Should a restaurant be able to turn away clients based on age?

[sho'nuff]

Originally Posted by kwilkinson

But....

they are, for the most part.

youre missing my point. they may be entitled. i dont like people who act entitled. there's a difference.

a baby crying in front of me when im sitting in a bus, if the lady looks apologetic and says 'sorry' to me, i dont mind it and i smile back.

a baby crying in front of me when im sitting in a bus, and the lady has a smug look on her face just waiting for someone to say something, not trying to hold the crying back, that i have a problem with.

 

[sho'nuff]

Originally Posted by mondayc

I went to Olive Garden once (hey, someone else paid for everything) and just as we were seated, the <1 year old baby at the next table started bawling. Bawling. Bawling. Finally our food gets there and the mom found out what was wrong. Dirty diaper. She started to change the baby right there on the ******* table.

Another time at a fancier restaurant, a kid threw some penne at his sister and missed. Direct hit on my cheek, though.

From now on, I ask to be seated at a table far away from any babies or kids.

that is DISGUSTING. I would have complained to the management discretely and asked to have been moved if i were with company.

if i were by myself? i would have said something to those parents.

 

[LA Guy]

Originally Posted by Piobaire

Could be. However, a late night in a +1 type environment carries with it certain social guidelines. I would submit that the people with the screaming brat are breaking the social guidelines of the venue, not the +1 situation. People not pleased with said screaming brat, may or may not get their evening ruined too easily, but that is rather not the point. The point is the couple sought out this time and location with a certain set of social expectations for the visit and their expectations are completely reasonable.

I agree with the late night scenario. There is really no reason that a young child can be expected to behave well after his or her bedtime, and it's selfish on the parent's part to keep a child up and out that late, though there may be mitigating circumstances (say, transoceanic travelers who are experiencing jetlag). However, if you are at the early, pre-show sitting, you've gotta expect that there will be children. A 9:00 sitting, however, yes, I can see how a patron might be put off a little. My point of contention is against people who seem to dislike the very fact that there are children in their midst. I don't think that that is a healthy attitude.

 

[LA Guy]

Originally Posted by sho'nuff

i love babies, but i dislike the parents who automatically think they are ENTITLED to bringing in their infant to anywhere.
basically, any entitled-feeling persons like:
smokers,
breast feeders
certain handicapped persons
some people who use race card and sex orientation card.

sheesh.

Originally Posted by sho'nuff

youre missing my point. they may be entitled. i dont like people who act entitled. there's a difference.

a baby crying in front of me when im sitting in a bus, if the lady looks apologetic and says 'sorry' to me, i dont mind it and i smile back.

a baby crying in front of me when im sitting in a bus, and the lady has a smug look on her face just waiting for someone to say something, not trying to hold the crying back, that i have a problem with.

I agree that it would be a nice gesture on the woman's part, but she is probably more preoccupied with her infant than with your discomfort. I disgree about most of the other examples, however. I don't think that a disabled person should need to apologize for being disabled, nor should a breastfeeding mother have to apologize for your discomfort with boobies, nor should a black person have to apologize for being black, nor a gay person for your shyness around their gaiety (?)

Originally Posted by gomestar

and just to note, I'd also be very irritated by adults acting in a poor manner.

You can try to ignore it all you want, but all you can think about when a screaming child is present is "jesus, STFU kid", even if you're donning a smile and pretending to have a good time. This, to me, is not fun.

Like Fuuma stated before, I expect children to be more lively, so I don't need to pretend. Having different expectations from a child than from an adult, and really not letting it bother you, is where you want to be headed. Indignation never made anyone happy or enjoyable company.

 

[Piobaire]

Originally Posted by LA Guy

I agree with the late night scenario. There is really no reason that a young child can be expected to behave well after his or her bedtime, and it's selfish on the parent's part to keep a child up and out that late, though there may be mitigating circumstances (say, transoceanic travelers who are experiencing jetlag). However, if you are at the early, pre-show sitting, you've gotta expect that there will be children. A 9:00 sitting, however, yes, I can see how a patron might be put off a little. My point of contention is against people who seem to dislike the very fact that there are children in their midst. I don't think that that is a healthy attitude.

I would agree with the bolded also; glad you agree with the scenario Gome has put forth. The group that would wish children never appear in public are frankly not only unusual and illogical, but not good for society.

