nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Some people need to get a serious grip on themselves

knucklehead6

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/we-felt-so-discriminated-against-mother-furious-after-shes-told-no-buggys-at-choir-service-35305519.html

This woman is claiming that she (and other mothers) is/are being discriminated against because she can't bring her baby's buggy into a choir service.

Well at least her family know what to buy her for christmas, a nice dictionary where she can look up words like discriminated.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Grayson

Does it have anything to do with the carol service or is that sign just always there?

Boom_Bap

I wonder if she would get all upity if she wasn't allowed bring a buggy onto an airplane with her.

It's obviously a space issue and buggies do get in the way and take up space and cause hazards.

somesoldiers

LordSutch wrote: »

Why is the brand/make of pram even relevant?

Points to the credibility of the owner, Bugaboo or iCandy = likely to be rich and therefor credible. Anything less, probably got it free off the state in the first place and likely to leave at the next bus stop and go get another free one off the social....I jest of course

sbsquarepants

Hold on, lets get to the core issue - is she a yummy mummy?
Cos if not she can fúck right off:mad:

suicide_circus

There are three gowls involved in this story;

Gowl 1: the whinging drama queen of a woman wit her poxy buggy

Gowl 2: the semi literate shıt stirrer who penned the "article"

Gowl 3: myself for clicking on and reading this clickbait rubbish

RhubarbCrumble

"A mother has described how she was left feeling 'devastated' after being told she was not permitted to bring her child's pram into a choir service at the weekend"

Devastated, actually DEVASTATED. Seriously? I'd love to know how on earth she'll cope if she ever has any real worries in her pampered little life?

Jawgap

[RANT] Come the revolution all those stupid buggies will be banned.....especially the ones done up like they're ATVs or MRAPs for use in Afghanistan.....some of them look like they're designed to take a hit from an IED or anti-tank missile!

......can't even go for a quite cup of coffee but cafes etc are like buggy parking lots.....

i don't understand* why they can't just leave them outside with the kid in them like they do in Scandinavia and let the childers get some fresh air. [/RANT]

*actually I do - you can't show darling Sorcha and Englebert off and tell everyone in a loud voice about their latest advanced calculus achievements if they are happily dozing in the fresh air

lawred2

knucklehead6 wrote: »

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/news/we-felt-so-discriminated-against-mother-furious-after-shes-told-no-buggys-at-choir-service-35305519.html

This woman is claiming that she (and other mothers) is/are being discriminated against because she can't bring her baby's buggy into a choir service.

Well at least her family know what to buy her for christmas, a nice dictionary where she can look up words like discriminated.

Why were no buggies allowed? I presume that there is a reason beyond 'no childrenz here'. I presume that there was nothing to stop her carrying her child in!

As for newsworthy - seriously?

sbsquarepants

quickbeam wrote: »

And yet nobody seems concerned about the poor discriminated against photographers who aren't allowed to bring their cameras in either. For shame people! For shame!!

And what about the poor fatties, or the alcos.

I wanted to listen to the choir while eating my kebab and supping a luke warm karpackie - it's devastating so it is:mad::mad:

theteal

Can we stop providing clicks to that rag, please?

They might be forced to do some actual journalism in place of these social media "shock" product placement stories

eviltwin

I'd have some sympathy for her if she bought her tickets and there was no mention of lack of space but I've bought tickets for events in Farmleigh before and it always had in the fine print that buggies had to be left outside. I'd be surprised if they haven't mentioned that in the fine print.

Grayson

lawred2 wrote: »

Why were no buggies allowed? I presume that there is a reason beyond 'no childrenz here'

If you look at farmleigh's website they have a load of events, including stuff for children, over the xmas period. That choral service was located inside the house itself in the ballroom.

http://www.farmleigh.ie/TourofFarmleigh/TheBallroom/

It has been said that Farmleigh's Ballroom is a good example of turn-of-the-century social architecture. The Guinness' guests could not fail to be impressed with the superb decoration in the style of Louis XVI with swags, wreaths, musical trophies, urns, sphinxes, and Corinthian pilasters.

The rich decoration is executed in plaster that is applied to wood panelling, and the whole room, including the ceiling, is painted off-white to resemble plaster. The chimney piece is also made of wood and this, together with the overmantel, the ceiling, and the elegant portieres, were all part of an integrated scheme designed by Young. The Edinburgh-based interior design company Morrisons probably supplied the portieres as they had done so for the Young-designed ballroom at Iveagh House.

The floor is made from Solid oak.

I'd say that the reason buggies aren't allowed in is because they'd destroy the place.

rainbow kirby

No sympathy for her - she could have made her life a hell of a lot easier by using a sling for the baby.

osarusan

Roar wrote: »

Bringing a 10 month old to a carol service at his nap time is irresponsible parenting TBH. I hope social services were called.

A job at the Indo awaits you.

Dixie Chick

A very similar story was all over Cork radio facebook recently. But in this case, the lady had to pay for a ticket for the infant and took an stance by pulling her 4 year old daughter from the play and then cribbing on the radio. Where she got no support ether. Because drama.

Special Circumstances

rainbow kirby wrote: »

No sympathy for her - she could have made her life a hell of a lot easier by using a sling for the baby.

They had them in aldi there last week.

Wait... I foresee a problem with that particular solution.

Whoever put this in a paper rather than laughing down the phone at the woman and telling her "get a grip" as the thread title suggests really is a disgrace.

Big Bag of Chips

eviltwin wrote: »

I'd be surprised if they haven't mentioned that in the fine print.

Yeah..... But this was a Bugaboo. Different rules apply. She shouldn't be lumped in with "regular" buggy users. It's ok that other buggies be left outside.

