Family Etiquette

[Jace, Extat]

Why would a parent teach their child not to lie? It's the single most valuable skill an adult can have. I get not wanting the kid to lie to you but it's such an important part of life.

[polishgenius]

8 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

You're talking about bribing though. 

Well, bribery as surrender. It starts off as 'I'll give you a sweet if you do this' but it ends up as a routine of battle of wills and patience between the screaming kid and the parent and once it gets into a routine like that it's no longer 'I'll give you this to do what I want' but 'I'll bloody give you what you want if you just shut up!'.

And yeah, your point makes sense- I just think surrender is quite a harsh word in the circumstances but everything you say stands up.

[JGP]

9 minutes ago, Jace, Basilissa said:

Why would a parent teach their child not to lie? It's the single most valuable skill an adult can have. I get not wanting the kid to lie to you but it's such an important part of life.

I don't disagree. It's not like we're going for the Persian noble standard or anything. After all, Tyrion isn't adept at archery. As far as I know.

She's eight years old so lying isn't to be unexpected. It's the frequency and sheer arbitrariness of it that's baffling to me. She'll lie just because, about anything and nothing consequential. One time when I called her on it [humorously, I'll add] she paused and was all, 'Well. Ok, that's not true. But it sounded cool, Dad.' 

I doesn't bother me horribly. She's very bright, social, and genuinely cares about her peers. It is a jarring contrast however in comparison to her older sister who is [almost] honest to a fault and at 10 years already a burgeoning little justice warrior.

Anyway.

[JGP]

5 minutes ago, Fellaining Da Bruyne said:

Well, bribery as surrender. It starts off as 'I'll give you a sweet if you do this' but it ends up as a routine of battle of wills and patience between the screaming kid and the parent and once it gets into a routine like that it's no longer 'I'll give you this to do what I want' but 'I'll bloody give you what you want if you just shut up!'.

And yeah, your point makes sense- I just think surrender is quite a harsh word in the circumstances but everything you say stands up.

I don't mean it harshly.

I have an acquaintance whose son has a severe behavioral issue. I haven't asked if it's been diagnosed, mind, but it seems pretty obvious to me. If the alternative to surrendering [not always, but you have to pick your battles amirite] is being a shut in with your elemental kiddo... there's no winning there either.

[Jace, Extat]

31 minutes ago, JEORDHl said:

I don't disagree. It's not like we're going for the Persian noble standard or anything. After all, Tyrion isn't adept at archery. As far as I know.

She's eight years old so lying isn't to be unexpected. It's the frequency and sheer arbitrariness of it that's baffling to me. She'll lie just because, about anything and nothing consequential. One time when I called her on it [humorously, I'll add] she paused and was all, 'Well. Ok, that's not true. But it sounded cool, Dad.' 

I doesn't bother me horribly. She's very bright, social, and genuinely cares about her peers. It is a jarring contrast however in comparison to her older sister who is [almost] honest to a fault and at 10 years already a burgeoning little justice warrior.

Anyway.

Sounds like a future president to me

[mormont]

16 hours ago, Fellaining Da Bruyne said:

You're right, you're not expressing disdain for people who find disruptive children in quiet places irritating at all.

Genuinely confused by this. You've provided a bunch of quotes, none of which talk about whether or not I'm expressing disdain, and then responded as if those quotes do say that. Just bizarre.

Anyhoo, I'm not going to deny that things said in this thread make me genuinely angry: and I'm 100% sure that shows.

16 hours ago, Fellaining Da Bruyne said:

But while there are kids who will just act out whatever you do, for the most part when young kids act out on the regular it's because the way hasn't been found yet.

That may be your experience - it's not mine - but I don't see the relevance, anyway. Why does it matter, in considering whether we should be tolerant and patient when a kid acts up in a restaurant, whether the parent just hasn't found the right approach yet, or whether there just is no right approach? (Or whether the right approach is not what we, a bunch of strangers, think it should be?) One way or the other, it's not on us to be judging them as parents on the basis of a single encounter.

[polishgenius]

5 hours ago, La Albearceleste said:

You've provided a bunch of quotes, none of which talk about whether or not I'm expressing disdain, and then responded as if those quotes do say that. Just bizarre.

They don't talk about you expressing disdain. They are you expressing disdain.  How can you be snidely asking me if I understand how conversation works when you appear to think that for an emotion to be shown a person literally has to say 'I AM EXPRESSING DISDAIN NOW'?

[mormont]

16 hours ago, Fellaining Da Bruyne said:

They don't talk about you expressing disdain. They are you expressing disdain.  How can you be snidely asking me if I understand how conversation works when you appear to think that for an emotion to be shown a person literally has to say 'I AM EXPRESSING DISDAIN NOW'?

You said 'you're right, you're not expressing disdain'. I'm confused because I'm not sure where I ever claimed not to be expressing disdain.

I could quibble about the difference between anger and disdain, but whatever.

[polishgenius]

Whether it's anger or disdain doesn't really matter. The point is that when I said you think people are wrong for finding it annoying when uncontrolled kids disturb their evening, you said it was a strawman. So I quoted several instances of you saying so and you found that confusing.

[mormont]

1 hour ago, Fellaining Da Bruyne said:

The point is that when I said you think people are wrong for finding it annoying when uncontrolled kids disturb their evening, you said it was a strawman. So I quoted several instances of you saying so and you found that confusing. 

I mean, we can do another round of 'Mormont produces the receipts' if you like, I guess.

