Is a ban on children discrimination? Liberal hypocricy?

[larsenl1]

But, in Red Lobster’s defense, I have always thought of it as a family restaurant, especially based on their advertisements.
.

The change in advertising followed the change in clientele. First, people started bringing their kids, then Red Lobster added a kids menu. They did not always have a kid’s menu. They did not always advertise as a family restaurant.

I am looking through the lens of thirty odd years. I might guess that you are looking through a lens of about 5 years.

God Bless you and I will pray for your heart to soften to the ignorant folk of Iowa who don’t even have that many seafood restaurants. The poor disadvantaged midwesterners.

 

[PatriceA]

The change in advertising followed the change in clientele. First, people started bringing their kids, then Red Lobster added a kids menu. They did not always have a kid’s menu. They did not always advertise as a family restaurant.

I am looking through the lens of thirty odd years. I might guess that you are looking through a lens of about 5 years.

God Bless you and I will pray for your heart to soften to the ignorant folk of Iowa who don’t even have that many seafood restaurants. The poor disadvantaged midwesterners.

I can certainly remember a time that going to Red Lobster was a HUGE deal, if you were a kid. It meant your parents thought that you could handle a more adult type meal experience than going to the local diner. You were expected to be on your best behavior, or you weren’t going out to another adult type restaurant until you could behave.

By the way, McDains has never had a kids menu. They tried to make the place as unkid friendly as possible, but some people just don’t get it until a place is forced to take the stance such as “no children under 6” permitted.

 

[Mumbles140]

Are you a pot calling the kettle black?

We have airports in Iowa. I know what a Leer jet is. Chances are one of your insurance policies is underwritten by a P&C company in Iowa.

I have all of my teeth. I don’t wear jeans tied with a rope.

I can get fresh whole lobster at many restaurants. Red Lobster is a national chain that most Americans would recognize the name. I could also complain about the Chicago Speakeasy, Noah’s Ark, Mama Lacona’s, Waterfront Seafood Market, Joe’s Crabshack (which is a good place for kids), Johnny’s Italian Steakhouse and many more. Also Red Lobster is affordable while still fine dining. I can’t afford 801 Steak and Chops at $200 a meal just to avoid children and I bet I would still have to deal with children there because the well-to-do still have a sector of persons with bad manners.

I would bet the porkchops I eat and the Filet Mignon I eat are better than the grassfed cattle that are common on the East coast.

Inclusive and non-discriminatory ha! When pig’s fly. You have simply chosen to be tolerant of toddlers as your pet issue but you are woefully ignorant of the economy and versatility and abundance of food, including seafood, of your neighbors in the midwest.

I meant no offense, and I think your reaction is a bit over-the-top. My in-laws are from Iowa (Sioux City) and my wife’s grandparents still live there. They made mention on several times how it was difficult to find good seafood out there. My brother lives in a small town in Kansas and I don’t have these false sterotypes about the midwest.

 

[larsenl1]

I’m sorry you and your husband have such a hard time getting lobster - I’m sure there aren’t a ton of seafood places in Iowa.

emphasis added.

This is not the same as “I’ve been told by relatives in Western Iowa that they have trouble finding good seafood”

Note I did not state that I had a hard time getting lobster. I complained about going to a restaurant to eat lobster which is more of an adult type meal and being bothered by kids.

You assumed my problem was finding a place to eat lobster.

I live in Des Moines Iowa and at one time we were rated as the city to have the most restaurants per capita in the USA. We recently were voted as one of the best places to live.

Whether or not you think you have misconceptions about the midwest, the way the you write gives you away.

 

[BillP]

Businesses tried doing that in the past to minorities. The federal government disagreed and forced integration under the powers of interstate commerce (i.e. your ketchup is manufactured out of state. Therefore, interstate commerce applies - open your doors). These businesses, private or not, are banned from discriminating.

There is a huge difference between keeping minorities, who are behaving in exactly the same appropriate way as other patrons out of a restaurant and keeping noisy, boisterous undisciplined children out of a restaurant.

If today’s parents would instil some discipline into their children this wouldn’t be an issue. Its really too bad that the minority who have well-behaved children are penalized along with the rest, but that’s life.

