|
Post by Andrew is Good on Feb 19, 2013 11:04:36 GMT -5
How about you do something nice for the parent who has to deal with the stress of the baby crying in their lap? They have a lot more on their minds and a lot more to deal with then the comfort of other people. f*** other people, they have a crying baby to worry about. You think it sucks to hear a crying baby, what about the parent themselves? Because it's their baby and they chose to have it along with the headaches that accompany it. That's like saying "How about you do something nice for a crack addict!??!" I don't even understand the comparison and where to begin with how absurd that sounds. It's a f***ing baby. Good god. They choose to have it along, maybe because they'd like their baby to be in their life, and they'd like to actually take care of the baby. I'm at a loss for words. It's not a crack addict, it's a parent with a child, holy crap. Why are three simple words, "Deal with it" so hard to understand. Again, as someone who has flown a s*** ton in his life, it's not that hard to deal with. It's almost like, complaining because you need something to complain about. Life isn't always perfect, but if you always are focusing on the negative aspects, like a baby is crying and woe is me, then these things are going to be bigger problems to you in the end. And I'm with PapaEmeritus, explain that absurd comparison. And it's not being selfish, he's a parent, how unselfish can you be? And you know what, maybe he is being a bit selfish, I would be too if I was taking care of a child, doing everything so unselfishly, except for this one convenience of high speed travel via an airplane.
|
|
biafra
El Dandy
Biafra Who?
Posts: 7,617
|
Post by biafra on Feb 19, 2013 11:05:30 GMT -5
I think that the right of a person to have a family member in their general vicinity outweighs your right to not hear crying. Ear plugs. Ipod. Realizing the world doesn't always revolve around you; much simpler than planning birth control around the possability of annoying a stranger. I would disagree about the first part you said. That's not a right - that's a choice that person made. There's no inalienable human right to take your baby on a plane. It's a luxury. I never said -don't have a baby. I'm just saying you can't choose to have a child and then throw up your hands and say "DEAL WITH IT WORLD!!!" Consideration should go both ways - it shouldn't ONLY be placed on the people who didn't bring their kids into that situation. Both parties should attempt to be considerate of the other. If you believe that a parent shouldn't have to be considerate of others - then that's where we disagree and its best to leave it at that. Parenting issues are always very touchy and we'll probably just go round and round. My only point was - both parties should work to "just get over it" as you put it. I try my best to avoid putting my young child in any situation I can not remove her from if she gets fussy. I have even left concerts I paid good money to see because I felt she was bothering everyone else. But sometimes it is unavoidable. In those circumstances, people can f*** off. Is it right? Wrong? I don't care. It's that way it is. She is my kid and the stranger is a stranger. Her needs come first.
|
|
biafra
El Dandy
Biafra Who?
Posts: 7,617
|
Post by biafra on Feb 19, 2013 11:06:46 GMT -5
Again, you're using a child as a way to justify being selfish. I put my child's needs above the comforts of strangers. I don't apologize for it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2013 11:07:44 GMT -5
Because it's their baby and they chose to have it along with the headaches that accompany it. That's like saying "How about you do something nice for a crack addict!??!" I don't even understand the comparison and where to begin with how absurd that sounds. It's a f***ing baby. Good god. They choose to have it along, maybe because they'd like their baby to be in their life, and they'd like to actually take care of the baby. I'm at a loss for words. It's not a crack addict, it's a parent with a child, holy crap. Why are three simple words, "Deal with it" so hard to understand. Again, as someone who has flown a s*** ton in his life, it's not that hard to deal with. It's almost like, complaining because you need something to complain about. Life isn't always perfect, but if you always are focusing on the negative aspects, like a baby is crying and woe is me, then these things are going to be bigger problems to you in the end. Exactly - they chose to have it. So take care of your baby, but how does bringing it on a plane, an apparently VERY PAINFUL experience for some babies, come even close to "taking care of it.' By all means, take care of the child, but parents need to deal with the fact that just because they chose to have a kid and the burdens (and joys) associated with it - doesn't mean anyone else is expected to sacrifice their convenience to make a parent's life more convenient.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2013 11:10:32 GMT -5
