And I hope you’re completely consistent in your righteousness and refuse to accept any care from anyone younger than you are. Honestly dude, when you’re an 80 year old drooling moron, who the fuck do you think will be taking care of you? They should have cards for your type so that my kids will know not to fucking bother.
Jesus Christ, it just keeps getting better.
No milk at our house meant no cookies and milk, no brownies and milk, no cereal, no milk in your oatmeal, no nesquick, no hamburger helper or macaroni and cheese, no nice creamy mashed potatoes, no milkshakes, etc. Our aunt’s cooking was divine, and going without it because we cried for a toy at K-Mart was quite punishment enough that we learned our lesson. The other kids put pressure on the one who acted out to be good next time so they could have their chocolate pudding back. Calcium can be had from other sources, so going without milk for a week wasn’t exactly cruelty.
Nah.
Children ARE parasites.
You don’t know much, do you. You are aware that such techniques wouldn’t work on an 18-month-old, and would be close to irresponsible, right?
One surmises 18 month old tykes don’t throw tantrums in aisle 5. In fact, from distant experience with my sister’s fuck trophy, 18 month olds sleep. A lot. And then they eat before siesta 
Oh Christ, one of those parents who thinks that disciplining their kids will kill them. :rolleyes:
We weren’t 18 months old, we were 4, 5, and 8. Of course that wouldn’t work on an 18 month old. The 18 month old is the one you take out to the parking lot or to the bathroom until they stop screaming or fall asleep, then go about your business.
You clearly don’t have any idea what the fuck you are talking about. 18 month olds nap 2, maybe 3 hours a day. They are absolutely capable of throwing ear splitting tantrums at any time. They are capable of quite a bit, actually.
You’re an idiot. Seriously, you are too stupid to even address, but here goes: If you take milk away from an 18 month old for a week, he probably won’t even notice. He definitely won’t have any idea that the absence of milk = discipline. You clearly have no idea what a reasonable disciplinary action for a child that age is, so do us all a favor and quit showing your ass to the world.
It stands to reason that professional adults will care for me in my old age, if need be. Although I plan to stay in shape and keep my mind sharp, I guess you never know. But your logic isn’t clear. Why would any children be involved? I won’t have any, and won’t have any coming to visit me.
Tell me, oh sage, what you do with the other two children and the cart full of groceries during this period?
You park the cartful of groceries at customer service, or outside the bathrooms, and you all go together to the car or the bathrooms. If having two other kids is a problem, stop opening your legs.
Tell me, oh sage, how would you handle the situation? Just shrug and tell the rest of us “fuck all y’all”? 'Cause that seems to be what you’re suggesting.
Oh, the stupidity just keeps getting better. Take them to the parking lot! No one will hear them there!! After watching his younger brother, the 4 year old won’t think of this tactic next time he wants to go home. No sir.
Fortunately, I’ve never had to deal with this problem. My son loves the grocery store, and has only started to wind up once in a child friendly restaurant. He was whisked away very quickly, you’ll no doubt be happy to know. I’m not a total moron, though, and realize that some people can’t drop everything they are doing every time a child starts to get upset. One would think that most of the time it is possible, but sometimes it isn’t. If you were talking about a restaurant or a movie theater, I’d be on your side. At the grocery store, running a very necessary errand? Not so much.
No, I’m suggesting it isn’t always as easy as starwarsfreek seems to think it is. The vast majority of parents in this world will remove their child from any situation other than a flight if s/he is throwing a prolonged tantrum. However, a 90-second tantrum by a toddler isn’t quickly solved with the threat of withholding a food staple. Nor are future 90-second tantrums curbed in such a manner.
They aren’t going home. They sit there until everybody quiets down, and they go back in and pay for their groceries. If the kid starts screaming once they are in line, they get a pass till the goods are paid for.
No, they go back inside and continue shopping, because they’ve only got a small fraction of what they need in the cart. Then the child starts in again. Or the newborn. Then, they all go back out to the car. Then they come back, and it’s now time for the baby’s bottle, or for child #1 to go to the bathroom.
I think what starwarsfreek is intimating is this: disciplining one’s child is a chore, it’s not a fun thing to do, it takes efforts, etc. etc. The social compact governing misbehaving children is: yes, occasionally your kid will act up, the rest of society understands this, but when it happens, the parent is expected to take steps to minimize how disruptive the kid becomes.
The problem is, obviously, the first point and the second point are at loggerheads. Many parents, and this should not be taken as directed at any particular board member, assert that they cannot limit the disruption because of scheduling, or costs, or because that’s just how kids are, when in fact, sometimes it’s because they just don’t want to make the effort. It is a free-rider problem. We’re not going to create child-free zones because of a few severely misbehaving children, so they get the benefit (sufferance of brattishness) without the cost (having to do the work of disciplining).
Let’s put on our serious, intellectually-honest hats now: what is the bigger problem – oversensitive DINKs? Or over-indulgent parents?
Again, I wasn’t talking about toddlers.
Well first of all, they should have all been fed and gone to the bathroom before they left the house. This would eliminate some problems from the start. If you can’t manage 3 kids, stop opening your legs. It’s pretty simple.
ETA: also, what **Kimmy_Gibbler **said.
To the self-labeled “child haters” who posted above…
I understand as well as anyone how annoying children can be, but unless you plan to ditch civilization and live by yourself in the woods, how can you disavow all responsibility for them?
Take away the children and YOUR standard of living starts plummeting within 10-20 years. You need that next generation of workers to keep things going so that you can have your fancy childfree restaurants and cushy retirements. Without them, you’ll end your days as subsistence farmers waxing nostalgic about the days of iPods, air conditioning and healthcare when there were still enough people around to staff the factories and hospitals.
That is why we subsidize parenthood. Parents sacrifice an awful lot of money, health, opportunity and sanity to prop up the future for all of us. For every minute you spend listening to their screaming brats, they’re spending hours rocking them, being driven insane by them, cleaning up vomit/poop/snot from prized possessions, wrestling them into clothes and trying in vain to teach them manners and common sense before they’re in full possession of reason.
I get that you’d rather leave that part to someone else and contribute to society in some other way, but quit yer whining already. You don’t scold the on-call doctor whose beeper goes off to alert him to a life in danger. Show some respect for the perpetually on-call parent who is doing the job you didn’t want to do.
At the very least, give up the notion that they ought to let a cart full of groceries spoil while rushing a fussy child to the car to spare your delicate ears.