If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#81
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
Nan has her intimate dinners at the KFC buffet.
Caledonia wrote: Nan wrote: On 10 Aug 2006 14:24:38 -0700, "L." wrote: Knit Chic wrote: There are all kinds of disruptions in the world ... a lot of people need to get over themselves. My daughter has a disability and not a disability that everyone can see. If she has issues in a public area, I will remove her from that public area if it benefits her. I'm not going to remove her from an area that she is legally permitted to be in for any other reason, even if that means she is "disrupting" someone else. Well, then you're a selfish bitch. And if your kid continued to disrupt my intimate dinner, you'd be removed from the restaurant. -L. You have intimate dinners at a Friendly's type restaurant? That's pitiful. Er -- I think for some folks, Denny's is a Big Deal -- I realize I'm wading into deep water here, but truly, I feel that a public space is a public space. (Okay, I'm thinking of my parents, who could only afford, post-retirement, a dinner out at Denny's once in a blue moon. For them, it was an intimate dinner -- which says something about wages in the US that's pitiful, but hey, such is life) Sure, whenever you sit in the playplace part of McD's there's an expectation of what you'll get (then again, fast food is typically pretty expensive, on the whole), but at a sit-down restaurant, it's a public space and for me, the unspoken rules (aka, 'think of it from the other guy's perspective') apply. It's the same thing as not letting kids run around WalMart, nor letting them run around Bloomingdales, or Saks. It's all the same, really. Or expecting reasonable behavior, whether seated in the first class or coach sections. Whether it's an inexpensive venue for you isn't comparable to whether it's a casual/inexpensive venue for the other customers. Caledonia |
#82
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
On 11 Aug 2006 06:43:45 -0700, "Caledonia"
wrote: Er -- I think for some folks, Denny's is a Big Deal -- I realize I'm wading into deep water here, but truly, I feel that a public space is a public space. (Okay, I'm thinking of my parents, who could only afford, post-retirement, a dinner out at Denny's once in a blue moon. For them, it was an intimate dinner -- which says something about wages in the US that's pitiful, but hey, such is life) Sure, whenever you sit in the playplace part of McD's there's an expectation of what you'll get (then again, fast food is typically pretty expensive, on the whole), but at a sit-down restaurant, it's a public space and for me, the unspoken rules (aka, 'think of it from the other guy's perspective') apply. It's the same thing as not letting kids run around WalMart, nor letting them run around Bloomingdales, or Saks. It's all the same, really. Or expecting reasonable behavior, whether seated in the first class or coach sections. Whether it's an inexpensive venue for you isn't comparable to whether it's a casual/inexpensive venue for the other customers. Caledonia No, you're misunderstanding me. My position is that if you go to a family style restaurant, you have to expect that there will be more noise than a fine-dining establishment. If someone's child speaking (even more loudly than you want to hear) at the next table is going to bother you, then my suggestion is that you not patronize a place that also caters to children. If, as one poster stated, her daughter *may* be a bit disruptive, and she handles it when it benefits her child. Lyn decided to go on the attack and demand that she be kicked out if she disrupts *her* intimate meal. That's entitlement minded thinking on Lyn's part. In no way am I saying that people don't deserve to have a nice dinner. What I am saying is that they should be prepared for some noise. I don't allow my children to run around any store, from Walmart to Carson Pirie Scott. It annoys me when I see it in either place. Nan |
#83
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
StephanieTheGoofy wrote: "L." wrote in message Killing animals so she does not have to have some shots does not make sense to me. Regardless of how it was portrayed in the media, it was probably NOT a cause and effect situation - ie she refuses the shots, so they kill the animals for testing. It is VERY, VERY likely that even if she had taken the shots prophylactically, that they would STILL have euthanized the animals and tested - for the safety of the other kids, and the zoo workers. Do they KNOW how rabies acts in meerkats? Can it lay dormant? So she gets her shots, doesn't develop the disease, they keep watch on the animals, they appear fine, then wham they bite someone else. Cathy W |
#84
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