I would disagree about the first part you said. That's not a right - that's a choice that person made. There's no inalienable human right to take your baby on a plane. It's a luxury. I never said -don't have a baby. I'm just saying you can't choose to have a child and then throw up your hands and say "DEAL WITH IT WORLD!!!" Consideration should go both ways - it shouldn't ONLY be placed on the people who didn't bring their kids into that situation. Both parties should attempt to be considerate of the other. If you believe that a parent shouldn't have to be considerate of others - then that's where we disagree and its best to leave it at that. Parenting issues are always very touchy and we'll probably just go round and round. My only point was - both parties should work to "just get over it" as you put it. I try my best to avoid putting my young child in any situation I can not remove her from if she gets fussy. I have even left concerts I paid good money to see because I felt she was bothering everyone else. But sometimes it is unavoidable. In those circumstances, people can f*** off. Is it right? Wrong? I don't care. It's that way it is. She is my kid and the stranger is a stranger. Her needs come first. Hey you know what? What you do sounds like more than what most parents to do to be honest and that's the kind of stuff I'm talking about. Consideration going BOTH ways. Too many parents believe "I'm a parent - XYZ rules don't apply to me cause of my baby!" which is BS. You want to put your kid first - of course you should, but by that same token of what you were talking about above - that kid isn't their kid, you're a stranger to them and the attitude of "people can f*** off" goes both ways. Shy of actually pimp smacking a 2 year old of course. haha!
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Feb 19, 2013 11:12:20 GMT -5
I don't even understand the comparison and where to begin with how absurd that sounds. It's a f***ing baby. Good god. They choose to have it along, maybe because they'd like their baby to be in their life, and they'd like to actually take care of the baby. I'm at a loss for words. It's not a crack addict, it's a parent with a child, holy crap. Why are three simple words, "Deal with it" so hard to understand. Again, as someone who has flown a s*** ton in his life, it's not that hard to deal with. It's almost like, complaining because you need something to complain about. Life isn't always perfect, but if you always are focusing on the negative aspects, like a baby is crying and woe is me, then these things are going to be bigger problems to you in the end. Exactly - they chose to have it. So take care of your baby, but how does bringing it on a plane, an apparently VERY PAINFUL experience for some babies, come even close to "taking care of it.' By all means, take care of the child, but parents need to deal with the fact that just because they chose to have a kid and the burdens (and joys) associated with it - doesn't mean anyone else is expected to sacrifice their convenience to make a parent's life more convenient. It can be painful with ear popping and such, but again, sometimes it's simply necessary. And good god, what sacrifice? Get some earplugs, get an iphone, and quit complaining, that's all you need to do. Oh, there's a baby on a plane, they can't do much about it. How about some empathy for others, is that too much to ask? Maybe someday you or people you care about will be in that position, and that's why a lot of people give and ask for special treatment. Sometimes they need it, and someday, you, I, and others will need it. It goes both ways, because maybe someday you'll be force into a situation where you have to take a child with you on a plane, and you'll wish for the understanding of other people.
|
|
|
Post by salsashark on Feb 19, 2013 11:13:32 GMT -5
You know what? I'm actually going to veer over to the other side far more with this subject the more I think about it, and some of you (especially Cantus Fraggle) are speaking sense, so I'll reconsider my position. Being vague hasn't helped either, so I'll specify a few things. I think it'd be considerate to hand out those candy bags for, say, 20 to 25 people within your vicinity. On a flight of however many hundred-ish passengers, it'd be ridiculous to give one out to everyone. I never said that, but I was never specific either. You have to use your judgment. The average loud baby would only really bother people within a close radius, so do something nice for them. If you can by any means, don't take a baby on a flight. I'm not going to say never take one on there for multiple reasons, but I'd say rule of thumb is to not do it. We've been discussing several extreme examples in this thread, and I don't know why most people are transporting kids, but whatever the case is, keep it light at least until they are 2 or 3 years old. Also, two or three years really isn't that long of a time to keep away from something like air travel barring extenuating circumstances. Why do parents have to do that, I think that's stupid. Maybe like, one or two if the parents feel like it, but they shouldn't have to put money into the potential of a baby crying. How about you do something nice for the parent who has to deal with the stress of the baby crying in their lap? They have a lot more on their minds and a lot more to deal with then the comfort of other people. f*** other people, they have a crying baby to worry about. You think it sucks to hear a crying baby, what about the parent themselves? And as well, there are funerals, maybe they need to go certain places. Maybe a parent does try to limit their travel as much as possible, but there are tons of other parents trying to do the same thing, and they happen to be on that one flight. Parents shouldn't have to think, well, I have a human being to look after, I should reconsider my options with flying. It all comes down to 3 simple words. Deal with it. I've flown all around the world, and I fly back and forth from my job. I haven't flown as much as some, but I've flown a lot. Deal with it. Lord, what is with the attitude? This subject really riles you up. Please speak to me with a bit of courtesy. Why do parents have to do that, I think that's stupid. Maybe like, one or two if the parents feel like it, but they shouldn't have to put money into the potential of a baby crying.
