Do you support restaurants who ban children from entering or eating in their etablishments?
- Thread starter TheGLOV
- Start date
Seriously, I really like this discussion because it has brought out a lot of posters who I don't see post much. Moreover the posts are very thoughtful (except for mine) and shows terrific introspection.
A
anon_1eeb2b426hv3y
Guest
I dunno...I hate to sound shallow...but I scored your post the best because of the picture of that woman with the sweet bangin body.
That sweet banging body won’t be so sweet if she lets kids roll around in there.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
The discrimination is based on age, not behavior, so it is punishing kids who are well behaved. We're talking about eating at a restaurant here - not bars, strip clubs, or other places where it might be illegal (as in against the law) for a child to be present. As a parent, I'm not aware of any places that my children can go that I cannot. That includes their schools, parks, doctor's office, etc. What you write is certainly 'reasonable', but that doesn't mean restaurants can and should be able to discriminate for behavioral issues that vary from child to child using age as the benchmark. What if a restaurant, in an effort to keep it's reputation as hip and edgy, refused reservations for people over 60?
As a parent of young children many years ago, I know that when they have their inevitable meltdowns and cry and scream at 100 decibels, then nobody in the restaurant is enjoying themselves anymore. My wife and I learned that the only places suitable to take our children with us were the ones that catered to children, like McDonald's or Chuck e Cheese or Rainforest Cafe. That was the reality. Nice places to eat became carry-out or date night when a babysitter was at home with the kids.
Children have meltdowns, and it's unfair to inflict that on other diners or waitstaff.
Children have meltdowns, and it's unfair to inflict that on other diners or waitstaff.
That's probably the reason why lunch buffets at strip clubs are so popular.
As a person over 60 I’m fine with that ( as long as I receive a waiver). I hate eating with other older people, they complain about choices, and annoyingly remark about the cost, they take too long to decide what to eat, then bitch about it when it comes. They take too long to eat the food when it does arrive, and always want a doggie bag when the idiots don’t even have one. And you know damn well that they are going to ask a million stupid questions about dessert and then don’t order any. They complain about how the people at other tables aren’t dressed properly, and they never want to leave a decent tip. And finally they whine about kids ( even if none are present ) making noise restaurants while trumpeting how well behaved their little bastards were in such situations. That’s who we ought to be keeping out of restaurants, these dimwits have had their whole lives to figure out how to act in public and haven’t mastered it yet.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
The other key to being a responsible parent dining out with kids is to eat early (and you almost have to since they get tired pretty easily and go to bed relatively early). We didn't want to go anywhere with our kids when they were in that 18-28 month range - get take out, and move on. Now, my 3 and 5 year olds are pretty good when eating out, but I would never take them anywhere that isn't what I would call 'fast casual' (or at a time when there are many diners).
There is a difference between children and babies
Restaurants can prevent children from dining in a bar even with their parents/adults if their is no restaurant side. The idea is to insulate them from drunks and bad language. The same thing you get at most sporting events Lol
Generally you must take the kids to the restaurant side per restaurant policy. I am not sure about Pa LCb rules concerning kids being able to sit and eat at a bar area with or without parents. States can have different rules.
For Restaurants to ban babies or 3 year olds e.g. it is purely the restaurants call.
Restaurants can prevent children from dining in a bar even with their parents/adults if their is no restaurant side. The idea is to insulate them from drunks and bad language. The same thing you get at most sporting events Lol
Generally you must take the kids to the restaurant side per restaurant policy. I am not sure about Pa LCb rules concerning kids being able to sit and eat at a bar area with or without parents. States can have different rules.
For Restaurants to ban babies or 3 year olds e.g. it is purely the restaurants call.
I can remember a rather very unpleasant experience my cousin had on a cruise:
He and his wife had dinner reservation, which they paid for, with the Capt. of the ship.
Another couple, who also paid for having dinner with the Capt., brought there whiney 2 year old.
The kid basically ruined the dinner for everyone! Cried loudly, kicked, threw stuff, screamed his lungs out, etc.
My cousin demanded a REFUND saying that while he paid for dinner with the Capt., he did not pay for THIS!
The cruise line capitulated and also offered dinner with the Capt. FREE the very next night. No bratty kids were allowed at the dinner!
He and his wife had dinner reservation, which they paid for, with the Capt. of the ship.
Another couple, who also paid for having dinner with the Capt., brought there whiney 2 year old.
The kid basically ruined the dinner for everyone! Cried loudly, kicked, threw stuff, screamed his lungs out, etc.
My cousin demanded a REFUND saying that while he paid for dinner with the Capt., he did not pay for THIS!
The cruise line capitulated and also offered dinner with the Capt. FREE the very next night. No bratty kids were allowed at the dinner!
Any way restaurants can ban loud talkers? Like you can hear them across the room loud talkers? Many times they are worse than children.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Or people who like to order fancy food because they think it makes them look special? 'Oh, you have to have some of this fro graws - it's from France; it's the sh*t.'