How many times have you been around a kid, whether you knew them or not, and see them do something so funny, silly, or cute that it makes you smile? I’d take an hour of crying babies for one of those innocent moments of happiness.

Then frequent businesses that permit children. I’ll frequent the others and we’ll both be happy.

 

[Rascalking]

I’m sorry - I took your statement to mean that because they are private, give them free-t.

No problem.

 

[Allegra]

If the parents are drunk, then it should be child endangerment (depending on the age of the child), or at the very least negligence. But again, you should expect children at an amusement park, and though that doesn’t excuse what you or your family had to deal with, your example is about kids behaving poorly at a place for kids. And I know you have other serious examples which display inappropriate behavior, but what is the percentage of problem children versus the amount of children you are around (directly or indirectly) every time you are out?

As I said, none of these were places “for kids”. One was a restraunt, but it was nearly ten o’clock. None of these took place at an amusement park. I think you may have mixed me up with another poster. I’ve already said that these are rare occurances. I’m not advocating making it illegal to bring children out in public. I’m advocating the right of a business owner to exclude children from his or her establishment. The people who patronized such a place would probably do so, in part, because they wanted to be away from children. Why would anyone want to deliberately force their children on people who don’t want to be around them, when they have other, child friendly options?

 

[larsenl1]

I can certainly remember a time that going to Red Lobster was a HUGE deal, if you were a kid. It meant your parents thought that you could handle a more adult type meal experience than going to the local diner. You were expected to be on your best behavior, or you weren’t going out to another adult type restaurant until you could behave.

By the way, McDains has never had a kids menu. They tried to make the place as unkid friendly as possible, but some people just don’t get it until a place is forced to take the stance such as “no children under 6” permitted.

I wish this restaurateur the best of luck. If I lived nearby I would patronize his place of business.

 

[BillP]

Forgive me, but my brother and his wife have 5 children. Is 15 minutes considered sufficient to ‘ruin’ your evening?

Oh, so now we’re haggling over how much of my time parents of undisciplined children are entitled to waste are we?

So you think 15 minutes is no big deal?

How about 30? An hour? Where do you draw the line?

If my wife and I went and saw the new Harry Potter movie here in Atlanta it would cost $30 for the tickets. The movie lasts 2 hours, 15 minutes of waiting in line behind five kids whose parents can’t get them to decide just cost us 1/8 of that movie, Multiply $3.75 times the number of people in line… and it arguably screwed up the rest of it (What happened so far?). But thats ok with you, huh?

Like I saw, how long is too long?

whenever I get frustrated with a crying baby, terrible tot, or a child having a tantrum, I just think how happy I am that their mother chose life, and that God has created this person, just like you and me.

And I wonder how we got overrun with such inconsiderate parents. Go figure.

 

[BillP]

It may just be me, but I believe in the policy of inclusion, not exclusion. Welcome all, then ask those who deserve to leave to do so.

If people who are ruining the experience of others don’t deserve to leave then who does?

Think about parents with a newborn baby who want to have a nice dinner together. The child is too young for a sitter and needs to be breast-fed. Other than sleeping, the child is awake to nurse, and the mother takes him/her into the bathroom to do so. Should they not be allowed at nice restaurants because of an infant?

No they should have the good sense and consideration for others to stay home until and unless that can arrange appropriate child care.

I suspect that the lack of common courtesy and consideration on the part of such parents is related their unwillingness to discipline their children.

 

[Allegra]

If today’s parents would instil some discipline into their children this wouldn’t be an issue. Its really too bad that the minority who have well-behaved children are penalized along with the rest, but that’s life.

.

The good parents aren’t being penalized anyway. They can still take their kids out to eat at any number of other places that cater to their kids’ needs. Then on date night, they can go enjoy themselves at the childless place. The only people who are being penalized are those who think that their child is fused to their hip bone and really, really, REALLY want to eat at the one place kids aren’t allowed. (Which could possibly be nonone.)

 

[Allegra]

I wish this restaurateur the best of luck. If I lived nearby I would patronize his place of business.