How about you do something nice for the parent who has to deal with the stress of the baby crying in their lap? They have a lot more on their minds and a lot more to deal with then the comfort of other people. f*** other people, they have a crying baby to worry about. You think it sucks to hear a crying baby, what about the parent themselves?No one asked you to reproduce. You knew the terms of the agreement when you had a child. Taking care of kids is not easy. Just as other people shouldn't have put money into the potential of a baby crying, I shouldn't have to put money and be rewarded with a source of constant noise in an area I can't leave. It's like non-parentless passengers are second-class citizens -- we are paying just like everyone else is and not bothering anyone. Why should I have to do something nice for them when I'm not the one initiating any problem in the first place? Yeah, "f*** other people," that's a good way to go in public situations. That does a lot of good in making society better. It all comes down to 3 simple words. Deal with it. I've flown all around the world, and I fly back and forth from my job. I haven't flown as much as some, but I've flown a lot. Deal with it.On the flip side, how about you deal with the fact that not everyone wants to hear a child crying after spending, as Ghidorah pointed out, hundreds of dollars and being trapped in a confined space with them? If you want to use this base "Deal with it" response, how about dealing with the idea that the world doesn't revolve you and your child either and since you are the one inconveniencing others by bringing on a human who is clearly not mature enough to deal with the experience yet, doing something nice for others would be the way to go? If this is turning into some kind of bizarre flying dick-measuring contest, I'll bite. I've flown around the world, too. I was been flying internationally from Pakistan to Texas unaccompanied from 13 to something like 19 or 20, and I've traveled dozens and dozens of times across the United States.
|
|
biafra
El Dandy
Biafra Who?
Posts: 7,617
|
Post by biafra on Feb 19, 2013 11:14:43 GMT -5
It does go both ways as far as I am concerned. I do not take my child to see adult or even teen movies. Kids movies some noise is expected but even then if she is crying and obviously not enjoying herself we leave. We went to a Christmas concert, we stayed until she got fussy and it started to get in the way of the enjoyment of other people. I would not take my child on a flight if the rason for the flight wasn't important. But IF she is there...and I am doing all I can to make her comfortable people are going to have to get over that fact.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2013 11:17:20 GMT -5
Exactly - they chose to have it. So take care of your baby, but how does bringing it on a plane, an apparently VERY PAINFUL experience for some babies, come even close to "taking care of it.' By all means, take care of the child, but parents need to deal with the fact that just because they chose to have a kid and the burdens (and joys) associated with it - doesn't mean anyone else is expected to sacrifice their convenience to make a parent's life more convenient. It can be painful with ear popping and such, but again, sometimes it's simply necessary. And good god, what sacrifice? Get some earplugs, get an iphone, and quit complaining, that's all you need to do. Oh, there's a baby on a plane, they can't do much about it. How about some empathy for others, is that too much to ask? Maybe someday you or people you care about will be in that position, and that's why a lot of people give and ask for special treatment. Sometimes they need it, and someday, you, I, and others will need it. Hey man, babies crying on planes don't bother me one bit. It's not about me. It's about the principle of the matter. I mean, I never flew on a plane when I was a baby. Partially because we couldn't afford plan tickets growing up. That's right taking a plane is a LUXURY! My main point was that all this talk of people feeling "entitled" because they have to deal with a crying baby is one-sided in that there's equal amounts of entitlement from people who believe flying on a plane isn't one of the biggest luxuries we have and can't see that they're equally entitled for expecting everyone else to accommodate their child. IT SHOULD GO BOTH WAYS. That's my point.
|
|
King Ghidorah
El Dandy
On Probation for Charges of two counts of Saxual Music.
