Infants Fly Free?

[purplehorseshoe]

Your story made me smile, black rabbit.

[tdn]

Originally Posted by Meyer6

The logical fallacy was hers, not mine. She's claiming that babies are the only annoying thing on planes getting a 'free pass', whereas puppies are completely silent and problem free and drunk people never, ever get to stay on the plane.

No, she pretty much did not say that.

[expectopatronum]

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

You're absolutely right; parents of infants she should absolutely barred from air travel. Mostly since they put you in danger of not being able to sleep off your hangover, and not having to accept the glares resulting from your SBD farts because you're asleep.

just for the record, i don't have a problem with infants flying free, although i understand the OP's frustration. but i find this type of statement really fucking grating, and it always seem to come up in this type of thread.

just because someone doesn't have kids does not mean they're living it up and their biggest problem is trying to sleep off a hangover. everyone has their own struggles, some of them severe.

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

1. The child is colicky.
2. The child is scared.
3. The child is a fuckingoddamn child, the they fuckinggoddamn cry.
4. The kid is hungry, and mom (or dad) is really trying to get the right bottle out, and getthecapofforscrewthelidonandnotspillbecausethereareonlytwobottlesfortheentiretripandshealreadyspil ledhtelastoneandweknowthatpeopleareannoyednaditsuckssobadbecausewe'retryinghardandsometimes. sometimes. you just can't DO anything for an infant.

fair enough, and i won't deny any of that, but here's another perspective:

maybe the passenger who is annoyed by the crying baby is:

1. going to a funeral
2. racing to say goodbye to a family member who is about to pass
3. just got fired
4. just got divorced/split from partner
5. has legal trouble

etc. etc.

i'll gladly defer to the parents in how to best comfort and parent their child. i don't know how to stop a baby crying and i won't pretend to, but please quit writing off other people's problems as being some frivolous bullshit because they don't have children.

[Mr. Greenjeans]

Originally Posted by Rune

...the queers, and the coons, the reds and the Jews.

Originally Posted by Novelty Bobble

Pink Floyd Reference!

Originally Posted by Terr

No "reds" in "In the Flesh".

From Waiting For The Worms:

"Waiting...for the queens and the coons and the reds and the jews."

[Kimstu]

Originally Posted by Rune

Malaysian Airlines is great. They (at least when I was in the business) have a HR IT system which is specially extended with functionality to asses the attractiveness of the female stewardesses.

Or at least they've managed to eliminate that tiresome labor-loving drivel about not throwing good workers out on their asses once their years of hard work have started to show up on their faces:

Air hostesses over the age of 40 have been grounded by Malaysian Airlines on the principle that passengers want to be served by 'young, demure and pretty stewardesses', according to media reports.

The company said that it had no intention of discriminating against women, but Mohammadon Abdullah, the general manager for corporate services, was quoted by the New Straits Times as saying: "Let's face reality. Customers prefer to be served by young, demure and pretty stewardesses, especially Asian ladies."

The employees union has begun a campaign against sex discrimination, pointing out that women must retire from flying by the age of 45 if they are supervisors, and by the age of 40 otherwise - 15 years earlier than their male counterparts.

Originally Posted by Rune

Clearly neither Lufthansa nor Aeroflot have any such rating system.

Serves you right for being sucker enough to fly with airlines based in countries that actually care about how companies treat their workers, rather than solely about the quality of the Oriental-Beauty tits that the workers present for your visual enjoyment.

[Meyer6]

Originally Posted by tdn

No, she pretty much did not say that.

Ummm, she pretty much did. I don't see how else to read her post. But if you (and apparently BPC) want to pretend that I'm the one with the crazy logical fallacy rather than curlcoat, I guess I can't stop you.

[Smeghead]

I generally find that there's no more solid and reliable SDMB rule than this: "If curlcoat is agreeing with me, I must be wrong."

[Budget Player Cadet]

Originally Posted by expectopatronum

i don't know how to stop a baby crying and i won't pretend to

Me and the guy sitting next to me came up with a lot of ways very quickly:
– Alcohol
– Duct tape
– Guitar strings that I had in my bag
– pillows given by the aircraft
– baseball bat
– emergency exit doorway

^_^


Idon'thatekidswhydoeseveryonethinkIhatekids

[Novelty Bobble]

I should make clear, in case it weren't obvious, that my earlier quip about the service personnel on airlines was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I don't care what they look like as long as they keep the beer and sour cream and chive pretzels coming.
It was dreadfully sexist and exactly the sort of comment I make to my wife when no-one else can hear. She does a wonderful mock-affronted expression because she knows I don't mean it. And believe me, that is not the only shockingly offensive thing we say to each other in private.

[Sicks Ate]

Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet

Me and the guy sitting next to me came up with a lot of ways very quickly:
– Alcohol
– Duct tape
– Guitar strings that I had in my bag
– pillows given by the aircraft
– baseball bat
– emergency exit doorway

^_^


Idon'thatekidswhydoeseveryonethinkIhatekids

If you have children, it's difficult to imagine any of those things. And it certainly isn't funny.

