regulating speech (ex. obscenity) which seem bypassed by internet access.So should freedom of speech as a right be applied unequivocally to anything any everything accessible on the internet; the internet is the closest to anarchism that one can really get so there's no further-left one could go…See More
2 hours ago
Tim Covone joined Herb Munson's group
Thumbnail

The Great Debate

"Iron sharpens iron." A place for men to impact each other by debate and exchange of ideas. This is a group where no ideas are off limits. If your motto is, "I never talk about politics or religion," this group is probably not for you. A "gym" for thinkers.See More
6 hours ago
Native Son replied to Sir's discussion US Presidential primaries in the group The Great Debate
"Welcome to the wonderul world of retail politicking.   "
7 hours ago
N Fan posted a discussion

I could have died while hiking today, don't be stupid like me

I have a cautionary tale for my fellow outdoorsmen out there. I went hiking solo today through some less traveled canyons near where I live. I unknowingly ended up off trail and was aggressively bouldering to get up and around some obstacles, mainly a decent sized waterfall. I kept pushing because I thought this was my route, and the knowledge that I wouldn't need to go down because I was on a loop. Anyway, I finally got up the bulk of it and couldn't find anything that resembled a trail.…See More
7 hours ago
Lou commented on Matthew Jones's group Real Shaving
"Good evening gentleman, just purchased an inexpensive safety razor along w/a 3 pc.set of shave soap from Walgreens. The razor appears similar to what my granddaddy use to use. I must need some practice, the first shave although effective, ultimately…"
8 hours ago

© 2016   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service