How Absurd
Posts: 8,330
|
Post by King Ghidorah on Feb 19, 2013 11:18:15 GMT -5
Again, you're using a child as a way to justify being selfish. I put my child's needs above the comforts of strangers. I don't apologize for it. It goes both ways
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Feb 19, 2013 11:19:20 GMT -5
Why do parents have to do that, I think that's stupid. Maybe like, one or two if the parents feel like it, but they shouldn't have to put money into the potential of a baby crying. How about you do something nice for the parent who has to deal with the stress of the baby crying in their lap? They have a lot more on their minds and a lot more to deal with then the comfort of other people. f*** other people, they have a crying baby to worry about. You think it sucks to hear a crying baby, what about the parent themselves? And as well, there are funerals, maybe they need to go certain places. Maybe a parent does try to limit their travel as much as possible, but there are tons of other parents trying to do the same thing, and they happen to be on that one flight. Parents shouldn't have to think, well, I have a human being to look after, I should reconsider my options with flying. It all comes down to 3 simple words. Deal with it. I've flown all around the world, and I fly back and forth from my job. I haven't flown as much as some, but I've flown a lot. Deal with it. Lord, what is with the attitude? This subject really riles you up. Please speak to me with a bit of courtesy. Why do parents have to do that, I think that's stupid. Maybe like, one or two if the parents feel like it, but they shouldn't have to put money into the potential of a baby crying.
How about you do something nice for the parent who has to deal with the stress of the baby crying in their lap? They have a lot more on their minds and a lot more to deal with then the comfort of other people. f*** other people, they have a crying baby to worry about. You think it sucks to hear a crying baby, what about the parent themselves?No one asked you to reproduce. You knew the terms of the agreement when you had a child. Taking care of kids is not easy. Just as other people shouldn't have put money into the potential of a baby crying, I shouldn't have to put money and be rewarded with a source of constant noise in an area I can't leave. It's like non-parentless passengers are second-class citizens -- we are paying just like everyone else is and not bothering anyone. Why should I have to do something nice for them when I'm not the one initiating any problem in the first place? Yeah, "f*** other people," that's a good way to go in public situations. That does a lot of good in making society better. It all comes down to 3 simple words. Deal with it. I've flown all around the world, and I fly back and forth from my job. I haven't flown as much as some, but I've flown a lot. Deal with it.On the flip side, how about you deal with the fact that not everyone wants to hear a child crying after spending, as Ghidorah pointed out, hundreds of dollars and being trapped in a confined space with them? If you want to use this base "Deal with it" response, how about dealing with the idea that the world doesn't revolve you and your child either and since you are the one inconveniencing others by bringing on a human who is clearly not mature enough to deal with the experience yet, doing something nice for others would be the way to go? If this is turning into some kind of bizarre flying dick-measuring contest, I'll bite. I've flown around the world, too. I was been flying internationally from Pakistan to Texas unaccompanied from 13 to something like 19 or 20, and I've traveled dozens and dozens of times across the United States. I have an attitude because this is absurd. It's not supposed to be such a big deal, but you're making a mountain out of a molehill, and I'm flabbergasted that this argument exists. No, parenting isn't easy, so why not give them a few special conveniences, because parenting again isn't easy as you said, and hell, you could be in their shoes one day. I feel this whole debate can also figure into actual political debates of, well, you didn't have to choose to ride that motorcycle and get into that accident. The fact that you're saying that non-parents are like second class citizens really shows that you're making this incredibly dramatic. I don't feel like a second class citizen when I travel and hear babies crying. Again, you're being really dramatic. Just like the world doesn't revolve around the parent, the world doesn't revolve around you either. And the reason I brought up my flying history is because I learned to deal with it. Why haven't you? Again, with Numero99, is it giving some entitlement? Yeah, probably. But again, I think that maybe someday, I'll need help, and they'll help me. That's how my mind operates with everything. I'll be understanding of them, and in return, it can be reciprocated. If a guy is in a wheel chair, and needs extra room, I don't go, f*** you, you chose to be in that car when it got hit by another car, why do you get on a plane first and not me? A bit of an extreme case, better then a crack addict comparison though, good lord, what was that. And this comparison is more apt, because parents with small children and people who need assistance get on the plane first, so it does make sense.
|
|
biafra
El Dandy
Biafra Who?