I think you've hit on a key phrase, one that I've made statement equivalents of prior and in other threads: this behavior is selfish on the parent's part.

 

[sho'nuff]

Originally Posted by LA Guy

I agree that it would be a nice gesture on the woman's part, but she is probably more preoccupied with her infant than with your discomfort. I disgree about most of the other examples, however. I don't think that a disabled person should need to apologize for being disabled, nor should a breastfeeding mother have to apologize for your discomfort with boobies, nor should a black person have to apologize for being black, nor a gay person for your shyness around their gaiety (?)

.

i understand that. again, that is not my point. my point is when someone takes whatever 'ailment' or 'hinderance' or 'difference' they possess and turn it into a trump card in society by demanding entitlement. im talking about attitude. i dont think a black guy needs to apologize that he is black or someone who is gay or handicapped. i think it is fine they feel proud to be black. or feel accomplished to be able to deliver in society as a handicapped man. and so forth. im not a bigot that i think youre suggesting i may be. im not, i thought you would know me better.



and i understand the situation. i know sometimes a mother can be preoccupied with a certain situation or an elderly trying to manouever in a car, i have to wait. that is fine. i have taken care of babies before. i have taken care of elderly before. and still do.




these are true examples from my life i have seen that i dont like:

a black man throwing a tantrum in a fast food restaurant because something something about his food. then he turns it into a race thing about that he is black and such and such i dont remember the details. saying something like he deserves more attention to his food/service and just because he is black , they are not doing it. whatever. the place was packed and busy and was doing it to everyone. just calm down.


i go into an elevator with a guy on crutches. he says nothing. i press my floor, im sort of on my crackberry, and then with a huff, he snorts, 'arent you going to ask me for which floor i want??"
huh? just ask me to press a certain floor, why does he have to ask me that way? whatever.


and a variety of women with kids scenes i can talk about but tired now. i have no examples of gay people yet. theyve been cool thus far.

 

[Aaron01]

Originally Posted by B1FF

They are starting to introduce theatres that serve liquor. No kids at any time of day.

About time, I'm sick of hearing some baby ******* cry during the middle of a movie.

 

[MrDaniels]

Originally Posted by Aaron01

About time, I'm sick of hearing some baby ******* cry during the middle of a movie.



That needs its own thread!

 

[itsstillmatt]

Some angry mofos in here.

 

[Douglas]

My baby is more mature than some of the posters in this threak.

 

[sho'nuff]

im not actually angry. it is just writing, emphasizing to make a point and so forth. lot of times i dont really feel anything other than when someone mentions a topic and to take a side you have to start talking 'emotionally' to make any point

 

[Piobaire]

Originally Posted by Douglas

My baby is more mature than some of the posters in this threak.

And far cuter than all of us put together.

 

[tattersall]

Originally Posted by sho'nuff

<< insert verbal diarrhea >>

Originally Posted by sho'nuff

im not actually angry. it is just writing, emphasizing to make a point and so forth. lot of times i dont really feel anything other than when someone mentions a topic and to take a side you have to start talking 'emotionally' to make any point

Who let the village idiot out of his box?

 

[retronotmetro]

Originally Posted by LA Guy

It's actually not that way. A restaurant is not considered to be in the same category as a private club. It's a pseudo-public space. For example, you can't decide that you will not serve black people, or the disabled. Or white dudes, regardless of how other patrons might react. Some establishments try to get around this by posting a "We reserve the right to refuse service", but it doesn't really let you circumvent the rules, regardless. On the other hand, children are not protected class, so, iirc, the onus falls to the proprietors to show that children would hamper their ability to do business.

In California, the Unruh Civil Rights Act (farily unique state law) provides that a business establishment cannot discriminate on the basis of age. This does not necessarily mean you can't boot out a screaming kid who is disturbing others, but it does mean that a categorical "no-kids policy" would get you sued into submission.

 

[MrDaniels]

Originally Posted by retronotmetro

In California, the Unruh Civil Rights Act (farily unique state law) provides that a business establishment cannot discriminate on the basis of age. This does not necessarily mean you can't boot out a screaming kid who is disturbing others, but it does mean that a categorical "no-kids policy" would get you sued into submission.

So you have to welcome kids into cigar bars and porno theatres?