Posted on 08/15/2006 6:24:16 AM PDT by steve-b
For Cindy Nooney's 3-year-old twin boys, playing with the Thomas the Train set at their local bookstore in Southern California is a major thrill. Jack and Sam push Thomas, Arthur and friends down the track, they run around the table, jump up and down — and, of course, they squeeeaal.
Nooney expects as much in the children's section of the store. But on a recent afternoon, she was surprised by an employee who confronted her, calling her darling Jack a tyrant.
"He was a little loud but this is a children's section," says Nooney. "They run a noisy, cavernous bookstore but they don’t want kids to make any noise? It just seems ridiculous and leads me to believe that they don't want kids, they want silent kids."
The bookstore is not the only place that likes quiet, controlled children — and isn't afraid to say so. Across the nation, there are signs of a low-burning uprising against children supposedly behaving badly in public.
Eateries from California to Massachusetts have posted signs on doors and menus saying "We love children, especially when they are tucked in chairs and well behaved" or "Kids must use indoor voices." In North Carolina an online petition was started last year to establish child-free restaurants — the petition loosely compared dining with children to dining with cigarette smoke....
(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...
Once you agree that everything, just about, started falling apart in the '60s (and I mean EVERYTHING - even the dogs!), it's ipso facto that Spock caused it all.
Our library has the following warning:
Unattended children will be given a double shot of expresso and a free puppy!
"I will stop your child": what horrible threat exists there?
While I never had the horrible pain, I did have ears that were stopped up for a day or two until someone told me about Afrin, which is a very good nasal decongestant spray. Worked like a charm on me, and the kids as soon as the peditrician cleared us to use it on them.
> where their behavior doesn't offend a reasonable patron.
And that's the whole problem. What is reasonable? I fear that in some parts of the country the definition of reasonable is changing away from being child-friendly, and towards the views put forward by those who despise us breeders.
As to choosing the right place, if they have high chairs, patrons can expect to have kids misbehaving. Not running riot, mind you, but on occasions, something is going to happen. And those of the anti-breeder or the not-in-my-day persuasion who tut and shake their heads at this are the equivalent of the anti-smokers who are just dying for someone to light-up so their can complain about it and then brag to their buddies later.
With fuel prices eating out could be the vacation.
If they consistently act like animals then they should not enjoy the privilege of eating out until they are taught to act civilized.
That sign is in my office.
I'd agree with that scale. No kids in nice joints. But that doesn't seem to be what others are talking about here.
I hate flying, and I really hate flying with children. Unfortunately, we do it about once a year, because we are orphaned out here in the midwest, with all our family on the west coast.
We try to physically hold the children's feet the.entire.flight. The problem is that when the four-year-old is sitting in the seat with his back against the back, his legs stick straight out (i.e., little legs don't bend at the same place on the seat as an adults). With our 18-month-old, her car seat (mandated) makes it so that she is about 8 inches from the seat in front of her.
No matter how hard we try (and we try really, really hard) the people in front end up getting kicked. As soon as we turn our head to get a book or toy or blanket for one of the kids, the other kicks. We apologize profusely, offer to change seats so that they aren't kicked, or offer to buy a drink, etc.
My point is that sometimes it can't be helped. It really can't. We drastically limit the amount we fly in the first place, and we are vigilant about the kids' behavior (including kicking)...and it still happens.
FWIW, I find it unbelievably offensive that you would physically intimidate any woman like that, let alone a mother traveling with her child(ren). I understand your frustration, but that is an unbelievably disproportionate reaction.
On that I agree, Mike. :o) And hopefully the parent will do the right thing and remedy the situation rather than sit by and allow the children to disrupt other patrons.
> What you're teaching the kids by giving them 2 warnings
1. Stop that.
2. Stop that or you get a smacked hiney.
3. Whack!
Doesn't seem too unreasonable to me, and I really think people of good faith can disagree on this. If what we were talking about was the difference between one and two warnings, I don't think there'd be much debate...
LOL. I love it. Similarly effective:
Unattended children will be turned over to Child Protective Services for Investigation of Child Abuse.
I should also add...there needs to be grace extended. :o)
Well, now that I think about it, I think my kids knew, even before leaving the house, that such behavoir wouldn't be tolerated. They learned it at home, so we didn't have to worry about it in public.
I thinks it's a fairly safe bet the screaming kid syndrome that I've seen started at home, and the parents didn't ever bother to do anything about it.
> "I will stop your child": what
> horrible threat exists there?
Did I say horrible? Anyway, the threat is clearly to either physically restrain the child or to chastise them. My problem is that the OP seems quite proud of what he said, which I fear reflects part of the problem attitude that some Freppers exhibit. It would have been sufficient to draw the parent's attention to the child's behavior without the need for any further comment.
> If they consistently act like animals then
> they should not enjoy the privilege of eating
> out until they are taught to act civilized.
Quite. But that's a strawman.
> On that I agree, Mike. :o)
Then on that note, we'll end it! :)
I disagree. I have heard the term 'breeder' used to describe people from red states with children by liberals. I have seen the term used to disparge parents with children. It is a slam period. My children were usually well behaved. They were punished severely (spankings,no TV, grounding,long talks kids hate those) for PDBB-public display bad behavior(family term). I think there is an anti-child bias out there. I would never take a toddler to a fancy restaurant, but if a store is for families then I expect my children to be treated politely as paying customers because that's what they are.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.