Poll: No-kids-allowed movement. Yay or nay?

[Superballs]

I think we should just ban teenagers. And maybe young adults up to a point.

See...children are annoying, but what they have over teens and young adults is that children know they are annoying, and are probably doing it on purpose for attention or to try to push boundaries.

Teenagers and young adults don't seem to realize they are being annoying, they are being trendy, and excessively quoting movies and tvshows...and internet slang.

Funny thing is that in a so called free country you would actually seek to deny the freedoms of others simply because they have children. There are children free zones...usually they are bars, clubs, bingos, casinos and anywhere else that anyone under 18 shouldn't be allowed to go.

Furthermore, i think that it should be noted that anyone under 18 is in fact, still a child. So that at least takes care of the teenagers.

Now, on the flip-side, it's also a travesty that people let their children do whatever they want. These people make it harder for me bring my child - who is kept on a tight reign - out, since she sees what the other kids are doing and wants to do what they are doing. Of course she ends up in trouble, which neither her or I like.

I do speak to other parents when their children annoy me.

Other people I would like to see banned:
Those guys who order a coffee with 6 creams and 4.5 sugars, then spend 20 minutes complaining about how long it takes while i'm sitting behind them.

People who claim to like freedom but want to institute communist ideals like banning children from places of business.

 

[targren]

I never freaked out like this generation does, and it seems to have started from the no hitting children thing...

Might have something to do with it, now that you mention it. But you're right. It's not the kids.

Kids will be kids. The problem is that the parents don't seem to want to be parents.

 

[Bat Vader]

If a child is crying or screaming in a theater or a restaurant I will talk to the management and report them. I don't care how old the child is. If the parents cannot calm their child down they should be escorted out of the restaurant or theater. The same goes with people that talk on cell phones at the theater and people who cause a scene in a restaurant.

 

[deadxero]

What's most interesting about this pole is what is says about the demographic of the escapist rather than the actual topic =)

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

Idiotic.

There are already rules to handle these situations. Blanket bans like this are completely nonsensical and unnecessary when you can police individuals so easily in all of these situations. Loud kid in a restaurant? Staff can politely ask the family to leave. Loud kid in a movie theater? Staff can politely ask the family to leave.

Baby with the bathwater and all that.

The real problem is that most employees are so nervous about turning people away in the sort of cases these bans are supposed to address. It's not about the failure of the parents, it's about the failure of the staff to ever do anything about it. And you can actually help in these cases. Instead of just sitting through it and going on the internet to suggest that kids shouldn't be allowed in public places, tell the fucking staff to do their job. If someone's kid is bothering you, tell an employee to do something about it. If they don't act appropriately, ask to talk to a manager. If that doesn't work, they don't deserve your business - stop going there.

The amount of absurd naivity in this thread is staggering. Parents don't have magical abilities - there is no magic word that makes children suddenly behave. Many parents can't afford sitters. If it weren't reflective of a mind-blowingly immature real-world trend, I would normally find most of the posts here to be a pretty humorous indication of Escapist demographics (no kids, relatively affluent, relatively young).

 

[Jaime_Wolf]

If a child is crying or screaming in a theater or a restaurant I will talk to the management and report them. I don't care how old the child is. If the parents cannot calm their child down they should be escorted out of the restaurant or theater. The same goes with people that talk on cell phones at the theater and people who cause a scene in a restaurant.

This guy gets it.

This is part of the management's goddamn job. A blanket ban is just a way of letting them avoid having to do their job at the expense of a huge number of completely reasonable families.

 

[Flight]

I agree. There are simply some places children shouldn't be in, especially the ones who aren't capable of behaving.

 

[targren]

This is part of the management's goddamn job. A blanket ban is just a way of letting them avoid having to do their job at the expense of a huge number of completely reasonable families.

You've apparently never dealt with a member of the... shall we call them 'earthy?'... portions of the populations in this role? More often than not, bad kids come from bad parents and I've actually seen the father of one of the little monsters take a swing at the zit-faced minimum-wage kid who was trying to 'do his goddamn job.'

