So do you think there is really a distinction between 6 and 7 or 8? Also, not sure how many kids have IDs before their driver’s permit (unless they are military), so will parents need to bring their birth certificate, or can they just vouch for the age of their child?
I guess I meant that banning booster seats, high chairs,etc. would essentially accomplish the same thing.
I would agree that there isn;t a much of a difference between a child between the age of 6 and 7 and I think the restuarant maybe should have extend the ban a bit more. You have a point it is not going to be something the restuarant will be able to inforce exactly but you could probably look at most kids and tell in general about how old they are. And sure that might mean there will be some older looking 5 year olds that get in because they look old and their parents lie but I think in general it wonlt be impossible to inforce the ban.
Ahh ok I donlt think I saw booster seats before I read high chair and thought of infants and toddlers mainly. But yeah many kids 6 and under would have to use a booster seat.
Again, you are making assumptions about all children because a few bad experiences with some. Not all children may get fidgety, and maybe the parents will bring them coloring books so they can do that while sitting there. And not all places have to have kids’ menus for them to serve kids. Depending on the type of place, I’m sure one could find a chicken, pasta, or other meat dish which coulds could have (either shared or all depending on age). Also, you are now putting it on the parents to find a babysitter. Maybe they want their kid to come out with them. Maybe it’s the kid’s 1st birthday, and they want to have a nice dinner out to celebrate that they started a family.
Sure I’ve overstated it and no one posting here is calling for a ban on children in public-- yet. But these are the first steps. Just in this thread we’ve gone from people wanting small children banned from “nice” restaurants to people wanting **all **children banned from not just “nice” restaurants but hotels, grocery stores have been suggested and even a movie theatre by implication. The list will grow. I simply think it is a sad commentary on the state of our society. Children used to be a blessing and people liked to be around children. Today children seem to be seen as a burden and increasingly more and more people want to get away from children–including, sadly, the children’s own parents. I am amazed by the number of my childrens school mates who’s parents take an annual vacation without their children. I can hear the calls already–lets make this area of the city a “children free zone” an area where I can shop and eat and hang out without the threat of seeing a child – the mere sight of which will somehow ruin my day. Maybe those children who misbehave would behave better if the adults in their life and society weren’t fleeing from them or ignoring them or shoving them off to “child friendly” places by which I gather you mean places where they can misbehave–which shouldn’t be allowed anywhere. Children can sit still at the table without fussing–it is a matter of training and expectation.
Spot on, sir. I am in full support of every single one of those statements, and pray that more people accept the presence of children as a blessing, even if it may be a disturbance at times.Sure I’ve overstated it and no one posting here is calling for a ban on children in public-- yet. But these are the first steps. Just in this thread we’ve gone from people wanting small children banned from “nice” restaurants to people wanting **all **children banned from not just “nice” restaurants but hotels, grocery stores have been suggested and even a movie theatre by implication. The list will grow. I simply think it is a sad commentary on the state of our society. Children used to be a blessing and people liked to be around children. Today children seem to be seen as a burden and increasingly more and more people want to get away from children–including, sadly, the children’s own parents. I am amazed by the number of my childrens school mates who’s parents take an annual vacation without their children. I can hear the calls already–lets make this area of the city a “children free zone” an area where I can shop and eat and hang out without the threat of seeing a child – the mere sight of which will somehow ruin my day. Maybe those children who misbehave would behave better if the adults in their life and society weren’t fleeing from them or ignoring them or shoving them off to “child friendly” places by which I gather you mean places where they can misbehave–which shouldn’t be allowed anywhere. Children can sit still at the table without fussing–it is a matter of training and expectation.
And please lets stop with all the “a business should have a right to cater to who ever they want to” talk. Those saying this seem resistant to the idea that restaurants should be able to exclude african americans, catholics, jews, homosexuals etc. claiming that somehow that’s just unreasonable. Why? What if the owner gets complaints? That was the original justification given for banning children–the owner had complaints. Guess what I bet the owner gets complaints about his food and service–all restaurants do no matter how good they are–yet they don’t stop serving food and providing service–and lets be honest lousy service or a bad meal ruin the outing a lot more than a fussy child at the next table. Complaints come with running a business and all businesses get them. Customers will not stop patronizing the establishment if they have a reasonable policy for dealing with problems–like unruly customers additionally a well stated policy will minimize those problems–and patrons will appreciate that.
No one has explained how the well behaved child sitting at the table next to you ruins your experience? How does it bother you? Why does it bother you?
Finally what you experienced at your local version of Hooters was not a child problem but a parent problem–parents who took their children to the type of place that no adult should patronize let alone where a parent should take their children --parents who by your account ignored their children–and you’re blaming the children for this–as if it is a child problem. Further you describe the place as “loud and crowed” like that was a reason the ladies shouldn’t have brought their children there saying the kids did “pretty well” despite that fact. If the place is already “loud and crowed” how could a couple of kids being “fussy” be what ruins the expenence. It would seem a loud and crowed place would be just the place for children–it is the “Hooters” aspect that makes the place unsuitable for children–in my opinion–though in this society I seem to be in the minority on that.