Posts: 7,617
|
Post by biafra on Feb 19, 2013 11:20:40 GMT -5
It can be painful with ear popping and such, but again, sometimes it's simply necessary. And good god, what sacrifice? Get some earplugs, get an iphone, and quit complaining, that's all you need to do. Oh, there's a baby on a plane, they can't do much about it. How about some empathy for others, is that too much to ask? Maybe someday you or people you care about will be in that position, and that's why a lot of people give and ask for special treatment. Sometimes they need it, and someday, you, I, and others will need it. Hey man, babies crying on planes don't bother me one bit. It's not about me. It's about the principle of the matter. I mean, I never flew on a plane when I was a baby. Partially because we couldn't afford plan tickets growing up. That's right taking a plane is a LUXURY! My main point was that all this talk of people feeling "entitled" because they have to deal with a crying baby is one-sided in that there's equal amounts of entitlement from people who believe flying on a plane isn't one of the biggest luxuries we have and can't see that they're equally entitled for expecting everyone else to accommodate their child. IT SHOULD GO BOTH WAYS. That's my point. I'm willing to agree that parents should take every precaution and action they can to prevent their child from being an annoyance to others, at the same time that IF those parents are doing that people need to cut some slack. And at no point is it ok to take it upon yourself to do or say anything to the child. Fair or not, at that parental instincts kick in and it's usually going to be an asswhooping. But overall, I think we have come to a reasonable agreement.
|
|
|
Post by salsashark on Feb 19, 2013 11:32:36 GMT -5
Lord, what is with the attitude? This subject really riles you up. Please speak to me with a bit of courtesy. Why do parents have to do that, I think that's stupid. Maybe like, one or two if the parents feel like it, but they shouldn't have to put money into the potential of a baby crying.
How about you do something nice for the parent who has to deal with the stress of the baby crying in their lap? They have a lot more on their minds and a lot more to deal with then the comfort of other people. f*** other people, they have a crying baby to worry about. You think it sucks to hear a crying baby, what about the parent themselves?No one asked you to reproduce. You knew the terms of the agreement when you had a child. Taking care of kids is not easy. Just as other people shouldn't have put money into the potential of a baby crying, I shouldn't have to put money and be rewarded with a source of constant noise in an area I can't leave. It's like non-parentless passengers are second-class citizens -- we are paying just like everyone else is and not bothering anyone. Why should I have to do something nice for them when I'm not the one initiating any problem in the first place? Yeah, "f*** other people," that's a good way to go in public situations. That does a lot of good in making society better. It all comes down to 3 simple words. Deal with it. I've flown all around the world, and I fly back and forth from my job. I haven't flown as much as some, but I've flown a lot. Deal with it.On the flip side, how about you deal with the fact that not everyone wants to hear a child crying after spending, as Ghidorah pointed out, hundreds of dollars and being trapped in a confined space with them? If you want to use this base "Deal with it" response, how about dealing with the idea that the world doesn't revolve you and your child either and since you are the one inconveniencing others by bringing on a human who is clearly not mature enough to deal with the experience yet, doing something nice for others would be the way to go? If this is turning into some kind of bizarre flying dick-measuring contest, I'll bite. I've flown around the world, too. I was been flying internationally from Pakistan to Texas unaccompanied from 13 to something like 19 or 20, and I've traveled dozens and dozens of times across the United States. I have an attitude because this is absurd. It's not supposed to be such a big deal, but you're making a mountain out of a molehill, and I'm flabbergasted that this argument exists. No, parenting isn't easy, so why not give them a few special conveniences, because parenting again isn't easy as you said, and hell, you could be in their shoes one day. I feel this whole debate can also figure into actual political debates of, well, you didn't have to choose to ride that motorcycle and get into that accident. The fact that you're saying that non-parents are like second class citizens really shows that you're making this incredibly dramatic. I don't feel like a second class citizen when I travel and hear babies crying. Again, you're being really dramatic. Just like the world doesn't revolve around the parent, the world doesn't revolve around you either. And the reason I