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
All bets are off on a cruise. I mean, I didn't pay for my cruise to watch tattooed bros drink like fish and puke into the pool every day, or fight like Hunger Games for a deck chair every morning, but it is what it is.
Very simple, really simple. Only one word comes to mind ..... SELFISH. Now is going to a Red Robin different than fine dining, yes. Red Robin, I know what I'm getting. NEVER. EVER did this when are kids were young.
Only one thing is worse, taking underage children to a PG-13 or R movie. At Movie Tavern in Exton, PA they are asked to leave.
Sorry, don't buy the babysitter argument. What;s that word again .....
A
anon_1eeb2b426hv3y
Guest
Ok. So you weren't playing devil's advocate.
And not surprisingly, you're taking this position as a parent whose kids are well-behaved. In many cases, I suspect your children are the ones who'd be welcomed if these restrictions hadn't become more necessary than they used to be. I'll also point out that adults-only restaurants, hotels, etc. aren't a new thing, even if not expressly posted on the wall.My first post in this thread (at least implicitly) agreed with your premise that kids should be permitted into nice restaurants, etc. if they can behave appropriately for that environment. Note in particular, that my second post drew the distinction between adult environments and environments requiring adult behavior.
Laws removing parents' (anyone's) discretion as to whether kids may enter isn't the only standard for whether an environment is or should be deemed kid-friendly. Conformity to adult behavior is another. While amorphous, volume and physical activity come to the forefront. You mention bars and strip clubs. I was actually referring to fine dining rooms and country clubs.
When we were kids, restaurants had much more discretion as to throwing people out or correcting behavior than they do today. Where parents used to be more focused on their manners and conformity to the social norms of a given environment, feeling embarrassment for their kids going wild and disturbing the peace for others, the pendulum has now swung towards defending our rights as individuals over minding our manners or questioning the standards of appropriate conduct. That's good in pursuing justice in many cases. But as you said we're talking about eating at a restaurant here.
And, as of right now, the law and public policy don't agree with the position you're advocating. I guess we'll agree to disagree on this one. I remember loads of hotels, restaurants, etc. I wasn't allowed into as a kid. Before so many needed to impose a prohibition with a sign by the door, the well-behaved exceptions were allowed as exceptions--but they had to act the part and all knew it from the start. But there were always places more or less child-friendly. That was just an accepted reality, just like adults aren't allowed into the kids club on a Disney cruise or a preschool classroom as we wish. If we're allowed in at all, it's under tight controls. As the controls over "acceptable" behavior are questioned or undermined in adult environments, those kids who are disruptive limit opportunities for kids like yours. It's legal and appropriate, even if it sucks in your case.
You need to find a better cruise line. You get what you pay for.
So, couple more thoughts
I belong to a club (because I am a yuppie scumbag elitist), and we had two dining areas; one downstairs for families and one upstairs where no one under the age of 16 was allowed to dine. It was wonderful (except when the 40 year olds get drunk and act stupid, but I digress).
The club recently made some changes to the clubhouse, and moved all dining into a new area that was built, and built a bar adjacent to it. The upstairs dining area remained, but only used if requested. It still had a "no one under the age of 16" rule. A family wanted to dine there with their friends and all the kids - all of whom were under 16. The club refused, in part because there were some older couple dining there and they didn't want the noise, but mostly because the rules still applied.
The father of one of the kids used Midnighter's argument - his kids were well behaved. The club president was very blunt - "You may think your children are well behaved, but you don't see them from the same viewpoint that others do. What you are willing to let go and tolerate, others will not. It's bothersome to others who are dining there. And since we have this rule of no one under the age of 16, we have to abide by it." He was firm but polite.
You may see your kids as angels, but others may view them as a holy terror. Additionally, as an adult, it's your responsibility to be aware of your surroundings and how your actions affect others - and that is what you should be passing onto your kids.
Furthermore- the world does not revolve around your children. (And I am using the generic "you"). There are PLENTY of places where your children are welcome. Let us enjoy the few places where they are not.
I belong to a club (because I am a yuppie scumbag elitist), and we had two dining areas; one downstairs for families and one upstairs where no one under the age of 16 was allowed to dine. It was wonderful (except when the 40 year olds get drunk and act stupid, but I digress).
The club recently made some changes to the clubhouse, and moved all dining into a new area that was built, and built a bar adjacent to it. The upstairs dining area remained, but only used if requested. It still had a "no one under the age of 16" rule. A family wanted to dine there with their friends and all the kids - all of whom were under 16. The club refused, in part because there were some older couple dining there and they didn't want the noise, but mostly because the rules still applied.
The father of one of the kids used Midnighter's argument - his kids were well behaved. The club president was very blunt - "You may think your children are well behaved, but you don't see them from the same viewpoint that others do. What you are willing to let go and tolerate, others will not. It's bothersome to others who are dining there. And since we have this rule of no one under the age of 16, we have to abide by it." He was firm but polite.