I hope he comes to my town and opens a grocery store. The next unsupervised kid that slams a miniature grocery cart into my leg had better be a fast runner!

 

[pnewton]

There is a huge difference between keeping minorities, who are behaving in exactly the same appropriate way as other patrons out of a restaurant and keeping noisy, boisterous undisciplined children out of a restaurant.

Adults do not all behave the same way. Many adults misbehave in public; at restraunts, movies and pretty much anywhere else.

So does everyone who supports this idea of excluding children also accept the idea of excluding the mentally handicapped? They too can be a distraction. How about banning breast-feeding moms? That too puts a lot of people off.

 

[larsenl1]

Adults do not all behave the same way. Many adults misbehave in public; at restraunts, movies and pretty much anywhere else.

So does everyone who supports this idea of excluding children also accept the idea of excluding the mentally handicapped? They too can be a distraction. How about banning breast-feeding moms? That too puts a lot of people off.

I think that it is fair to say I do not want children excluded from everywhere. But as a consumer I would like to be able to choose when I will be in a restaurant that caters to families with children and when I can have an adult’s only date with my hubby. Sometimes I will take my granddaughter out to eat, sometimes I won’t.

A breast-feeding mom who has pumped and provided breastmilk for the sitter to use while she goes out on that precious date with hubby and then has dressed up and used nursing pads inside her nursing bra would not bother me at all. A breast feeding mother who has a fussy baby that is hungry, too hot, too cold, too wet, would bother me just as much as a mother using formula in a bottle.

Do I care if a mother is breast-feeding at a bench in the shopping mall where I expect kids of all ages while her husband goes and shops for her? No I do not.

If an adult in a wheelchair wants to eat at a fine restaurant and is able to be reasonably quiet and won’t jump out of the wheelchair and lay on the floor just to see what is under the table, then by all means they are welcome.

If a child in a wheelchair still has a personality and behavior of a five year old not in a wheelchair, then she would probably still be bossy and even whiny and that would be disruptive to other consumers.

I’m okay with men’s only establishments too, (and I don’t mean strip clubs) because honestly I don’t want to be around guys smoking cigars, farting, and slinging back whiskey while they watch boxing. I would expect them to look at me funny if I came in and ordered a glass of white wine and wanted them to change the channel to Oprah or Dr. Phil. I just do not go to the places here and there that are friendly to testosterone. And I know not all men are like that. Most men are not like that most of the time. But when they do feel the need, I am happy they have a place to go.

 

[BillP]

Adults do not all behave the same way. Many adults misbehave in public; at restraunts, movies and pretty much anywhere else.

Not at anything like the rate of children. Do you really think that these restaurant owners and patrons are banning kids because their mean-spirited or grumpy? Now, they’re doing it because it is a problem.

So does everyone who supports this idea of excluding children also accept the idea of excluding the mentally handicapped? They too can be a distraction. How about banning breast-feeding moms? That too puts a lot of people off.

Agains you’re drawing false equivalencies (its called a “strawman argument”) the behavior of mentally handicapped people isn’t intefering with the ability of other people to enjoy the experience that those other people are paying for.

IF large numbers of mentally handicapped people ran around restaurants willy-nilly, crawled on the floor upsetting tables and shrieking at the top of their lungs, then I’d ban them in a “NY minute”.

Breasfeeding in public is no more appropriate than flossing one’s teeth or pickinng one’s nose in public and I’d hope that most Mom’s would avoid it if at all possible. But I do realize sometimes you’ve “just got to get that popcorn hull out from between your teeth”…

 

[MarkInOregon]

In my opinion a private company should be able to deny anyone access to their business, for any reason. Most business owners are smarter than this because it limits their customer base and profits. As for a white table cloth fancy resturant banning kids…I’m a mom and I’m OK with that.

Anyone? Really? Ban Catholics? You’d be o.k. with that? What about African Americans? What about Italian Americans? German Americans? Would you be happy if we started seeing signs in the windows of private companies that said “Catholics need not apply” again? What about age? What if I don’t want to serve senior citizens? That all seems reasonable to you? When you say “private company” do you include companies/people that rent housing–should I be able to deny a place to live to people based on race, religion etc.?