[Meyer6]

Originally Posted by Smeghead

I generally find that there's no more solid and reliable SDMB rule than this: "If curlcoat is agreeing with me, I must be wrong."

Very true. This should be included in the stickies or something.

The corollary is "If someone is agreeing with curlcoat, their opinions can safely be ignored".

[DiosaBellissima]

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

If you have children, it's difficult to imagine any of those things. And it certainly isn't funny.

Oh, please. I have plenty of friends with plenty of kids and each and every parent is as loving and caring as a parent can be. Yet they've all, at one point or another, made what were very obviously jokes about things like he wrote there. Out of context, I imagine some of them sound pretty bad, but in the situation, it was very clearly a light hearted joke on what is a stressful situation.

Then again, maybe my friend was serious when she said, "If the baby doesn't stop crying, I'm selling her to gypsies."

[Sicks Ate]

Originally Posted by DiosaBellissima

Oh, please. I have plenty of friends with plenty of kids and each and every parent is as loving and caring as a parent can be. Yet they've all, at one point or another, made what were very obviously jokes about things like he wrote there. Out of context, I imagine some of them sound pretty bad, but in the situation, it was very clearly a light hearted joke on what is a stressful situation.

Then again, maybe my friend was serious when she said, "If the baby doesn't stop crying, I'm selling her to gypsies."

Oh shit, my bad. Talking about strangling someone else's baby with a guitar string is the pinnacle of comedy. Duly noted.

[Moonlitherial]

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

Oh shit, my bad. Talking about strangling someone else's baby with a guitar string is the pinnacle of comedy. Duly noted.

No but finding some dark humour to laugh at a situation is not unusual.

I doubt they were aiming for high comedy, just something to alleviate the tension of sitting near a small wiggly noisemaker that they could do nothing about.

[Rune]

Originally Posted by Kimstu

Serves you right for being sucker enough to fly with airlines based in countries that actually care about how companies treat their workers, rather than solely about the quality of the Oriental-Beauty tits that the workers present for your visual enjoyment.

I see you haven't been working in Mother Russia.

[tdn]

Originally Posted by Meyer6

Ummm, she pretty much did. I don't see how else to read her post.

I think there are several ways to read it, but it was a bit tortured to really suss out the meaning. What I got out of it was that crying babies are one of (at least) three annoying things on an airplane, two others of which are puppies and drunks. I didn't get that she was exalting the other two, just that they don't get the free passes that babies do.

Does that sound like a reasonable interpretation?

[pbbth]

I think the airlines need to put a blurb on every ticket that says, "Air travel is a form of public transportation. If you don't have your own jet you have to fly with other people, much like not having your own car means you have to ride the bus. Please try to keep this in mind during your flight and avoid as much annoying behavior as possible and be understanding of the annoying behavior of others."

[Vinyl Turnip]

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

Oh shit, my bad. Talking about strangling someone else's baby with a guitar string is the pinnacle of comedy. Duly noted.

'neath the pinnacle of comedy lies a whole lotta perfectly good rock. You fossils way down in the sourpuss stratum know it as "the ceiling."

And yes, infants fly free--- as it should be, provided you get enough momentum in your spin.

[Meyer6]

Originally Posted by tdn

I think there are several ways to read it, but it was a bit tortured to really suss out the meaning. What I got out of it was that crying babies are one of (at least) three annoying things on an airplane, two others of which are puppies and drunks. I didn't get that she was exalting the other two, just that they don't get the free passes that babies do.

Does that sound like a reasonable interpretation?

Not really. I can agree that the part about the drunks is possibly ambiguous, but she clearly said that puppies were not ever annoying. In fact, if she has a puppy 'no one even knows it's there'. I was just pointing out that pets can be equally annoying, and probably more so for people with allergies.

[Blank Slate]

Crying babies aren't as bad as the motherrfucking snakes. Or the flying nazis.

[tdn]

Originally Posted by Meyer6

Not really. I can agree that the part about the drunks is possibly ambiguous, but she clearly said that puppies were not ever annoying.

That's not quite what she said. But I don't really care. When I woke up this morning I put "Debate the small minutae of one of curlcoat's posts" on my todo list. I think I can safely cross that off and move on to the next thing.

[Budget Player Cadet]

Apparently, some people checked their humor bags on a plane that got delayed.

[needscoffee]

Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet

Screw that, I don't fly first class! Put the babies up there!

Are you trying to make curlcoat's head explode?

[alice_in_wonderland]

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

If you have children, it's difficult to imagine any of those things. And it certainly isn't funny.

Actually I regularly contemplate duct-taping junior to the wall with a toy to amuse himself just so I can get the chance to go pee in peace.

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

Oh shit, my bad. Talking about strangling someone else's baby with a guitar string is the pinnacle of comedy. Duly noted.

Actually, I assumed the guitar string was going to be used to hang themselves. Or perhaps remove their own genitalia to prevent future babies? I imagine that would take your mind of pretty much anything, including a crying baby.

