It seems like this question has been skirted a couple of times, so I will point blank ask: Why can’t parents wait until the child has shown appropriate behavior in their own home, prior to bringing them out into public? In other words, we aren’t saying that you need to “lock 'em up” until a certain age. What we are saying is: teach them appropriate manners, and have those manners be practiced at your dinner table before you stick your dinner table in a crowded restaurant. Why can’t a trip to gramma’s be an excellent time to teach your children the appropriate manners for being out in public? Why can’t a once a week dinner at home be used in the same manner?
The problem isn’t the parents that quickly get on trying to quiet the child, etc, the problem is that there are parents who do not. So yes, I agree with you that its an issue of mutual consideration, but you wouldn’t hear anyone bitching about noisy kids if the parents were being considerate.
What the parents were doing was rude - not removing a screaming child (or trying to calm it down and then removing it if that did not work after a very few minutes). But Alice’s friend was also rude. Rudeness should not beget rudeness. Neither party here is innocent. And, frankly, I have more sympathy for the parents - who may not have realized how annoying their own child was being (after a while, parents forget) - than Alice’s friend, who intentionally was trying to make his obscenities overheard by the people to whom they were directed.
Walking up to the parents and saying “excuse me, we are trying to have a conversation, would you mind calming the baby or removing her” would not be rude. The parents might be shamed into the proper action. Or they might be rude and tell you to stuff it. In which case I’d loose all sympathy for them.
I’d call you a fucking asshole. Right to your face. I’m not a tough guy at all, and would get my ass beat in a fight. But I don’t scare easily and I’m not one to not speak my mind.
I’m not bothered as long as the parents are trying to comfort/distract the child. It’s when the child/infant is screaming and in clear distress, whith the parents acting completely oblivious that I just start to lose it.
And of course, it can be a real pain because then my daughter gets upset that the other child is upset . . . it can become a chain reaction throughout the building if you don’t nip it in the bud.
While we’re at it, can we please pit the idiot waiters/waitresses who are nowhere to be found when you’d very much like to pack up your unruly child and GTF out? It’s only happened to me twice, but both times I requested boxes and the check, and the waiter disappeared for TEN minutes (longer the second time) is this a signal for a smoke break or what?!?
But we haven’t reached a consensus that even if you’re at Chili’s (pretend like there’s a little chili in place of the apostrophe) and your child has turned into an un-calm-downable screaming machine, that you should take into the restroom or outside until it simmers itself? Interesting.
I try to be on the side of those behaving reasonably, making the best of the situation.
Parents who subject others to their children’s bad behaviour without making the attempt to discipline, distract, pacify, or remove the child get no sympathy - though in my experience, they are few and far between. Parents who make the attempt get my sympathy.
Likewise, non-parents who behave with some mediocum of understanding for parents get my sympathy; those who positively go out of their way to help get my admiration (and again, in my experience this is most). Those who are over-sensitive, self-righteous and rude in consequence do not have my sympathy (though in my experience they are likewise few and far between in real life), though without actually being present it is often hard to judge who was being rude to whom.
What people don’t realize is that most parents already know there’s a problem and are already frustrated at the situation. And most parents would try to do everything they can do to take care of the situation.
It’s a rare situation where a parent will simply let a baby cry without taking some situation. First, a crying baby is having discomfort and secondly they’re already embarrassed about it.
Well, the problem is, kids don’t have a switch. They don’t shift from being a pain in the ass in public to sitting quietly in an instant. It’s a transition process, and a kid who behaves impeccably 99% of the time may simply have a melt down at an unexpected time.
Doesn’t excuse not dealing with it, but your question shows a lack of understanding as to human behavior. Waiting until you are 100% certain the kid won’t have a melt down means you will never take the child out of the house.
I basically agree with you here (except for having more sympathy for the parents). However, let’s say Alice’s friend went with your direct, but non-confrontational method and was met with either apathy or hostility. Then is it OK for the friend to make the remark? Personally, I’d have to say “yes” at that point. I’m guessing that YMWV.
I thought we’d addressed this multiple times: because there is no guarantee that a kid will behave well, even the best-behaved one, at any age (see: petulant teenagers); and because going out in public is a necessary part of any child’s learning to deal with the public.
I disagree that " you wouldn’t hear anyone bitching about noisy kids if the parents were being considerate". That assumes that everyone is a reasonable and dispassionate observer. You know, some adults can be oversensitive assholes, too.
Yes, but then “reasonably accomodating” turned into, “I’ll tell it to shush, and will cajole it a bit, but after that, fuck you, and fuck your dinner.”
In my mind at least, taking the kid out may be necessary on occasion.
What I object to is those pluging the absolute exclusionary rule. To my mind, that’s unreasonable and excessive, and counter-productive. With common politeness and a small degree of mutual sympathy, parents and non-parents alike can share public spaces.
I object to mean-spiritedness and small-mindedness.
Nope, its still answering rudeness with rudeness. Alice’s friend would be justified in getting the manager - or even in getting the manager before then to intervene. Although that isn’t always successful - especially in a place like Dead Lobster where they serve a LOT of families and serve weak drinks.
In some areas whether because of criminal activity in the community or a lack of parental gun safety, very young children have access to handguns and many would argue they lack the mental capabilities to understand the consequences of pulling the trigger. In war zones (and some high crime zones), it can easily be your life or the kid’s whether it’s a kid caring a weapon or a kid unable to be quiet and not betray you to the enemy.