brought up my flying history is because I learned to deal with it. Why haven't you? Calling me dramatic when you're the one who wants to go for the throat on an issue I even swayed on and should my openness to is really the height of absurdity. People can deal with 10,000 things, but that doesn't mean they're not inconveniences which, with a bit of social courtesy as small as making a few f***ing ZipLoc bags of bulk candy from the grocery store (speaking of spending money, I'm sure that's a huge expense -- much more costly than buying plane tickets), can be made into better experiences. I deal with people who mispronounce my name, I deal with people on bikes who cut me off in traffic, I deal with things not going my way a billion times a day. That's life. However, that does not mean life has to be written one way in concrete 24/7. If something can be changed to accommodate that from the person inconveniencing the others, by all means implement it. It's why autos should yield to pedestrians at crosswalks. I mean, autos don't have to stop--the pedestrians can just deal with it--but allowing pedestrians to pass because finding gaps in fewer and far between and far more dangerous is an implementation of social courtesy. Who is more inconvenienced in roads without crosswalks? Autos, who are bulky and fast and can dominate the road, or people, who have to worry about getting clipped and often spend a lot of time waiting to pass if the intersection is particularly busy? Also, just because you choose to have a kid doesn't mean the world revolves around you and your offspring now. I want to have a kid some day -- I genuinely believe I'd make an excellent father -- and part of me going into that deal is realizing that the social rules of certain circumstances have changed.
|
|
biafra
El Dandy
Biafra Who?
Posts: 7,617
|
Post by biafra on Feb 19, 2013 11:35:16 GMT -5
Its ok guys, Numero and I have reached a compromise. Sometimes all it takes is a guy in a death mask with inverted crosses all over him to see the reason and logic of the other side.
|
|
|
Post by salsashark on Feb 19, 2013 11:37:25 GMT -5
Its ok guys, Numero and I have reached a compromise. Sometimes all it takes is a guy in a death mask with inverted crosses all over him to see the reason and logic of the other side. I'm happy to hear that. I'm getting all hot and bothered and way late on some work I should have turned in an hour ago (this thread is so compelling), so I'll hopefully return later if this puppy isn't locked. Good games, everyone.
|
|
|
Post by Andrew is Good on Feb 19, 2013 11:40:43 GMT -5
I have an attitude because this is absurd. It's not supposed to be such a big deal, but you're making a mountain out of a molehill, and I'm flabbergasted that this argument exists. No, parenting isn't easy, so why not give them a few special conveniences, because parenting again isn't easy as you said, and hell, you could be in their shoes one day. I feel this whole debate can also figure into actual political debates of, well, you didn't have to choose to ride that motorcycle and get into that accident. The fact that you're saying that non-parents are like second class citizens really shows that you're making this incredibly dramatic. I don't feel like a second class citizen when I travel and hear babies crying. Again, you're being really dramatic. Just like the world doesn't revolve around the parent, the world doesn't revolve around you either. And the reason I brought up my flying history is because I learned to deal with it. Why haven't you? Calling me dramatic when you're the one who wants to go for the throat on an issue I even swayed on and should my openness to is really the height of absurdity. People can deal with 10,000 things, but that doesn't mean they're not inconveniences which, with a bit of social courtesy as small as making a few f***ing ZipLoc bags of bulk candy from the grocery store (speaking of spending money, I'm sure that's a huge expense -- much more costly than buying plane tickets), can be made into better experiences. I deal with people who mispronounce my name, I deal with people on bikes who cut me off in traffic, I deal with things not going my way a billion times a day. That's life. However, that does not mean life has to be written one way in concrete 24/7. If something can be changed to accommodate that from the person inconveniencing the others, by all means implement it. It's why autos should yield to pedestrians at crosswalks. I mean, autos don't have to stop--the pedestrians can just deal with it--but allowing pedestrians to pass because finding gaps in fewer and far between and far more dangerous is an implementation of social courtesy. Who is more inconvenienced in roads without crosswalks? Autos, who are bulky and fast and can dominate the road, or people, who have to worry about getting clipped and often spend a lot of time waiting to pass if the intersection is particularly busy? Also, just because you choose to