Child-free flights: discrimination or something worse?

tin79 · 11-02-2013 11:31AM

MrCreosote wrote: »

and people complain about petty little things like a little noise.

Ever been on a 10 hour flight with a baby with colic beside you and a toddler running riot with one woman looking after both? i have I assure you there is nothing petty about it.

And before you ask I have a baby myself, I would not bring them on a flight and if I did I would fully support designated areas.

kunst nugget · 11-02-2013 11:32AM

hoodwinked wrote: »

You know societies turned their head and ignored it when groups of human beings were forced to sit at the back of buses, now here we are in 2013 and its children being forced to the back rows of aeroplanes...

you'd think people would learn to treat all humans equally....

Well, hopefully Rosa Parks has some great grandchildren in nappies that can rise up against this oppressive tyranny by sh¡tting themselves in the front row and refusing to move! Kiddie Power!

homemadecider · 11-02-2013 11:32AM

MrCreosote wrote: »

You're never going to be well-rested after a long-haul flight. It baffles me why people expect to be, and then get annoyed when they aren't

I fly long-haul several times a year for work and I almost always have a very restful sleep on the plane. The only thing that stops me sleeping is a child bawling. I would pay extra money to sit away from children so that I can always sleep on the plane.

MrCreosote · 11-02-2013 11:36AM

Here's the problem, in simple arithmetic 1,2,3:

Before:

200 seats, anyone could buy any of the seats

After:

200 seats- single travellers can buy any seat. Parents and children can only access 120. They have reduced choice as a direct result of the discrimatory policies. Fewer seats=more competition=higher prices===discrimination

SEPT 23 1989 · 11-02-2013 11:37AM

Unless you really have to get on a plane with children,i think you are better off holidaying at home or taking a ferry to France until they are at an age that they can travel on a plane without causing problems

rossit · 11-02-2013 11:38AM

sometime people have to bring there kids im sure that woman was doing her best with the two kids .a little understanding goes a long way.

hoodwinked · 11-02-2013 11:40AM

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

Unless you really have to get on a plane with children,i think you are better off holidaying at home or taking a ferry to France until they are at an age that they can travel on a plane without causing problems

again what do you set the age at?

when she was 1 year old she went on a 4 hour flight (we were delayed for an hour so 5 hours on a plane) she drank her bottle taking off, fell asleep and we had to wake her to give her a bottle to suck on for landing...

now she's three she will read a book, draw on a etch-a-sketch or watch a movie on the ipad (with ear phones) she is better behaved then most adults.

so what age can a child travel without causing problems?

by the way, we fly because i suffer extremely badly from sea sickness! i would be a nightmare disturbing other passengers vomiting all over them or the boat...so we don't get on a boat!

IceFjoem · 11-02-2013 11:41AM

MrCreosote wrote: »

You're never going to be well-rested after a long-haul flight. It baffles me why people expect to be, and then get annoyed when they aren't

Drunken behaviour is both disallowed, and encouraged by hosing booze down every red-faced moustachioed businessman's open maw...

I sense that you're implying that a screaming child will have no effect on your ability to sleep, irrespective of the fact that a confined airplane seat is not the ideal place for a nap. Do you actually believe this?!

I think it's fair to say that the majority of people don't become raving lunatics after a few drinks. Passengers are ultimately responsible for their own actions. If people are prone to acting that way after drinking then they should abstain. The laws already in place should be incentive enough, if you feel they're not harsh enough then start a thread about those.

Carlos Orange · 11-02-2013 11:43AM

hoodwinked wrote: »

stop assuming all children behave like that, we fly with our 3 year old and she has never once cried/screamed or interfered with other passengers...

I can only assume you didn't read what I said at all. Please read every single word and then apologise.

MrCreosote · 11-02-2013 11:45AM

IceFjoem wrote: »

I sense that you're implying that a screaming child will have no effect on your ability to sleep, irrespective of the fact that a confined airplane seat is not the ideal place for a nap. Do you actually believe this?!

I think it's fair to say that the majority of people don't become raving lunatics after a few drinks. Passengers are ultimately responsible for their own actions. If people are prone to acting that way after drinking then they should abstain. The laws already in place should be incentive enough, if you feel they're not harsh enough then start a thread about those.

What I'm saying is that a cramped airplane is not a place conducive to sleep. Crying babies is not the problem- the problem is you're stuck for 12 hours with your knees in your throat.