I am not a big “family and kids” restaurant type of person and if my kids can behave I don’t see why they shouldn’t be able to eat out with us and if they behave I don’t see how they ruin your experience or why it should bother you that they are there.
Scoff and attack away
Peace,
Mark
Are you really telling us all (most of us older than you with children and grandchildren), that you have never been in a restaurant, movie, cruiseship or especially AIRPLANE where children haven’t driven you nuts? I’ve taught high school for 31 years, I have patience, but when you spend $3K on a cruise vacation or $2500 to fly to Europe, the last thing you want to be is trapped with a screaming kid or small kids that the parents don’t control. There are many establishments that children are not allowed to enter - especially those serving alcohol. What is wrong with hiring a babysitter for an evening for your child under the age of 6? Obviously at a place like DisneyWorld, I would expect children of all ages to be admitted everywhere, however, if I’m going to spend $200 on a nice dinner at Ruth Chriss, I don’t want to sit next to a screaming 13 month old with poopy diapers!
Yes, I am. I have been around bratty children, fussy babies, breast-feeding in public, stinky diapers, and the like. Do I notice it? How could I not. Do I wish I could have avoided being around it - sometimes. But did I ever let it ruin an evening, destroy a romantic date, or drive me nuts? Not in the least bit. I don’t believe I’m special, I don’t believe I just go to places where kids aren’t. I just don’t let it bother me, just like hearing drunk people yelling their slurred speech at a bar doesn’t ruin me watching the game while I sip my craft beer.Are you really telling us all (most of us older than you with children and grandchildren), that you have never been in a restaurant, movie, cruiseship or especially AIRPLANE where children haven’t driven you nuts? I’ve taught high school for 31 years, I have patience, but when you spend $3K on a cruise vacation or $2500 to fly to Europe, the last thing you want to be is trapped with a screaming kid or small kids that the parents don’t control. There are many establishments that children are not allowed to enter - especially those serving alcohol. What is wrong with hiring a babysitter for an evening for your child under the age of 6? Obviously at a place like DisneyWorld, I would expect children of all ages to be admitted everywhere, however, if I’m going to spend $200 on a nice dinner at Ruth Chriss, I don’t want to sit next to a screaming 13 month old with poopy diapers!
Sure no one wants to sit next to loud misbehaving people–kids or adults. I just don’t think–based on my experience–that most kids wildly misbehave in public annoying all adults they come in contact with and that the best way to stop the behavior is to simply ban all children the good with the bad.Are you really telling us all (most of us older than you with children and grandchildren), that you have never been in a restaurant, movie, cruiseship or especially AIRPLANE where children haven’t driven you nuts?
I am really telling you YES. I have no idea how old you are but I will be 50 soon. Never ever been driven nuts by a child in a restaurant, movie, cruiseship or AIRPLANE. I have been annoyed by rude, drunk and unruly adults on numerous occassions but I refuse to let them drive me nuts or ruin my evening.
I’ve taught high school for 31 years, I have patience, but when you spend $3K on a cruise vacation or $2500 to fly to Europe, the last thing you want to be is trapped with a screaming kid or small kids that the parents don’t control.
So basically you’re saying people with kids can’t travel overseas unless they rent their own small private plane–so as to spare you the risk of being driven nuts. The person with kids is spending the same money per seat as you are to fly overseas.
There are many establishments that children are not allowed to enter - especially those serving alcohol. What is wrong with hiring a babysitter for an evening for your child under the age of 6?
Nothing, but If my children know how to behave and do behave why can’t they come out for a nice diner with their parents? We have often done that after the ballet (yes we take them to the ballet and I know its hard to believe but they manage to sit still and be quiet) with no issues. Why should I be relegated to some place like Red Robin or some pizza joint?
Obviously at a place like DisneyWorld,
Given the space and range of activities available on a cruise ship how is a cruise ship so different from DisneyWorld?
I would expect children of all ages to be admitted everywhere, however, if I’m going to spend $200 on a nice dinner at Ruth Chriss, I don’t want to sit next to a screaming 13 month old with poopy diapers!
Yes because thats all 13 month old children do. I find they spend more time sleeping and playing quietly than they do screaming. Just last month we were at a very nice restaurant and at the table next to us was a baby of roughly the age you cite–slept the whole time they were there–not a peep, no screaming, no poopy diapers. Imagine the nerve of that child! I should have told those parents they better wake that child up and make it scream–don’t want to disappoint people.
Oh and I don’t want to sit next to some cranky old person who complains about how their steak is cooked, how long it’s taking, that the service isn’t good enough, theirs not enough vodka in this martini or next to some self-important adult who can’t stop talking on their smart phone.