have a kid doesn't mean the world revolves around you and your offspring now. I want to have a kid some day -- I genuinely believe I'd make an excellent father -- and part of me going into that deal is realizing that the social rules of certain circumstances have changed. Saying you're like a second class citizen because you have to tolerate a crying baby on a plane is dramatic. How can it not be viewed as anything else but that. I don't think I'm going for the throat, I'm just boggled by the absurdity and the cartoonish nature of this argument. Again, why do parents have to make up little baggy's for people? Why should they have to do something like that for other people? It's not necessary, and again, maybe they don't have that much money, and they just barely had enough to get those plane tickets to see the dead mother. Life doesn't have to be concrete. Sometimes, babies can be completely quiet on a flight, sometimes not. Just as you tolerate a cold, being cut off, or whatever, why not tolerate that? Again, earplugs, if you get good ones (granted, I take a bunch from work, I'm extra prepared for a flight as I enjoy travelling). And again, it's all about attitude. If a crying baby on a plane inconveniences you to the point where you're talking about being a second class citizen, maybe it's simply a change in attitude that needs to happen. And it's not meant as an insult, like, a change in disposition could probably help a lot more then making the parent do all the work. Having a kid, the world doesn't revolve around you. But, and I'm actually not a parent, but if I was, my world would revolve around the kid, and my hope would be that other people would understand that, and once I have a kid and he/she is grown, I'll be understanding of them with their child.
|
|
xCompackx
Wade Wilson
Posts: 27,328
Member is Online
|
Post by xCompackx on Feb 19, 2013 11:59:54 GMT -5
I'mma just say this and bow out since it's getting too heated: I like to think I'm a reasonable guy when it comes to others and if I had a child, I would make every attempt to find someone to watch him/her, but if I had to bring that child with me on a flight for whatever reason, I'll do that. Is it inconsiderate? Maybe, maybe not but part of being a parent means putting your child's needs first. I wouldn't expect any different from any other parent with their children, and it shouldn't make me look like a bad person for doing it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2013 16:53:04 GMT -5
I haven't read the story or the comments before page six but people are getting way to overdramatic. Like the arguement a flight costs a hundred couple of bucks be considerate. Well you're paying for the destination you want to be where the real vacation trip begins. I could care less about a 3-6 hour flight. Last time I was in a flight a baby was crying so I put on headphones and watched The Departed and after the HBO 24/7 series of the Penguins and Capitals buildup to the winter classic. Than I listened to some music on my phone while reading the paper.
Also I was a baby who flew on lots of planes because I had to have grandparents to watch my infant ass because my parents were working 120 hours each saving up for the future and building the buisness so it would be easier before I became a toddler. Plus parents need to be happy and treat themselves from time to time. Just because you had a kid doesn't mean you should be entitled to doom and gloom for the rest of your life or during those years. Unhappiness is contagious in the household.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2013 17:38:23 GMT -5
Again, with Numero99, is it giving some entitlement? Yeah, probably. But again, I think that maybe someday, I'll need help, and they'll help me. That's how my mind operates with everything. I'll be understanding of them, and in return, it can be reciprocated. If a guy is in a wheel chair, and needs extra room, I don't go, f*** you, you chose to be in that car when it got hit by another car, why do you get on a plane first and not me? A bit of an extreme case, better then a crack addict comparison though, good lord, what was that. And this comparison is more apt, because parents with small children and people who need assistance get on the plane first, so it does make sense. Getting hit by a car isn't a choice - it's something that happens to you. Having a child is something you choose to undertake (again, save for extreme circumstances). I see no problem with helping other people - just like you should see no problem with parents attempting to be considerate of other people as well. That's my whole point, the consideration and entitlement goes both ways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 19, 2013 17:46:50 GMT -5
When I visited London, our plane had to turn all the way back almost two-thirds of the way because of a broken window on the inside. Have nothing to add except that we started again right afterwords. Crazy shit.
|
|