 

[NickCooley]

I'm sure everyone in this thread drove their parents to distraction on some occasion or another or cried in public as a baby or made too much noise etc. You annoyed everyone around you then and now in turn you have to suffer the new generation.

How self entitled are you people?

No less than these parents who are "inflicting" the "new generation" on us because they don't want to get a sitter rather than bringing a kid to completely inappropriate places.

Implying all parents have access to sitters at all times of day and night, or the cash to pay for them or the inclination to leave their child/children with a stranger who often isn't that much more than a child themselves (I've never seen a babysitter any older than 16). No lets force all parents to stash their children away to satiate your petty grudge against all things below puberty.

Or you could man up, grow a pair and stop getting so stroppy at these minor incoveniences at worst.

And after the checking the poll. Maker preserve me I never knew the Escapist was full of such bitter old grouches.

 

[tanithwolf]

Snip

1: I'm not quite sure if you're reffering to my post here, if you meant my comment on population decline, this link might help explain it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_decline#Decline_by_nation

2: The reason "uppity teens" are not allowed to drink and smoke, is because they are both harmful substances and the general consensus is that they should only be able to make the decision on taking them when they are adults. It is not discrimination when it is there to protect yourself and others from harm. It is discrimination to tell someone they cannot eat at a restaurant because they are not over a certain age, unless there is a very good reason such as adult entertainment at said restaurant.

3: You do realise not all parents want to just ged rid of their kids and go out for a night of partying. Amazingly some even want to bring their children out with them and be a family, crazy I know. Yes, parents should pay for babysitters, but they shouldn't have to leave their children behind when they're going out.

Regarding this comment: "Kids cost money. Deal with it or be smart enough not to have any". Please do not make silly generalisations. Yes kids cost money, wanting or having one does not indicate any sign of intelligence.

 

[Epona]

I never freaked out like this generation does, and it seems to have started from the no hitting children thing...

Might have something to do with it, now that you mention it. But you're right. It's not the kids.

Kids will be kids. The problem is that the parents don't seem to want to be parents.

..or are afraid or too confused to be. How much advice is out there telling parents to be their kids friend, talk to them as if they were just small adults, never spank them, never raise your voice to them, never this, never that. I'll bet that many parents don't know what to do with the hate and misinformation being thrown at them.

It's people like the whiners here (non parents who think that public places should be exactly to their liking) that are throwing the hate and misinformation.

 

[xmbts]

snip

But you are special right? That's why you get your way.

I've had my fill of this subject. Good sir I wish you luck in your future endeavors and many happy years with your fiance.

 

[The Becker]

Yes lets punish the ignorant muhahahaha [sarcasm]

 

[GeneralSeasick]

No. Children are people. Can they be annoying? Sure. But then again, so can anybody.

 

[targren]

Snip

2: The reason "uppity teens" are not allowed to drink and smoke, is because they are both harmful substances and the general consensus is that they should only be able to make the decision on taking them when they are adults. It is not discrimination when it is there to protect yourself and others from harm. It is discrimination to tell someone they cannot eat at a restaurant because they are not over a certain age, unless there is a very good reason such as adult entertainment at said restaurant.

You missed the point. The point is that a) this isn't about kids' rights and b) any argument that is centered on the premise of kids' rights, such as yours was, is a losing proposition.

3: You do realise not all parents want to just ged rid of their kids and go out for a night of partying. Amazingly some even want to bring their children out with them and be a family, crazy I know. Yes, parents should pay for babysitters, but they shouldn't have to leave their children behind when they're going out.

Absolutely. And they certainly should. But they should do it in ways and places that are appropriate to have a good family time, and they should keep their kids under control. This whole thing came about because of a tendency to do neither.

A restaurant with a real dress code (one that goes beyond "shirt and shoes required") and charges you for the glasses of water isn't that sort of place, and bringing your kids there because you can't be assed to get a sitter isn't a "family night out."

Regarding this comment: "Kids cost money. Deal with it or be smart enough not to have any". Please do not make silly generalisations. Yes kids cost money, wanting or having one does not indicate any sign of intelligence.

I wasn't making a generalization, but I was unclear. It meant if you can't deal with kids costing money (in other words, can't afford a kid), you shouldn't be having them.