And I agree most people don't become raving lunatics after drink. But they do become boring obnoxious windbags who keep me awake.

hoodwinked · 11-02-2013 11:48AM

psinno wrote: »

I can only assume you didn't read what I said at all. Please read every single word and then apologise.

i do realise you said some children, but you are arguing all children should be treated the same and made sit down the back in a child-zone (re: my post you quoted in your post) for the actions of 'some'.

if thats the case why don't we stop all adults from being in planes because of the actions of some....oh wait... :rolleyes:

Carlos Orange · 11-02-2013 11:49AM

MrCreosote wrote: »

Here's the problem, in simple arithmetic 1,2,3:

Before:

200 seats, anyone could buy any of the seats

After:

200 seats- single travellers can buy any seat. Parents and children can only access 120. They have reduced choice as a direct result of the discrimatory policies. Fewer seats=more competition=higher prices===discrimination

I know reading articles before commenting is old fashioned but if you did it you would see the child free seats are priced higher.

Carlos Orange · 11-02-2013 11:53AM

hoodwinked wrote: »

i do realise you said some children, but you are arguing all children should be treated the same and made sit down the back in a child-zone (re: my post you quoted in your post) for the actions of 'some'.

if thats the case why don't we stop all adults from being in planes because of the actions of some....oh wait... :rolleyes:

All I argued was that people are held to different standards inherently. Children aren't treated the same as adults. Please address other peoples arguments by replying to their posts.

tritium · 11-02-2013 11:54AM

MrCreosote wrote: »

It's not like the man is bumped off the flight, or made pay extra
n.

Oh well thats ok so, silly me! Call me a paedo by all means once you can visibly escort me to my new seat of shame

MrCreosote · 11-02-2013 11:54AM

psinno wrote: »

I know reading articles before commenting is old fashioned but if you did it you would see the child free seats are priced higher.

As I said the single traveller's can choose any seat they want. The competition for the family friendly seats will drive up prices there (fewer seats=fewer cheap seats)

Last year we flew through Dubai to Nairobi for safari- the price for all of us was bad enough then. I'm not even sure if we could have afforded it if they'd been higher. That's the end result of discrimination.

MrCreosote · 11-02-2013 11:57AM

tritium wrote: »

Oh well thats ok so, silly me! Call me a paedo by all means once you can visibly escort me to my new seat of shame

No-one is calling YOU a paedo. They're saying you're male, and most paedophiles are male. And they have a simple solution to prevent any accusations flying around.

If you want to get heated up about something minor then feel free...

kunst nugget · 11-02-2013 12:01PM

MrCreosote wrote: »

As I said the single traveller's can choose any seat they want. The competition for the family friendly seats will drive up prices there (fewer seats=fewer cheap seats)

Last year we flew through Dubai to Nairobi for safari- the price for all of us was bad enough then. I'm not even sure if we could have afforded it if they'd been higher. That's the end result of discrimination.

That's like saying giving a person the choice of flying first class drives up the price for everyone else.

11-02-2013 12:01PM

MrCreosote wrote: »

No-one is calling YOU a paedo. They're saying you're male, and most paedophiles are male. And they have a simple solution to prevent any accusations flying around.

If you want to get heated up about something minor then feel free...

No-one is saying that YOUR kids will scream and cry and kick the back of other passengers' seats. They're saying that most people who scream and cry and kick the back of other passengers' seats are children. And they have a simple solution to give people the option of not being surrounded by that.

If you want to get heated up about something minor then feel free...

Grayson · 11-02-2013 12:03PM

MrCreosote wrote: »

You're never going to be well-rested after a long-haul flight. It baffles me why people expect to be, and then get annoyed when they aren't

Drunken behaviour is both disallowed, and encouraged by hosing booze down every red-faced moustachioed businessman's open maw...

So we shouldn't put up with drunken people, but we should put up with children.

I see this as me being stuck with a baby screaming next to me. I wander up front and say to a guy who's not sitting next to one, "I'll give you 100 quid if you swap seats with me".
Only this is all sorted beforehand. I pay more and I get a nice quiet seat.

Then again, maybe we should just charge full fair for a baby on a plane.

Either way I know you'll disagree. You like children more than Jimmy Saville.