But this was a Bugaboo.

sbsquarepants

rainbow kirby wrote: »

No sympathy for her - she could have made her life a hell of a lot easier by using a sling for the baby.

I think they're called johnnies:D

lawred2

Grayson wrote: »

The floor is made from Solid oak.

I'd say that the reason buggies aren't allowed in is because they'd destroy the place.

well that makes no sense I'm afraid - round wheels will do a damn sight less damage to a wooden floor than the ladies and their high heels..

I'd say it's possible more likely a fire regulation thing.. buggies would only end up blocking exit points.

This lady should have checked out the venue beforehand.

jester77

ah, the poor woman, her Christmas has been ruined. She might as well take down the Christmas tree and return the turkey.

How does nonsense like this make the front page of a national newspaper #firstworldproblems

jester77

Big Bag of Chips wrote: »

Yeah..... But this was a Bugaboo. Different rules apply. She shouldn't be lumped in with "regular" buggy users. It's ok that other buggies be left outside.

But this was a Bugaboo.

I had to Google what that was:

definition wrote:

an object of fear or alarm; a bogey.

Sounds about right

Sam Kade

Dixie Chick wrote: »

A very similar story was all over Cork radio facebook recently. But in this case, the lady had to pay for a ticket for the infant and took an stance by pulling her 4 year old daughter from the play and then cribbing on the radio. Where she got no support ether. Because drama.

They think that going on the radio solves every problem when in fact nobody gives a sh1t. The only people that benefit from the radio are everyone employed by the radio station and the odd person that rings in with a good sob story and turn on the taps before the interview is over, they'll get a donor wanting to promote their business to give them a donation for their loss, everyone wins but it comes across very tacky.

c68zapdsm5i1ru

Silly woman. Seriously, she was 'devastated' because she had to leave the buggy outside?

I hope she never has a serious tragedy to cope with in life.

topper75

seamus wrote: »

Yep, Indo.

Whoever decided this woman's irrational rant was worth of publishing needs to rip up their qualifications and go do something they're actually competent at.

No - if you clicked, they are doing a fine job.

Yes - that is where we are with news'papers' now.

SterlingArcher

Never mind the buggy. they didn't even have room for her kitchen.

I blame the men. How was she even talking. Where was her husbands penis??? Lots of answers need questions here.

SarahS2013

Reminds me of a letter I received recently(attached). Self-righteouness at it's finest.

For some background:

We live essentially down a laneway with mews type houses on either side of the road.

If all cars who lived both sides of the road parked all 4 wheels on the road, you wouldn't get a push bike down the middle of the road, never mind be able to drive down it.

You'd swear she had to divert onto the M50 :rolleyes:

I fully respect that cars can sometimes get in the way of pedestrians unnecessarily; but if we had the space to stay off the path we would. In this case, it is physically impossible!

More worringly....is she suggesting she's going to use her child in a buggy as a battering ram?!

Jawgap

SarahS2013 wrote: »

Reminds me of a letter I received recently(attached). Self-righteouness at it's finest.

For some background:

We live essentially down a laneway with mews type houses on either side of the road.

If all cars who lived both sides of the road parked all 4 wheels on the road, you wouldn't get a push bike down the middle of the road, never mind be able to drive down it.

You'd swear she had to divert onto the M50 :rolleyes:

I fully respect that cars can sometimes get in the way of pedestrians unnecessarily; but if we had the space to stay off the path we would. In this case, it is physically impossible!

More worringly....is she suggesting she's going to use her child in a buggy as a battering ram?!

To be fair she does have a point about the footpath.

Does anyone have the right to park outside their house or on the street where they live?

Dial Hard

SarahS2013 wrote:

Reminds me of a letter I received recently(attached). Self-righteouness at it's finest.

"Footpaths are for FEET!"

Well by that logic she shouldn't be wheeling her buggy on it either.

Game, set and match SarahS2013...

c68zapdsm5i1ru

SarahS2013 wrote: »

Reminds me of a letter I received recently(attached). Self-righteouness at it's finest.

For some background:

We live essentially down a laneway with mews type houses on either side of the road.

If all cars who lived both sides of the road parked all 4 wheels on the road, you wouldn't get a push bike down the middle of the road, never mind be able to drive down it.

You'd swear she had to divert onto the M50 :rolleyes:

I fully respect that cars can sometimes get in the way of pedestrians unnecessarily; but if we had the space to stay off the path we would. In this case, it is physically impossible!

More worringly....is she suggesting she's going to use her child in a buggy as a battering ram?!

That's a totally different situation. The fact that the road isn't wide enough to park cars on both sides of the road doesn't give you the right to force pedestrians off the footpath; including, as pointed out in the letter, people in wheelchairs or blind people who find it difficult to navigate around unexpected obstacles.

Grayson

SarahS2013 wrote: »

Reminds me of a letter I received recently(attached). Self-righteouness at it's finest.

For some background:

We live essentially down a laneway with mews type houses on either side of the road.

If all cars who lived both sides of the road parked all 4 wheels on the road, you wouldn't get a push bike down the middle of the road, never mind be able to drive down it.

You'd swear she had to divert onto the M50 :rolleyes:

I fully respect that cars can sometimes get in the way of pedestrians unnecessarily; but if we had the space to stay off the path we would. In this case, it is physically impossible!

More worringly....is she suggesting she's going to use her child in a buggy as a battering ram?!

I lived on a road in an estate where there was a house that had two cars parked in the driveway. They were parked one behind the other so that the second car took up the whole footpath and stuck out a little bit onto the road. Other people parked parallel to the road but not these feckers. Everytime I walked down that path I'd have to go onto the road to get around the car.