I think some people on this thread just really like to debate, because the argument keeps shifting around from “Does a restaurant have a right to limit its patronage?” to “Can restaurants ban blacks and Jews?” which is beyond absurd. Why is it beyond absurd? If the argument is that restaurants can exclude whoever they want–and thats the argument advanced–why is it absurd? If a restaurant has the absolute right to limit its patronage–why is it absurd to ask it that right extends to excluding african americans and jews? We are not all that far removed from a time when african americans were excluded from places, from a time when businesses put up signs that said “catholics need not apply”, etc.
Beyond absurd–really?
Our current child-centered yet also child-killing society is very narcissistic this way. MY child isn’t disruptive so MY child ought to be able to go anywhere I’d like him to. YOU people ought to be more patient with MY child!
In this country, we still have somewhat of a free market, which means that businesses can find a target demographic to cater to. Most businesses, restaurants included, do allow young children and try to make everyone’s experience as happy as possible. But any business is free to choose its demographic. For example, I know a restaurant that is located in a primarily black area of town. Their menu is food that their demographic enjoys. They don’t stop people of other races coming in, but they also don’t make any changes to their menu to accommodate other ethnicities’ preferences. They don’t offer any Tex-Mex options, IOW. Should they have to do that, or is OK that they have decided on what their customers like and enjoy and that they have designed their menu accordingly? There is a huge difference between serving a particular style of food–and being open to anyone who wants to eat it–and banning a particular group of people. Its apples to oranges. To be truthful I don’t see a lot of small children at expensive upscale restraunts–and when I do–I don’t find them being loud and unruly.
The same with higher-end restaurants - should they have to accommodate young children who get impatient with a long evening out, causing disruption, demanding chicken strips when the menu is fine dishes, crying and fussing which disrupts other diners? Why should any child be dragged out on a nice evening when the parents ought to look forward to being together without their children? Are babysitters suddenly out of the question? Do parents really believe that their children ought to be allowed to go anywhere and everywhere in society? There is that narcissism that says “I will do what I want and damn everyone else!” (oddly enough, that includes the children, because frequently they are out too late for their own comfort…) What is funny is this narcissism you speak of also says “I want to be free of children when I am out in public and damn all those with kids I’m banning them” Oh wait thats what you want so its not narcissism is it.
I fully support businesses that decide for themselves what their business model is, and if the market doesn’t support them, then they will fail. No intervention is necessary at all. If you don’t wish to patronize those particular businesses, then don’t. But don’t take away that option for the rest of us. I would definitely go to a restaurant that excluded children under 14. By then, they have stopped wanting to be with Mom and Dad anyway.
(p.s. - There’s one local chain that charges $50 per person and I don’t see very many children there. Adults seem to want not to pay $50 for a kid to eat 6 olives and a piece of chicken.)
Just because something is open to the public doesn;t mean it is family oriented. Would you say hooters is family oriented? Also many of these restuarants like I pointed out are not equiped for young kids at all. There is going to be no booster seats or highchairs or kids menus. They probably are not going to like 99% of what is on the menu though I think kids no adays are WAY to picky but that another topic I mean I donlt have kids someone with kids could probably give more examples.
Thanks for pointing this out!
But if you go back to the original point of this thread, the comparison was on gender identification or sexual preferences. These do not have any history of some sort of specialized legal class. Instead, these practices have been banned or illegal in the practice. In any case, the “we’ve always done it this way” is a poor argument. That is what the South used to fight the Civil Rights movement. Should we have not had any civil rights legislation because we had a “long history” of segregation?
I’m not really sure how you got the “we’ve always done it this way” argument out of my statements. I was just pointing out the “slippery slope” argument stating if we ban children we can use the same logic to ban someone else probably wouldn’t hold up in court. The courts treat children differently than adults.
Hooters is not a family-oriented restaurant because its scantily clad women and heavy focus on booze - its menu is mostly made up of wings and other ‘bar’ food. My point was that a restaurant doesn’t need to have giant stuffed animals, arcade games, and a ball pit to be ‘family friendly.’ And if the business doesn’t want to stock their own booster seats or high chairs, that’s fine. If they don’t want a kids’ menu, better for them. But please, don’t make claims like how certain you are that kids won’t eat 99% of what’s on the menu. Most places have simple meat, seafood, or pasta dishes - it’s not like fancy restaurants only serve foie gras and escargot!
Just wanted to point out that the argument wasn’t necessarily that it would be legal to ban everyone under the current legal system. The point was made to refute the argument of several people that privately-owned establishments (by this I can only guess non-governmental as opposed to ‘publicly traded’ companies) should have the right to ban who they want. We simply took this statement and extended the application to Jews, African-Americans, and other examples of groups who haven’t always been allowed to enter certain establishments.