Restaurant bans children...

lounakin wrote: »

Indeed, it's where I come from. Despite aaaaall the governement help we still couldn't afford the flight but my family pitched in because for some reason they love to see this little person once a year!

That was more to do with what you were saying previously that you have a very quiet baby. I think a few of those passengers would have a different opinion.

lounakin wrote: »

My baby did't cry on the flight.

Yes she did you said so.

lounakin wrote: »

Where? She cried on the car ride down, she did not cry one minute on the flight. Jeese you sure are a piece of work!

lounakin wrote: »

I travelled Aerlingus from dublin to Paris on the 16th of july with my 2 month old... I was shocked to see you have to queue for ages to check your luggage even with a baby! Luckily I got a favour from one of the people at the desk and was able to go to the already checked queue (it's faster). Since the flight was far from full and I was on my own, they put my in a row of three on my own and locked the two other seats, which I was very grateful for. Unfortunately after I boarded, sat down and placed my bag next to me with all the baby essentials, waited for everyone to board... these 2 old ladies showed up and had the seats next to me. Because we were about to take off, some guy took my bag and put it in the overhead compartments and I found myself locked in with a baby on my lap without her cardi for the cold flight, without a muslin square for spit-ups or anything of the sort! I immediately had to ask a stuardess to move me somewhere else. It was incredibly stressful. I also had to fight with her for a good 15 minutes because I wasn't willing to take my sleeping infant out of the tight wrap against my chest (she'd been crying the entire flight and finally fell asleep), turn her around, sit her on my lap and put that crappy little belt around her. To me she seemed way more secure in the wrap, with me strapped in and two free hands to hold her on top of the wrap rather than lose in the belt (she can't even sit on her won for god's sake!!). She told me I wasn't protecting my child and asked everyone around me to be a witness to what she was saying!

As you were saying

I have no problem with people saying my kid cries but when they start going on about my kids never cries and is very good etc etc. I am not stalking I'm checking to see if what they say is correct.

Popinjay wrote: »

Brilliant!

Shine on you crazy diamond.

When you can actually discuss what's really going on, instead of what's going on only inside your head, you may have a few more people take your points seriously.

Otherwise, carry on. You're a gas man.

Why thanks . What is going on in my head is a reasonable anger about the crazy discrimination that people are supporting.

Junco Partner wrote: »

I wouldn't be surprised if someone tries to compare junior not being able to eat his nuggets in a particular restaurant at lunch-time to horrors of the Holocaust.

Now who's being OTT :rolleyes:. Please- we are using reasonable historical examples of discrimination to give an idea about what's going on (perhaps a little more serious, I'll grant you that. I wouldn't expect you to understand though- you'd be like the white folk on the bus tut-tutting...

Junco Partner wrote: »

And I see people saying "oh what about the drunks, the obnoxious suits,people talking loudly etc." grow a pair and tell them to shut up it works most of the time

Well well well, why can't you just do the same with kids eh? You'll get plenty dirty looks (or worse) if you try this on with pissheads. Maybe take a little advice for yourself and grow a pair, and tell the kids and their parents to quieten down IF THEY ARE OBNOXIOUS! Rather than banning them all in the first place

spookwoman wrote: »

Heres a very good article called Teach your brats some manners - or don't bring them to eat in my restaurant! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1383649/Teach-brats-manners--dont-bring-eat-restaurant.html

You're seriously using a Daily Mail opinion piece to support your point. Oh puh-leeze! That's just hilarious! A fascist hate-rag! Keep it coming- I'm just loving it.

MrCreosote wrote: »

we are using reasonable historical examples of discrimination to give an idea about what's going on .

So a single restaurant (out of hundred's) being adult only for two hours one day is comparable to lynching, segregation oppression based on race, beatings being denied access to education, general discrimination.

reasonable comparison my arse, and you called me OTT. Hah!
I have no problem telling people to shut their kids up like i'd tell a drunk or a teen to quieten down. will the parent quieten the kid is the question.

You must be feeling fairly full at this stage, lots of people feeding the troll tonight.

How about when parents go to restaurants they keep their kid(s) at the table and under control, they brought them in to eat didn't they, not to run around the place.

And if they start having a temper tantrum bring them outside, so as not to disrupt other paying customers who shouldn't have to put up with someone elses kid bawling.

The point of the daily mail art was where a kid sh*t on a table and the parents walked out without saying a word. I know it's one of the more extreme stories but they do happen. Was reading on another site and it was Irish where a couple thought it was funny that little Johnny managed to slip away without them noticing. When spotted he was standing at the top of a stairs in a restaurant, dropped his pants and pissed on the carpet. Would you behave like that in someone's premises? Not every kid is going to be like that but can you really blame a restaurant wanting to stop it before it even happens by saying no kids allowed. We don't know what the complaints were about in the restaurant to make him ban them.

If a restaurant says its not allowing kids in and those most outspoken against the ban kick up from here. The restaurant finally gives in, you and your child go in and sit down. Looking around you see paintings of naked men and women all around you. there are art pieces shaped like sexual organs. Are you going to stay with your kid if you feel embarrassed? If you kick up saying its x rated he could say its art. Art museums display stuff like that all the time.

And ref stalking, everything you post on the forum that is not locked down/private area is available to view anywhere on the internet. You do not need to read every post just look at the headings and from there work your way through. It took me less than 5 mins to find that info. So if you're touchy about what people are seeing don't post it. Also if you start going on about discrimination then you can expect people to check if a user has made comments about other groups or has looked for special treatment due to their circumstances. Pulling the discrimination card is like a red rag to a bull.

spookwoman wrote: »

If a restaurant says its not allowing kids in and those most outspoken against the ban kick up from here. The restaurant finally gives in, you and your child go in and sit down. Looking around you see paintings of naked men and women all around you. there are art pieces shaped like sexual organs. Are you going to stay with your kid if you feel embarrassed? If you kick up saying its x rated he could say its art. Art museums display stuff like that all the time.

What is all this even about?

CaraMay wrote: »

He said there was nowhere to store the buggies and the child was at risk when the buggy was parked between tables as the waiters have to negotiate around the kids and prams with hot food. It's a valid and fair point and that's the h&s issue.

If the waitstaff have difficulty seeing and walking around a large obvious object like a buggy, I'd suggest they look for another job.

spookwoman wrote: »

Not every kid is going to be like that but can you really blame a restaurant wanting to stop it before it even happens by saying no kids allowed.

Yes you can blame them. They're basically saying your child is going to behave as badly as that one. I've never seen a child sh*t in a restaurant or pub (other than in a nappy), but I've seen plenty of adults sh*t in a glass. For the laugh you know. Just for the laugh.

Junco Partner wrote: »

Being compared to the racist white folks who tutted while rosa parks made her stand might inspire anyone to hit the keyboard :P

Well I didn't compare you to the white folk who pulled on their pillowcases and got going with some cross-burning. So I was being nice!;)