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by ENugent

The cutoff is age 2. Kids older than that used to be able to fly half-price with an adult paying full-fare, but now it is generally full-fare for everyone. Babies only get to fly free if you agree to hold them the whole flight - if you want them in their own seat, you buy it at full price.

Ah. So all of the non-verbals and some of the verbals could easily be flying free. Two seems awful old to be holding on one's lap tho!

Originally Posted by Meyer6

And? Are you suggesting that visiting distant family is not an acceptable reason to fly? In any case, I doubt anyone would think that a flight with an infant would be fun in and of itself, they just think it's worth it in order to get where they're going.

Please don't hurt yourself trying to stretch for an interpretation that wasn't there. You made it sound like the mother had to fly with the baby; I was pointing out that she likely was not on a business trip or anything like that.

I see plenty of babies on planes, they just aren't generally terribly obnoxious. I doubt the places you fly have special children who are noisier than standard issue children, I'm guessing you're just more sensitive than most people are.

I believe I said that, tho in my view it is a case of parents and wanna be parents who are able to get used to/not hear the sort of noises that can come from babies and young children, yet are perfectly capable of complaining about things that make much less noise and are (at least to me and others) less irritating. Like drunk businessmen telling dirty jokes - big whoop.

As for where I fly out of, I was merely suggesting that since I live in the magical world of Disney, it could be more likely that I fly with more and/or noisier children that average.

Originally Posted by needscoffee

You are so full of it, you are just making stuff up now. You don't possibly care whether the poor airlines are making extra money off of babies or not.

Again, do not strain anything leaping to a conclusion that obviously is not there. I couldn't care less about whether or not any airline is "making money off of babies" and I was very clear about that. Do try to get rid of that blinding bigotry.

It's not like you're personally being reimbursed for the agony you have to go through to be in the same plane cabin as those potentially crying babies. What they pay or don't pay is none of your concern and has no bearing on you, only on the bottom line of the airlines.

Really? So you didn't bother to read my post at all?

Flying with a baby in lap is damned hard. If you'd ever tried it, you'd wonder why the airlines didn't pay you for the extra difficulty.

Oh please. You chose to have a baby, then you chose to take it on an airplane and then you chose to not buy it a seat and then dare to complain about the "difficulty" the airline put you thru? How about the difficulty of getting a young puppy thru the airport and on the plane, and then keeping it quiet (because, you know, I am polite) thru the six hour flight, and then getting to pay $100 for that? Yes, I chose to do all of that but the only thing I complain about is having to pay $100 for the space under my seat while you dare to bitch about being able to take a family member for free. But then, that is what mothers do these days, isn't it?

Babies are a fact of human life just like slow-moving people and loud-talking people and snoring people and bad-smelling people. Would you ban the mentally handicapped from flying too, lest they make too much noise for you?

You know what? If a mentally handicapped person is making the sort of disturbance that a baby or toddler can on a plane, the airline is very likely to remove them. How often have they removed a screaming baby or a toddler that won't sit in their seat?

If you have so much trouble with this every time you fly, one would think you'd have learned how to operate ear plugs by now.

You are going to hurt yourself this way - I never said it was every time I fly. I don't even know if there is a baby on the flight unless I hear it since I don't go around checking all the seats.

You know, you are awfully invested in this - feeling a bit guilty?

[Meyer6]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

You made it sound like the mother had to fly with the baby; I was pointing out that she likely was not on a business trip or anything like that.

Well, seeing as you don't have a job, you are certainly not flying for business either. What makes you think your reasons for flying with your unruly dog are better than their reasons for flying with their kid? I just seems silly to split hairs by trying to decree whether someones reasons for flying are good enough or not - why don't you just assume that their reasons are legit and the rest of us will assume that your reasons are legit?

How about the difficulty of getting a young puppy thru the airport and on the plane, and then keeping it quiet (because, you know, I am polite) thru the six hour flight, and then getting to pay $100 for that?

So in your previous post the dog was so perfect that nobody even knew it was there, but now that you want to play the martyr suddenly it's an ongoing struggle to just shut the thing up? Huh.

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Meyer6

I agree. She's also conveniently ignoring the fact that lots of the things 'non-parents' do are potentially annoying and the rest of us do actually have to put up with them. I've sat through a (mercifully short) flight where someone's dog whimpered and yelped loudly the whole time. I was also on a flight once when someone's pet cat pulled a Houdini, got out of his carrier, and ran around the cabin for a while making mayhem until he could be recaptured. That's not to mention the allergy problems pets can cause. I like animals, and I felt bad for the poor dog who was just scared, but it is ridiculous to claim that pets are 100% fine and babies are 100% awful.

The funny thing about this is I never said anything like pets are 100% fine. I am well aware that many people have pets with bad manners, but the point was (which you so conveniently ignored) that essentially every other disturbance on an airplane is either forbidden by law or restricted and made to pay quite a bit of money. Whereas there is no limit to the number of babies that could be on a flight, there is no official effort made to keep them quiet and the mothers get to bring a potentially non-stop noise fest on for free. Meaning they are far more likely to bring baby than if they had to pay the hundreds of dollars for a seat for it.

I've also experienced many, many annoyingly drunk passengers who were apparently not troublesome enough to get booted off, so that's a bit of a red herring too.

Huh. Sounds like you have as much patience with them as whoever it was that earlier posted about the drunk men telling jokes.

Originally Posted by Jeep's Phoenix

Here's an idea: set aside various flights for parents with infants. Fill out these flights with kids from the local junior and senior high schools. The parents reach their destinations quickly without annoying other travelers, and the high school kids learn about the consequences of unprotected sex without all the drama caused by trying to teach sex ed in schools.

That is actually a really good idea! Too bad the industry probably couldn't afford it.

Originally Posted by Meyer6

What? Did you read the post I was replying to?

It's pretty obvious you didn't, because...

She's claiming that babies are the only annoying thing on planes getting a 'free pass', whereas puppies are completely silent and problem free and drunk people never, ever get to stay on the plane.

---I didn't say any of that. Only your extreme bigotry makes you think I did. Or maybe it's simply that people who are arguing from a weak position must make up a defense.

[Meyer6]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

[...] essentially every other disturbance on an airplane is either forbidden by law or restricted and made to pay quite a bit of money[...]

[...]Sounds like you have as much patience with them as whoever it was that earlier posted about the drunk men telling jokes[...]

Do you not see the disconnect here? I don't especially care about drunk obnoxious people on airplanes, but you yourself have admitted that they are there, and here you are implying that they require patience to deal with. So, they are an annoying disturbance that requires the patience of others - and not forbidden by law (unless extremely disruptive), and not being made to pay more money. Hmmm, goes against what you were trying to say, no?

Actually, in my experience, the most annoying people to fly with are middle aged and slightly older women. They're the ones complaining endlessly about how the flight is late, and WTF why do we have to wait for deicing, and the food isn't right, and the drink cart hasn't been by in a whole hour. They're the ones who bitch to everyone around them about how they're going to miss their connection to Cancun because of this snowstorm, as though the rest of us have nowhere special to be.

They're the worst customers in retail, they're the most annoying diners in restaurants, and they're also terrible plane companions. So, really, they're the ones who should pay extra. How's that sound?

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Meyer6

Very true. This should be included in the stickies or something.

The corollary is "If someone is agreeing with curlcoat, their opinions can safely be ignored".

Are you not aware of how sad that is? You might as well say "If someone is agreeing with an opinion I don't like, their opinions on everything else can safely be ignored".

Originally Posted by tdn

I think there are several ways to read it, but it was a bit tortured to really suss out the meaning. What I got out of it was that crying babies are one of (at least) three annoying things on an airplane, two others of which are puppies and drunks. I didn't get that she was exalting the other two, just that they don't get the free passes that babies do.

Does that sound like a reasonable interpretation?

I'm sorry it was hard to suss out the meaning, but you are pretty much spot on.

Originally Posted by Meyer6

Not really. I can agree that the part about the drunks is possibly ambiguous, but she clearly said that puppies were not ever annoying. In fact, if she has a puppy 'no one even knows it's there'. I was just pointing out that pets can be equally annoying, and probably more so for people with allergies.

Quote that I said that puppies were not ever annoying. Yes, I had a puppy that no one knew was there, but that doesn't mean to anyone else on this planet that every pet flies that way.

You might just want to admit that you (purposely?) miss-interpreted my whole post.

Originally Posted by needscoffee

Are you trying to make curlcoat's head explode?

Why would it? I can't afford to fly first class - stick them all up there. Oh, except I am usually flying in the bulkhead seats so I guess that would guarantee I'd be stuck listening to any that squall...

[needscoffee]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

You know, you are awfully invested in this - feeling a bit guilty?

Nope. But I fully understand that human babies cry, and human adults get stuck having to listen once in a while. It's not pleasant, but that's life.

[Meyer6]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

Are you not aware of how sad that is? You might as well say "If someone is agreeing with an opinion I don't like, their opinions on everything else can safely be ignored".

Oh, I know, it's so terribly sad I may cry right now.

Actually, I wasn't talking about opinions I don't like, I was talking about completely moronic opinions. If someone tells me that they are a birther or a creationist or whatever, that pretty much tells me everything I need to know about them.

Quote that I said that puppies were not ever annoying. Yes, I had a puppy that no one knew was there, but that doesn't mean to anyone else on this planet that every pet flies that way.

You said it was unfair that you had to pay for your perfect puppy while the squalling brat flew free. Ignoring for now that babies are people and dogs are more like ... cargo, so the cost of bringing them is in no way comparable, you clearly implied that perfect dog and bratty kid was the expected, standard way of things. If you actually recognized that either one can be annoying and either one can be perfectly fine, then why didn't you say anything even remotely like that?

I can't afford to fly first class - stick them all up there.

Well I'm sorry that you are too fucking cheap to pay for a seat in first class. Guess you don't really want to be free from babies as bad as you claim.

[Algher]

Originally Posted by needscoffee

Nope. But I fully understand that human babies cry, and human adults get stuck having to listen once in a while. It's not pleasant, but that's life.

When I had babies and flew, I would pass out those foam ear plugs to the people around me before the flight started. There was only so much under my control.

Now that I no longer have babies, I fly with the same ear plugs in my briefcase just in case. However, I find that I don't need them. A crying baby doesn't bother me, because I am secure in knowing that IT IS NOT MY PROBLEM ANYMORE!! WAHOOOOOO!!!!!!

I fly every week for work. I fly through John Wayne airport, the gateway to Disneyland and other Orange County attractions. My flights are full of kids. If I had to list my issues in order:

Not getting my aisle seat.
Stuck in the middle between two other big guys (by big I mean shoulders - where someone has to sit forward).
Fighting over the armrest.
Loud mouths.
Drunks.
People WAY too large for their seats. Yes, I mean fat. Where their thigh is on my seat.
People who can't lift their luggage (scares the shit out of me when they are getting it out and I am sitting in the aisle seat). Buddy lost a tooth that way.
Loud video games.
Crying.

[tdn]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

I'm sorry it was hard to suss out the meaning, but you are pretty much spot on.

Thank you. I'm just trying to get to understanding, rather than dismissing posters out of hand.

I should mention one rather pleasurable flight that I had a year or two ago. I got stuck in the middle seat. Better than the aisle, which I hate because I keep getting hit with drink carts and bathroom goers and Ambivilad. I like the window seat because I like the view and the relative privacy.

But I really respected and admired, for whatever reason, the aisle-seat mom for keeping her newborn baby quiet. And I made sure to thank her for that. The baby slept like... a baby!

[Girl From Mars]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

Oh please. You chose to have a baby, then you chose to take it on an airplane and then you chose to not buy it a seat and then dare to complain about the "difficulty" the airline put you thru? How about the difficulty of getting a young puppy thru the airport and on the plane, and then keeping it quiet (because, you know, I am polite) thru the six hour flight, and then getting to pay $100 for that? Yes, I chose to do all of that but the only thing I complain about is having to pay $100 for the space under my seat while you dare to bitch about being able to take a family member for free. But then, that is what mothers do these days, isn't it?

So the real issue is my children flying for free? On the airlines I fly, I am charged 10% of the adult fare for a baby on my lap, and the full adult fare for my 2 year old who requires her own seat. The baby is supplied an extension seat belt by the airline, but I've voluntarily shelled out an additional $80 for an aviation safety harness for the 2 year old, to stop her being sucked out of a hole in the fuselage or becoming an inflight projectile. I'll be bringing a range of quiet activities for the toddler, plus raisins and ear drops for takeoff and landing.

I was planning on breastfeeding the baby to help with her ears, but then I remembered that you are horribly offended by public breastfeeding. (Is mentioning the word breast OK? I forget.). So can't decide whether letting the baby cry or embarrassing an entire plane with the occasional sight of a portion of my breast over the top of the baby's head is less considerate. Decisions, decisions...

Oh, and as a parent, babies and duct tape can be funny.

[2square4u]

Why do I get the feeling that you're European?

[nate]

Nobody likes having to fly with thier infant child. So as much as you hate it, I'm sure the mom and dad hate it even worse. It's probably 10 times more stressful for them as it is you and it is more than likely an unavoidable situation.

[Sicks Ate]

Originally Posted by expectopatronum

just for the record, i don't have a problem with infants flying free, although i understand the OP's frustration. but i find this type of statement really fucking grating, and it always seem to come up in this type of thread.

just because someone doesn't have kids does not mean they're living it up and their biggest problem is trying to sleep off a hangover. everyone has their own struggles, some of them severe.



fair enough, and i won't deny any of that, but here's another perspective:

maybe the passenger who is annoyed by the crying baby is:

1. going to a funeral
2. racing to say goodbye to a family member who is about to pass
3. just got fired
4. just got divorced/split from partner
5. has legal trouble

etc. etc.

i'll gladly defer to the parents in how to best comfort and parent their child. i don't know how to stop a baby crying and i won't pretend to, but please quit writing off other people's problems as being some frivolous bullshit because they don't have children.

It was supposed to be fucking grating, though you took a little farther than I intended.

The difference between the infant and a person with one of those problems, is that the grown person can reason out the situation. Baby? All they know is that they are unhappy. Adult? I'd like to think that they can say "Ok, I just got fired so I'm in a shitty mood. So the crying baby is annoying me more than it usually would"

Originally Posted by Vinyl Turnip

'neath the pinnacle of comedy lies a whole lotta perfectly good rock. You fossils way down in the sourpuss stratum know it as "the ceiling."

And yes, infants fly free--- as it should be, provided you get enough momentum in your spin.

Fair enough!

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by Girl From Mars

. I'll be bringing a range of quiet activities for the toddler, plus raisins and ear drops for takeoff and landing.

So, sticking raisins in your ears helps with that ear popping thing?

I did not know that.

Oh and saying breast is okay if you say it as breastessisis (we like em in multiple pairs in this corner of the world).

[expectopatronum]

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

It was supposed to be fucking grating, though you took a little farther than I intended.

The difference between the infant and a person with one of those problems, is that the grown person can reason out the situation. Baby? All they know is that they are unhappy. Adult? I'd like to think that they can say "Ok, I just got fired so I'm in a shitty mood. So the crying baby is annoying me more than it usually would"

i get the difference between how babies and adults cope, believe it or not, but that really wasn't my point. there's a tendency in these types of threads for some to paint the single/childfree person's life as being a constant party, with no real problems or responsibilities. (if only!) that's what i take issue with.

i know most parents do the best they can, and i feel for someone who has to take an infant on a plane. sometimes you can plan ahead for any situation and you still get stuck with a crying baby you can't console. i get that. i guess my whole point is that i don't presume to understand what it's like to care for a baby, so it would be nice for others not to presume that my(or anyone else without kids) biggest worry is sleeping off a hangover. i probably did make more of it than you intended, but that general attitude has long since been a pet peeve of mine.

[drewtwo99]

"Complimentary" (compulsory) baby tranquilizers, administered as families begin the early-boarding process, would alleviate many of these problems.

[DianaG]

Honestly I think that the flight attendants should be armed with tranq guns to deal with anyone who's being a pain in the ass, no matter what their age. And while several people have complained about drunks, I'd volunteer that there would probably be fewer drunks on planes if there were fewer children.

Last flight I was on, my friends and I were surrounded (literally) by a couple and their six children under the age of ten. I can only assume they were crazy quiverfull people (she was visibly pregnant, and the youngest couldn't have been much older than six months). After listening to the kids argue about who was going to sit next to who for twenty minutes while the parents pretended that the kids were equipped to work this out peacefully, you'd better believe that when the flight attendant showed up we asked her to bring us three drinks each and check back in each half hour.

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Meyer6

Actually, I wasn't talking about opinions I don't like, I was talking about completely moronic opinions. If someone tells me that they are a birther or a creationist or whatever, that pretty much tells me everything I need to know about them.

Which of course I haven't done. All I've done is expressed the opinion that having children doesn't make anyone special and that society should quit making excuses for what too often passes as "parenting" these days.

You said it was unfair that you had to pay for your perfect puppy while the squalling brat flew free. Ignoring for now that babies are people and dogs are more like ... cargo, so the cost of bringing them is in no way comparable,

For me, no they are not comparable. That puppy is mine and a baby is someone elses so obviously the puppy is more valuable to me than any given baby. Dogs are not cargo - cargo is not a living breathing thing. Also, the puppy was not in the cargo area, it was under my seat, so it wasn't taking up any room that the airline planned to use for something else, and it weighed less than a baby. No, they are not comparable.

you clearly implied that perfect dog and bratty kid was the expected, standard way of things. If you actually recognized that either one can be annoying and either one can be perfectly fine, then why didn't you say anything even remotely like that?

Because that wasn't the subject. The only reason it is now is that you continue to make incorrect assumptions about what I post, due to your extreme bias.

Well I'm sorry that you are too fucking cheap to pay for a seat in first class. Guess you don't really want to be free from babies as bad as you claim.

Uh, what? I already have to pay more to fly many times than a baby, not wanting to pay for a first class seat is not even close to "too fucking cheap", there can easily be babies in first class AND I was responding to someone suggesting that all babies be put in first class. Your response makes zero sense.

Originally Posted by Algher

I fly every week for work. I fly through John Wayne airport, the gateway to Disneyland and other Orange County attractions. My flights are full of kids. If I had to list my issues in order:

Not getting my aisle seat.
Stuck in the middle between two other big guys (by big I mean shoulders - where someone has to sit forward).
Fighting over the armrest.
Loud mouths.
Drunks.
People WAY too large for their seats. Yes, I mean fat. Where their thigh is on my seat.
People who can't lift their luggage (scares the shit out of me when they are getting it out and I am sitting in the aisle seat). Buddy lost a tooth that way.
Loud video games.
Crying.

And I respect your right to complain about those things even tho almost none of them bother me. However, there is rarely any respect for people who dare to complain about children, even if there is no excuse for what they are doing.

Originally Posted by nate

Nobody likes having to fly with thier infant child. So as much as you hate it, I'm sure the mom and dad hate it even worse. It's probably 10 times more stressful for them as it is you and it is more than likely an unavoidable situation.

Actually, comments here and elsewhere seem to indicate that most of the time parents are flying with babies to take them on vacation, to see relatives or other of that sort of avoidable situation.

Particularly since the children I complain about are the ones that the parent involved is not trying to do diddly about and obviously could not be bothered to plan ahead. I'm well aware that there are times when there is going to be crying that cannot be stopped, but all too often they just let the child cry, or run screaming down the aisle, or kick the seat or whatever without doing one damn thing. Or even better, get pissy when someone does something like insist the kid take it's seat. Look at the comments in here - the OP complains about a baby that squalls thruout a flight, and the usual posse jumps all over him for daring to express irritation.

[Meyer6]

Originally Posted by curlcoat

We are sorry that you are too fucking cheap to pay for a seat for it. Guess you don't really want to see it as bad as you claim.

Originally Posted by Meyer6

I'm sorry that you are too fucking cheap to pay for a seat in first class. Guess you don't really want to be free from babies as bad as you claim.

It's hilarious that you have your panties all in a bunch about this, because it was your own vile quote with just a few words changed. Shoe's on the other foot now that it's your money*, huh? I know, I know, "but they don't have to fly - they're just going to visit relatives, those family-loving bastards!". Well, you don't have to fly either, so why don't you learn to deal with it or stay home?

Originally Posted by curlcoat

Look at the comments in here - the OP complains about a baby that squalls thruout a flight, and the usual posse jumps all over him for daring to express irritation.

Please. Quit being such a drama llama. Nobody is angry that he dares to express irritation, they're annoyed with him (and you) because he wants infants banned from flying and because he (and you) are basically calling all parents incompetent boobs who are complete fools for even wanting to take their own children with them anywhere. I know you like feeling persecuted, but there's a difference.

As I've said before, it's not a coincidence that you are surrounded by such annoying people - and it's not the fault of the airports you fly out of, or the welfare queens in California, or your bouncy-castle neighbors. It's because for some reason you delight in looking for the worst in people and decrying the state of the world today. News flash - the world is no worse than it was when you were a kid. If you just let things roll and didn't always assume the worst about everyone, you might find that magically you will be surrounded by nicer people. But you won't, because you inexplicably like being a bitter old bag.

Oops, sorry, that was just my 'extreme bias' against morons showing. I'll try to keep that under control.


*well, sugar-daddy's money anyways

[njtt]

Originally Posted by Zulema

I have a problem that this is even an option for safety reasons. We all have to be buckled in for safety but an infant can just be free to get sucked out of the plane if a hole appears in the fusilage or free to roll around on the floor in a crash.

A baby should have to have a seat and a car seat. I don't care if you won't be able to fly if you have to pay for your baby. Think about what could happen in an emergency situation with your baby being kicked around on the floor while everyone rushes the exits.

Oh thats funny. When my wife and I flew with my one year old daughter, normally a very quiet, well behaved kid, we booked a seat for her and brought a car seat for her to be strapped into on her own seat. However, the flight staff insisted that this could not be used during take-off, and I had to hold her on my knee, with an extension seat belt around her. She screamed and screamed all through take-off, and until the pilot turned off the seat belt sign, a long-long time, that seemed very much longer. Then eventually, we were allowed to set up her car set in the seat we had booked for her, strap her in, and she became her usual quiet, contented, well behaved self.

Maybe the finger of blame should not be pointing at kids or parents but at stupid and inflexible safety regs. (I can't imagine that she was safer on my knee than in her car seat, even though it might be true that the car seat wold have slowed me down a tiny bit in getting to an an emergency exit, in the very unlikely event that that would have been necessary.)

[curlcoat]

Originally Posted by Meyer6

It's hilarious that you have your panties all in a bunch about this, because it was your own vile quote with just a few words changed. Shoe's on the other foot now that it's your money*, huh? I know, I know, "but they don't have to fly - they're just going to visit relatives, those family-loving bastards!". Well, you don't have to fly either, so why don't you learn to deal with it or stay home?

Again with the stretching. There is a huge difference between being too fucking cheap to pay the price of a coach ticket, and being too fucking cheap to pay the price of first class, not to mention that apparently there are some airlines who charge less than coach for a young child in a seat. Not to mention that I am not bothering anyone (and if I was I'd do my best to fix it) whereas a squalling baby has the potential to bother quite a few people who cannot do anything to get away from it.

Please. Quit being such a drama llama. Nobody is angry that he dares to express irritation, they're annoyed with him (and you) because he wants infants banned from flying and because he (and you) are basically calling all parents incompetent boobs who are complete fools for even wanting to take their own children with them anywhere. I know you like feeling persecuted, but there's a difference.

HA! This is hilarious. As for drama llama, it isn't me who is characterizing words as "vile" and it isn't me who is exaggerating what folks have said. Look at the title of this thread - infants fly free. Not ban the suckers, its "why are they free". I'm not going to go back and read the whole thread again, so I'm sure that at some point there were posts about banning them totally, but for the most part we have addressed the OP - flying free.

I have also not called all parents incompetent boobs or complete fools. I have specified those parents who fly with babies who cannot be bothered to plan ahead - the fact that those parents are getting more common does not mean that I said all parents. Who is it that is feeling persecuted here? Hmmm?

As I've said before, it's not a coincidence that you are surrounded by such annoying people - and it's not the fault of the airports you fly out of, or the welfare queens in California, or your bouncy-castle neighbors. It's because for some reason you delight in looking for the worst in people and decrying the state of the world today. News flash - the world is no worse than it was when you were a kid. If you just let things roll and didn't always assume the worst about everyone, you might find that magically you will be surrounded by nicer people. But you won't, because you inexplicably like being a bitter old bag.

Wow, talk about fantasies - what planet do you live on again? Also, more drama. Tsk.

Oops, sorry, that was just my 'extreme bias' against morons showing. I'll try to keep that under control.

Nope, it's your kneejerk reaction to anyone who doesn't agree with you that we should allow mothers to do whatever they want to do, no matter how many people it inconveniences, irritates or costs money. No, the world is not the same place it was when I was a kid if for no other reason, kids didn't get away with being annoying little shits back then. "Seen and not heard" was real back then. Parents weren't trying to be friends with their kids, there were no awards for just showing up and bad manners weren't excused as self expression.

[SticksAndString]

Originally Posted by EmAnJ

Ban everyone under 25. After they are babies, they're toddlers, toddlers who know when they're being annoying and take joy in pushing your buttons more. But then they turn in to 4 to 8 year olds, the ones that constantly whine about being bored and kick your seat and get up a million times to use the bathroom, putting their sticky hands on the head rest of your seat as they climb over mom and dad's lap. But wait! Then they become pre-teens and teenagers, and they are loud and annoying once again. They tell loud stories and laugh at an ear drum piercing level for half the flight. They play their video games with the volume on even! And then, then they hit 21 and they can DRINK on the plane. They get drunk with their buddies and harass the flight attendants.

The only problem is that punishes the bad kids/parents as well as those of us who actually TRY to teach our kids to behave (no matter where they are). Since Stickman and I have both worked in retail/customer service and Stickman's mom once worked as a stewardess for a short period of time, we've tried to teach him how to behave in public.

Generally, he does quite well. The only time I can remember he ever caused any sort of a problem on a flight was when he was 5 and he was SO excited that he stuffed his mouth full of crackers and managed to choke himself, then puked up the chewed up crackers on Stickman.

On the return trip, Stickman and I had both fallen asleep and Slim asked the stewardess for a Coke. She wisely woke Stickman up and asked if he was allowed to have one (he wasn't..he got an apple juice instead but I had to give him points for having the balls to ask, yanno.).

[D_Odds]

Originally Posted by Leaffan

Great. Another thread by someone who hasn't had kids, hates all kids, thinks all parents are abdicating jerks, doesn't appreciate that he was once an infant, and assumes his parental skills will be like ten parents, plus two.

I'll leave it at that; although I started to type much more inflammatory stuff.

I have kids (well, now they're adults, but at one time they were kids).

I am on board with the rant.

[D_Odds]

Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet

Me and the guy sitting next to me came up with a lot of ways very quickly:
– Alcohol
– Duct tape
– Guitar strings that I had in my bag
– pillows given by the aircraft
– baseball bat
– emergency exit doorway

^_^


Idon'thatekidswhydoeseveryonethinkIhatekids

Originally Posted by Sicks Ate

If you have children, it's difficult to imagine any of those things. And it certainly isn't funny.

No it's not. I imagined them all the time for my own kids. Still do, at times (though nowhere near as often). We won't discuss what I imagined for other people's kids.

[Gary Kumquat]

Originally Posted by Budget Player Cadet

Okay, you know what, this is one airline policy that I will never have any understanding or sympathy for. Yeah, they don't weigh much and they don't take up much space, but you know what? It's like taking a goddamn air raid siren into the plane. When you're in an extremely enclosed space with a few hundred other people, the last thing you should be allowed to take with you is something which:

1. Is extremely loud and grating
2. Is liable to smell completely disgusting for prolonged periods of time
3. YOU'RE NOT ABLE OR ALLOWED TO TURN OFF / MURDER!

Cuz lemme tell you, after two hours of a stupid, spoiled brat screaming in your ears because it can't get everything it wants and its mother completely failing to keep her under control, that last option is becoming increasingly attractive in just about every capacity. Oh, and that little shitstain pays nothing for ruining not just my flight, but the flight of everyone around me? Jesus fucking christ!

How best to demonstrate how stupid this OP is? Ah yes. Curlcoat agrees with you. I don't think you could ask for much clearer proof that you're talking absolute shite.

$35 buys you a set of decent, in the ear, noise blocking headphones. Combine that with the general engine noise, and you're laughing, even the shoutiest of 2 year old tantrums becoming just a small part of the background noise to whatever you're listening to. That's all. Or alternatively just acknowledge that children are an essential part of the human race are children, and bloody learn to deal with it, rather than whining about them like a spoilt gobshite.

[MsWhatsit]

I spent a grand total of 23 hours across four flights on my recent vacation. The number-one most annoying thing that happened: A 20ish girl sitting diagonally from me had a friend seated way in the back of the plane, and this friend immediately hopped out of her seat to take a squatting position in the aisle to laugh and squee with her seated friend about all the awesome and hilarious hijinks they had had on their recent vacation. This was a 10-hour flight. Annoying Loud Squee Girl was camped next to my seat for around 3 hours of it. If you're going to have a special noiseproof Baby Hold, I want to throw Squee Girl into it.

Second most annoying thing that happened: When I boarded the final flight of my trip, I was seated next to a guy who kept nudging me and trying to get me to commiserate with him about the people across the aisle who had a small child. "THIS should be good," "ugh," loud sighing, etc. It was fucking annoying. The kid was completely quiet through all of this, incidentally.

So, grand total for me in the Annoying Bullshit on Planes scorecard is Adults 2, Kids 0.