|
#85
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
wrote in message
ups.com... 0tterbot wrote: no, the zoo owns the meerkats, the zoo allows admission. the child poked the meerkats. the meerkat bit the child. NONE of this has to do with the parents. you just want to make up a reason it's their fault because you "hate parents"? no zoo = no incident, OR, no kid = no incident. buggered if i can work out how it's the parents' fault. Did you even read the article? no, i decided not to. rolls eyes The kid climbed on a display that was clearly marked DO NOT CLIMB ON ROCKS, stuck her hand through a small hole in the barrier and tried to pet the animals. THAT is how she got bitten. Pure negligence by whomever was supervising the child. you know, we're not big on killing zoo animals who attack silly humans here - i couldn't tell you the last time that happened, because the general idea is that wild animals might do that if people are witless enough to get into such a situation. what i can tell you though is that the last person in my city snipped by a lion for putting their hands where hands don't belong was AN ADULT. so was that adult's _parents_ at fault too? :-) they could only be 90 or so - that's enough to make them wear the blame for all their transgressions in having the gall, the absolute front, to be a pair of shudder PARENTS (_and_ for having got away with it for so long....!!). ultimately - a nine y.o. would, at least in theory, know better than to poke zoo animals, climb on rocks marked otherwise, and so forth. so would, at least in theory, an adult know better. but people lose their heads (not usually literally g) and do silly things on the spur of the moment - and experience tells me that adults are the prime ones for this. generally kids are being looked after by a sensible adult, but that doesn't preclude non-sensible adults from being daft or doing harmful things. consider the world around you for a moment. It's the child's fault as well, but ultimately parents are responsible for the actions of their children so the responsibility for the incident is on the parents. ho hum. it's a zoo issue. this type of thing goes hand in hand with ZOOS, not with "parents". when you've actually been a parent for more than three seconds yourself, you might eventually develop an idea of that for which you are ultimately responsible and can control, and that which you can only do your best. trying to use an incident like this to make your case for your chronic parent-hating makes you look like an idiot. (as well as exposing the most obvious logical lapse - you ARE one! are we going to see YOU on the news in a few year's time after junior causes the deaths of 5 meerkats by being temporarily unable to think straight during the 10 seconds you were looking elsewhere?) pffft. kylie |
#86
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
0tterbot wrote: ho hum. it's a zoo issue. this type of thing goes hand in hand with ZOOS, not with "parents". when you've actually been a parent for more than three seconds yourself, **** you. Too bad you don't know thew truth, because it makes you look like an ass. you might eventually develop an idea of that for which you are ultimately responsible and can control, and that which you can only do your best. If any animal bites any child, it's *always* the parents' fault. No ifs, ands, or buts. -L. |
#87
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
Cathy Weeks wrote: I've been to that zoo many times (I have a membership, and live 30 minutes away) and I've seen the exhibit. And in fact, my husband and stepson have both commented about *wanting* to climb in (they restrained themselves ;-) A) It's trivially easy to climb into the exhibit. My 4-year-old could probably do it. B) It is indeed clearly marked as you described. In this case, I'd say that the parents WERE being negligent. And the Zoo could easily and SHOULD make it safer. Even the most diligent parents sometimes turn their back for a second, and the toddler takes off before the parents realize it. This wasn't a toddler. If it was a toddler I could *almost* understand. But even with a toddler, you have to be smart about how you let them interact, when around animals. but you said 9 is old enough to know better, so which is it?? if 9's enough to know better, it's the child's fault. It's the child's fault as well, but ultimately parents are responsible for the actions of their children so the responsibility for the incident is on the parents. I agree with this. However, I don't know many parents who *would* allow it, so I wonder what was going on. Either way, I suspect some seriously disfunctional family life is at work. Cathy Weeks Thanks for your input. I suspect the parents stood by and watched, as they do in similar situations all over the US. I once stopped a kid from poking a kitten with a stick at our humane society after listening to the Mom say "Nathan, don't poke that kitten" 15 times. I walked over, removed the stick from his hand and told him "Stop poking the kitten!". It's not neuroscience, but so many parents either A.) Don't want ot parent their children or B.) Don't care, when it comes to these sorts of situations. It's a shame that places like zoos have to become idiot-proof. -L. |