You may see your kids as angels, but others may view them as a holy terror. Additionally, as an adult, it's your responsibility to be aware of your surroundings and how your actions affect others - and that is what you should be passing onto your kids.
Furthermore- the world does not revolve around your children. (And I am using the generic "you"). There are PLENTY of places where your children are welcome. Let us enjoy the few places where they are not.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
[
I already said I wouldn’t take my kids to a place where I was worried their behavior would be out of place or disruptive to other customers, so any kind of ban on kids doesn’t bother me (and I belong to an adults only winery - means no one under 21 allowed). I still think it’s discriminatory even if not illegal.
Ok. So you weren't playing devil's advocate.
My first post in this thread (at least implicitly) agreed with your premise that kids should be permitted into nice restaurants, etc. if they can behave appropriately for that environment. Note in particular, that my second post drew the distinction between adult environments and environments requiring adult behavior.
Laws removing parents' (anyone's) discretion as to whether kids may enter isn't the only standard for whether an environment is or should be deemed kid-friendly. Conformity to adult behavior is another. While amorphous, volume and physical activity come to the forefront. You mention bars and strip clubs. I was actually referring to fine dining rooms and country clubs.
When we were kids, restaurants had much more discretion as to throwing people out or correcting behavior than they do today. Where parents used to be more focused on their manners and conformity to the social norms of a given environment, feeling embarrassment for their kids going wild and disturbing the peace for others, the pendulum has now swung towards defending our rights as individuals over minding our manners or questioning the standards of appropriate conduct. That's good in pursuing justice in many cases. But as you said we're talking about eating at a restaurant here.
And, as of right now, the law and public policy don't agree with the position you're advocating. I guess we'll agree to disagree on this one. I remember loads of hotels, restaurants, etc. I wasn't allowed into as a kid. Before so many needed to impose a prohibition with a sign by the door, the well-behaved exceptions were allowed as exceptions--but they had to act the part and all knew it from the start. But there were always places more or less child-friendly. That was just an accepted reality, just like adults aren't allowed into the kids club on a Disney cruise or a preschool classroom as we wish. If we're allowed in at all, it's under tight controls. As the controls over "acceptable" behavior are questioned or undermined in adult environments, those kids who are disruptive limit opportunities for kids like yours. It's legal and appropriate, even if it sucks in your case.
I already said I wouldn’t take my kids to a place where I was worried their behavior would be out of place or disruptive to other customers, so any kind of ban on kids doesn’t bother me (and I belong to an adults only winery - means no one under 21 allowed). I still think it’s discriminatory even if not illegal.
It's been challenged as discriminatory and lost. But I am not sure when. The courts found that a business owner can establish their own rules, within the context of the laws.
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
Discriminatory and illegal are not mutually exclusive.
A
anon_1eeb2b426hv3y
Guest
Agreed. It's discriminatory.
Discrimination is a bad word for good reason. That doesn't mean all discrimination is bad. Hence laws distinguishing protected classes from others. I remember our community pool having "adult swim" for 10-15 minutes out of every hour or two when adults could swim without being surrounded by screaming kids, splashed, etc. Youth swimmers who could have swum laps around them still weren't in the pool. Was completely discriminatory. Didn't offend anyone. And this was a publicly-owned pool.
Remember that restaurant owners profit more by having more fannies in the seats, families, children, etc. They wouldn't be cutting their own returns if there weren't a good reason for it. Liken it to refusing service to a member of a protected class in another setting if you see it that way, but it's not the same. If others exercised their discretion as you seem to, this wouldn't be an issue.
A
anon_1eeb2b426hv3y
Guest
A
anon_xdc8rmuek44eq
Guest
For fun, name the last restaurant you went to where a kid ruined or disrupted your meal. I know exactly what it was for me because it was only a few weeks ago. It was at J. Gilbert's in McLean. It's not fine dining per se - more DC steakhouse type; it's family friendly I would say. We were seated at a six person table (my in laws were with us) across from another six person table (empty when we arrived). It was sort of a private area so we had the space to ourselves. Things are going well and the kids are behaving and then all of a sudden, the other family shows up and they have three kids in the range of 8-14 years old. They're loud and obnoxious to the point where we have to stop our conversation to wait for their heathenry to end. Thankfully we didn't have to suffer long, but these kids were worse than five year olds IMO.
Obviously raised by the Dr. Spock method!
Use the ROD! The hell with spoiling the child!~!!!!
A
anon_1eeb2b426hv3y
Guest
Man, I wish I had time to give an adequate response. Could choose several ruined or disrupted meals. For now. I’ll just leave you with the adult swim example. I’m not advocating prohibiting kids from all or even most restaurants. Some? Absolutely.
Oh brother. No, it is, without question, not the same thing. Race, gender, religion, disability, etc. are legally protected characteristics when involving access to places of public accommodation like restaurants. Childhood is not.
What you write is a philosophical point of view, but it sure ain’t the law. In this country, disallowing children simply is not age discrimination.
At the end of the day, the logical conclusion, I would prefer if restaurants would ban all other people while I am dining. That would be best.