I will say this–people now seem more tolerant of dogs than children and I find dogs in public for more annoying than children–in general, and when animals are more accepted than children–then something has gone seriously wrong in our society.

As for restaurants not taking children–well we don’t eat there and my children don’t grow up with the habit of eating at those restaurants–which means they most likely won’t grow up to be patrons of those restaurants–at least with my oldest children that has been the case. Makes the policy short sighted.

Peace,
Mark

 

[larsenl1]

Anyone? Really? Ban Catholics? You’d be o.k. with that? What about African Americans? What about Italian Americans? German Americans? Would you be happy if we started seeing signs in the windows of private companies that said “Catholics need not apply” again? What about age? What if I don’t want to serve senior citizens? That all seems reasonable to you? When you say “private company” do you include companies/people that rent housing–should I be able to deny a place to live to people based on race, religion etc.?

so if I own an Italian restaurant and a family comes in knowing that the food is ethnic, and they demand that I cook Mexican food, then I need to serve them?

You are arguing that all is equal everywhere and everyplace and everytime. That is not how the world is. This is the case of a restaurant owner putting limits on the guests that will be served and if a family with children boycotts the place that won’t really bother him

I will say this–people now seem more tolerant of dogs than children and I find dogs in public for more annoying than children–in general, and when animals are more accepted than children–then something has gone seriously wrong in our society.

Dogs cannot go into restaurants it is a violation of the health code.

 

[Allegra]

Anyone? Really? Ban Catholics? You’d be o.k. with that? What about African Americans? What about Italian Americans? German Americans? Would you be happy if we started seeing signs in the windows of private companies that said “Catholics need not apply” again? What about age? What if I don’t want to serve senior citizens? That all seems reasonable to you? When you say “private company” do you include companies/people that rent housing–should I be able to deny a place to live to people based on race, religion etc.?

I will say this–people now seem more tolerant of dogs than children and I find dogs in public for more annoying than children–in general, and when animals are more accepted than children–then something has gone seriously wrong in our society.

As for restaurants not taking children–well we don’t eat there and my children don’t grow up with the habit of eating at those restaurants–which means they most likely won’t grow up to be patrons of those restaurants–at least with my oldest children that has been the case. Makes the policy short sighted.

Peace,
Mark

I really doubt that this one restaurant in question is welcoming to dogs either. (Although some people do prefer them to children.) I disagree with your assessment of the future of their business. Following that logic, there would be no one who drinks, smokes, or does drugs unless their parents did it with them as kids. Your kids might have kids someday and want to enjoy an evening out in an adult setting.

 

[BillP]

I will say this–people now seem more tolerant of dogs than children and I find dogs in public for more annoying than children–in general, and when animals are more accepted than children–then something has gone seriously wrong in our society.

In my experience, and I’m serious about this….most dogs are better behaved than most children.
**
THAT** is what has “gone seriously wrong” in our society.

This weekend I stopped into a PetSmart to buy cat food for the wife’s cats and then went next door to a Barnes & Noble. There about a dozen or so leashed dogs walking around the pet store with their people. No fuss, no bother.

The book store had about the same number of kids, but only a few of them were being adequately supervised by their parents.

There were two brothers who were playing “tag” in the aisles while their mother talked on a cellphone and occasionally told “Dylan” and/or “Tyler” to “Stop that!” or “Come here!”

There was a little girl (4-5 years old) sitting in front of the magazine rack “coloring” an issue of “Foreign Affairs”.

There was another little girl who was literally lying on the floor kicking her feet and screaming that she wanted a particular book, while her father stood by quizzically looking at her saying “Come on 'becca, we’ve got to go now…come on”.

Yeah, the dogs were much better behaved…

 

[Allegra]

Not at anything like the rate of children. Do you really think that these restaurant owners and patrons are banning kids because their mean-spirited or grumpy? Now, they’re doing it because it is a problem.

…

I bet they’re doing it because it’s going to get them some more money. People will probably be happy to pay several bucks more per childless meal. I don’t understand why you have a problem with breast-feeding though.