#88
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
-L. wrote: Cathy Weeks wrote: I've been to that zoo many times (I have a membership, and live 30 minutes away) and I've seen the exhibit. And in fact, my husband and stepson have both commented about *wanting* to climb in (they restrained themselves ;-) A) It's trivially easy to climb into the exhibit. My 4-year-old could probably do it. B) It is indeed clearly marked as you described. In this case, I'd say that the parents WERE being negligent. And the Zoo could easily and SHOULD make it safer. Even the most diligent parents sometimes turn their back for a second, and the toddler takes off before the parents realize it. This wasn't a toddler. If it was a toddler I could *almost* understand. But even with a toddler, you have to be smart about how you let them interact, when around animals. I know it wasn't a toddler - it was a 9-year-old. I brought up toddlers because they are sort of my benchmark - is the zoo a safe place for when even a diligent parent lets down their guard for a second. I meantioned the dysfunction - because my 12-year-old stepson might have climbed up on an exhibit like that despite our telling him not to when he was 4 or 5 - necessitating my husband bodily removing him. Not at 9, and certainly not at 12. Though who knows... he might be back to that when he turns 15! Sigh... these sorts of situations. It's a shame that places like zoos have to become idiot-proof. Yes, in theory, I agree with you. However, I also kind of think that since these are wild animals, and we cannot monitor every single interaction between human and interaction, we need to guard against the idiots, so the animals don't ever need to pay the price. It's also the case that *I* would feel terrible if a kid were killed by an animal in my zoo, despite it being their or their parent's own stupidity at fault. Rarely do I think death is the deserved punishment for a moment (or even two) of stupidity. If you ever want to read about stupid people's interactions with animals - check out "Death in Yellowstone: Tales of Death and Stupidity in our Nation's first National Park" (or something like that). Grim reading, but also interesting, and sometimes amusing. Cathy Weeks |
#89
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
Cathy Weeks wrote: If you ever want to read about stupid people's interactions with animals - check out "Death in Yellowstone: Tales of Death and Stupidity in our Nation's first National Park" (or something like that). Grim reading, but also interesting, and sometimes amusing. Thanks for the book rec. I read nonfiction almost exclusively but I hadn't heard of that one. -L. |
#90
|
|||
|
|||
Prime example of why I hate other parents...
-L. wrote: 0tterbot wrote: ho hum. it's a zoo issue. this type of thing goes hand in hand with ZOOS, not with "parents". when you've actually been a parent for more than three seconds yourself, **** you. Too bad you don't know thew truth, because it makes you look like an ass. you might eventually develop an idea of that for which you are ultimately responsible and can control, and that which you can only do your best. If any animal bites any child, it's *always* the parents' fault. No ifs, ands, or buts. How absurd. From just a 2 minute web search: http://www.nbc5.com/news/4466937/det...%3Cbr%2 0/%3E Three year-old girl was on steps outside a home that housed a candy store when a dog pushed its way out the door and attacked her. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/stor...p-349719c.html Boy riding tricycle on sidewalk when dog escapes from pen and attacks him, What did these parents do wrong? Are you blaming them for allowing their children to be outside? Barbara |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Foster parents need support from the state | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 3 | June 18th 06 07:39 AM |
Canadian Judge ok's Dad's apanking in Calgary divorce case | Fern5827 | Spanking | 8 | October 4th 05 03:43 AM |
New Research: Negative effects of spanking | Chris | Spanking | 14 | June 8th 04 07:01 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | Foster Parents | 3 | December 8th 03 11:53 PM |
Kids should work. | ChrisScaife | Foster Parents | 16 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |