Has this thread divided into the “people who don’t have kids” vs. “the people who do have kids” yet?
HA!! I can’t even read the rest of the thread. I am dying.
It involves starting when they’re the appropriate age. Emphasis added, since it apparently went right over your little head the first time. And of course it was a silly, hyperbolic comparison; that’s the point.
Seriously, what is so fucking hard about eating at a restaurant that a kid who’s old enough to have some kind of basic control over themself couldn’t figure it out the first time?
Yeah, and that symbol with the seated person with a big curved shape under his butt? That means baby-with-a-full-diaper.
The flip side is true too.
If you don’t want to be subjected to kids, don’t go places that people with kids go.
Parent. Agree with OP. I wish I had $5 for every time I’ve had to go and walk around the outside of a restaurant with a crying or tantruming child, while the rest of the family stayed inside and finished their dinner. Which makes it all the more rage-inducing when someone else doesn’t bother to extend the same courtesy to fellow diners.
Already there. It’s a vicious battle between the people who don’t have kids and think that any babies or small children in a restaurant should be quiet or their parents should distract them or take them out of hearing, and the people who do have kids and think that any babies or small children in a restaurant should be quiet or their parents should distract them or take them out of hearing. Beware the brawl!
On the few occasions I have had to eat at Denny’s, such situations in which it was around 2:00 a.m. and I was starving, I would be irate over the lousy parents who have an infant out at such an inappropriate hour. I would probably also be wondering how to discretely gather enough information to make a call to Children’s Protective Services.
If you’re going to be a complete and total fucking moron, why bother being discrete about it? You’re certainly open enough with your stupidity on these boards.
Personally, I’d assume the family was on a lengthy road trip and chose Denny’s because it was open. It strikes me as far more probable than a local family just getting up at 2 a.m. to go out for a meal, though I suppose it’s happened.
Shouldn’t you be worshiping a diaper somewhere?
So there you are, at a nice restaurant, and there are a couple of kids, seven or eight years old, playing tag between the dinner tables.
Is surreptitiously tripping them as they run by your table acceptable? Just asking, yup, that’s it, I’m just asking. 
Hey, moron, i have no kids, and i tend to get very annoyed that people whose children are loud and obnoxious in public places.
But i’m also smart enough to recognize that simply having an infant in a restaurant at 2 a.m. is not a reasonable cause for calling CPS. The fact that you apparently believe otherwise is fairly consistent with the sheer dribbling idiocy you have displayed on this board recently.
At least, I’m honest enough to admitt I would do whatever was necessary to survive. I wonder, Freudian Slit, what you’re reactions would be in a life or death situation? At least, I don’t advocate cannibalizing them.
I’m just throwing random thoughts here.
-
I’m curious about how long the episode in the OP went on. I’m not saying it’s okay to let children annoy other people. I’m just wondering what his threshold is. (I am actually assuming that it went on for more than minutes, since he says several people were bothered by it.)
-
Just an observation: I think some of this is partly because of something I’ve been watching develop for quite a while now. A lot of people seem to want kids to do things they aren’t old enough for, even to the point of insisting others accomodate them, or changing the things to accomodate the kid. We seem to have lost the idea of “not old enough” or “growing into”.
-
The OP said, take the baby out or stick a bottle in its mouth. I would agree with that, but I have to ask, what about pulling baby out of the seat and nursing him? Bother anyone, or is that a whole different discussion?
-
And I’m sitting her wondering, were we just lucky with out kids? They didn’t do the screaming in restaurants thing, and they never needed to be taken out to quiet down. We started taking the oldest out with us when he was weeks old and never had a problem.
Hey, idiot this the BBQ Pit where hyperbole is pretty common.
Wouldn’t the sensible thing to do be to check first if they were on the run, protecting their biological child from being snatched by adopters? Your call could make that happen, you know.
Trouble is, you can’t advocate something absurd, then advocate something similar and claim the second incident is hyperbolic. We’re not mind-readers.
Heh, how perfectly circular.
The issue is of course what “old enough” means.
Age merely indicates a certain degree of average experience. People generally learn through experience. Forbid the experience, and you impede the learning.
I’ve seen adults who had poor social skills - indeed, who behave like self-entitled assholes. What was “so fucking hard” about behaving properly, that they did not “figure it out”?
Not that I’m implying that self-entitled assholes got that way because their parents did not take 'em out it public! Rather, that there is no ‘magic age’ at which one miraculously learns how to behave properly. It is a constant process of enculturation. Locking a kid at home “until they are ready” is not a good option.
I don’t think it is absurd to say that you would kill a baby in situation where it is your life or the baby’s life. The fact that some people have lived so sheltered a life that they cannot even process the theoreticals of situations like that is absurd.