OldGoat · 11-02-2013 12:06PM

The OP is looking at this from the wrong perspective. They are creating child-frendly areas of the plane, removing children from the adult areas and putting them with their (age) peers.
I'd be delighted to see flights advertised as Child-Frendly. When I look for hotels I always look for those that are Child-Frendly and then I cross them of the list.

starlings · 11-02-2013 12:10PM

MrCreosote wrote: »

Last year we flew through Dubai to Nairobi for safari- the price for all of us was bad enough then. I'm not even sure if we could have afforded it if they'd been higher. That's the end result of discrimination.

OMG, are your diamond shoes hurting your poor ickle feet?

tritium · 11-02-2013 12:10PM

MrCreosote wrote: »

No-one is calling YOU a paedo. They're saying you're male, and most paedophiles are male. And they have a simple solution to prevent any accusations flying around.

If you want to get heated up about something minor then feel free...

Just so I'm clear! You think it's ok to apply a blanket paedophile filter to all men but are outraged that children might not have the run of the plane!

Really?

Grayson · 11-02-2013 12:11PM

MrCreosote wrote: »

200 seats- single travellers can buy any seat. Parents and children can only access 120. They have reduced choice as a direct result of the discrimatory policies. Fewer seats=more competition=higher prices===discrimination

No they don't. They just rejig the seating and end up putting people with kids in family areas.
And that's what a number have done. Rather than call one part a quiet area, they just call the other part a family area.

But I guess you're not against kids areas in resteraunts. Even though they take seating areas away from everyone else. That's pure outright discrimination.

Grayson · 11-02-2013 12:12PM

MrCreosote wrote: »

As I said the single traveller's can choose any seat they want. The competition for the family friendly seats will drive up prices there (fewer seats=fewer cheap seats)

Last year we flew through Dubai to Nairobi for safari- the price for all of us was bad enough then. I'm not even sure if we could have afforded it if they'd been higher. That's the end result of discrimination.

Did you read the article. They're charging the people in the quiet area more money. Not the people with kids. It's the exact opposite of your argument.

IceFjoem · 11-02-2013 12:14PM

MrCreosote wrote: »

What I'm saying is that a cramped airplane is not a place conducive to sleep. Crying babies is not the problem- the problem is you're stuck for 12 hours with your knees in your throat.

The points you're making in other posts about prices being driven up for families seem reasonable, but I can't understand your unyielding stance on noise.

Why is it so hard to admit that screaming children make sleep more difficult?

The confined space on planes can't be helped, the sound of screaming children can.

Hamiltonion · 11-02-2013 12:34PM

There should be about 20 seats at the back behind a soundproofed door in which kids can be sat- Why should I have to endure your screaming infant for a transatlantic flight? FFS why do parents bring young kids on holidays? They'd be as happy sat at home playing with a box

BizzyC · 11-02-2013 12:38PM

It's not discrimination it's inconvenience.
Calling it such is an insult to people who've had their fundamental rights taken away from them over race/religion/sexuality.

MrCreosote
No-one is calling YOU a paedo. They're saying you're male, and most paedophiles are male. And they have a simple solution to prevent any accusations flying around.

If you want to get heated up about something minor then feel free...

Statistically the most likely person to abuse a child is the parent.

If they want to separate children from potential abusers then the safest maneuver is to sit them away from their parents...

Hamiltonion · 11-02-2013 12:41PM

BizzyC wrote: »

It's not discrimination it's inconvenience.
Calling it such is an insult to people who've had their fundamental rights taken away from them over race/religion/sexuality.

+1. It's no more discrimination than banning under 18s from drink or the blind from driving

Peppa Pig · 11-02-2013 12:45PM

Hamiltonion wrote: »

+1. It's no more discrimination than banning under 18s from drink or the blind from driving

Of course it's discrimination. If I bring my child on this flight I cannot sit in certain rows. Mind you, because I need wheelchair assistance to the plane I can't sit in the extra legroom seats over the wing. That's discrimination as well.

I should be outraged over this double whammy on me, but the fact that it all makes perfect sense to do these things means I'll happily vote for it.

bronte · 11-02-2013 12:49PM

My poor dad could have used this when he flew to Australia and spent most of the flight with someone's little angel kicking his seat. Don't know how he didn't go mad. People are only delighted to pay a bit extra for something like this if it means they have a bit of peace. I'd imagine many parents travelling alone would use it too. Do you have an issue with quiet carriages in trains OP? Or resorts like this one that specifically aim at the adult only market? http://www.secretsresorts.com/capri-riviera-cancun

Child-free flights: discrimination or something worse?

Comments