On 7/7/2018 at 9:30 AM, Fellaining Da Bruyne said:

You seem to think that people should be required to put up with kids at all times regardless of where they are or what they're doing. Heck, even more, you seem to think that people should be not allowed to feel annoyed at loud kids regardless of where they are or what they're doing

This is a straw man. I've said no such thing. (It's also rather different than the bolded bit above. It goes much further.)

You then cite three instances of me not saying it.

Quote

Thirdly, the number of times people here are bitching about having their evenings ruined as opposed to discussing health and safety risks makes it clear what their main concern is. As do references to what kind of restaurant they were in. It's not the hazards they're complaining about, it's having to put up with kids when they don't want to. 

This does not say 'people should be not allowed to feel annoyed at loud kids regardless'. To be fair, it's probably the closest. But what it says is, when people have talked about these other concerns they've actually just been using them as an excuse. It isn't nearly as sweeping as the position you're attributing to me.

Quote

I'm not saying it wouldn't annoy me if I were in the theatre. But I would get over it pretty quickly. 

This really doesn't say it, in fact it acknowledges that I might feel (however briefly) annoyed myself. It makes clear the issue is not feeling annoyed, but what follows.

Quote

Reading the posts on this thread that complain about kids, I don't get a sense of people expressing public-minded concern for health and safety. I get a sense of people who are personally irritated about their own comfort levels, and think that kids should be seen and not heard.

And this doesn't say it either. It just repeats the first point.

We can do the receipts game all week, if you really want to, but it's kind of pointless. Here's the substance:

I'm suggesting that kids being loud and annoying is something adult diners should react to with tolerance and understanding, because often it is attributable to factors beyond the control of either child or parent: and it's usually impossible for you, as a stranger, to know the full story, and to tell if someone is a 'good parent' or not. So the right approach is to deal with your own annoyance in a mature manner, instead of bitching about it.

If you don't disagree with that, then we don't disagree, regardless of who said what and when.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

On ‎7‎/‎7‎/‎2018 at 7:38 AM, Spockydog said:

There is nothing worse than Other People's Children. And there is a special place in Hell reserved for people who take infants and newborns on long haul flights for vacation.

 

While this is annoying, sometimes it really just can't be helped. Sometimes it is not vacation, but parents moving, or the child no longer has parents and a relative has flown out to take custody of the child and has to make long haul flights.

Ever not have your ears pop on a flight? How painful, as an adult was that? Just imagine being under 2 and having that pain, and not really being able to express it.

I felt horrible when my 1 yr old nephew cried for a good portion of an international flight, but there was little to be done about it other than holding and rocking him. Luckily a flight attendant helped me as I was also dealing with my 3 yr old nephew (their father was in jail for murdering their mother, I was stationed in Germany and the only person who could take them at that time)

(I also traveled from the US to Germany with a 2yr old when I as assigned there, from Germany with an 8 month old, at the start of the 1st Gulf War, back again when it ended 6 months later, and again with a 2 yr old when my tour ended. Including the 2 flights with my nephews, that's a total of 6 non-optional flights with children 2 yrs or under)

This goes back to Mormont's point - judging without knowing all the facts.

 

As far as regular "public" places like restaurants and movies, I think most parents can see both sides of the issue. It's a balancing act. You teach the children though exposure to those situations, but that is not always easy or pleasant, especially in the beginning.

How are kids to learn how to behave in certain situations if they are never exposed to them? But there are things parents can do to lessen that possible problems, like going out during off peak hours until the behaviors are learned, bringing items to help keep the kids entertained, and such.

While I might occasionally be annoyed by other people's kids, I have never once said something unless it was a quick "careful" to a running/stumbling child. People have put up with less than stellar behavior from my lids a time or ten, and you just never know what the full situation is, so I put up with it too.

And then, I have seen some adults who's behavior was worse than any child.

 

[Myrddin]

Skipping 4 pages just to say it's really satisfying to be sitting in a restaurant and have your 12 year old look over at a couple of brats running around.

12 yo: "Man they are annoying."

Dad: Now you know why you were never allowed to do that.

12 yo: Thank you so much for that.

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

3 minutes ago, Eriksen's New Mascot said:

Skipping 4 pages just to say it's really satisfying to be sitting in a restaurant and have your 12 year old look over at a couple of brats running around.

12 yo: "Man they are annoying."

Mom: There were a few times you weren't much better than them.

12 yo: I'm sorry?  I was little?

Mom: As are they.  

It was just a slightly different conversation for us (more a lesson in tolerance)

[Myrddin]

18 minutes ago, Lany Freelove Cassandra said:

It was just a slightly different conversation for us (more a lesson in tolerance)

Well, that conversation reflects about 1/4 of our conversations these days. The parts where he acknowledges I may in fact know something about life. The rest are more like "All my friends have Snapchat and Instagram! I'm practically a teenager too! You have no idea what it's like to be a teenager in the 21st century. You're a horrible parent!"

The last part is what make the above restaurant exchange so satisfying. I ain't perfect, but I'm doing the best I can. Sometimes it works.

And then there's also his tendency to skip meals, snack on junk, and then he gets "hangry" over nothing. Two year old tantrum angry. I need to keep bags of Snickers on on hand....

[Larry of the Lawn]

1 hour ago, Eriksen's New Mascot said:

 

And then there's also his tendency to skip meals, snack on junk, and then he gets "hangry" over nothing. Two year old tantrum angry. I need to keep bags of Snickers on on hand....

Have you tried force-feeding the lad subpar steak from a chain restaurant?  I

[Jace, Extat]

This thread has kind of slowed down with the arguing over how angry Mormont is or isn't. 

Do I need to say something outrageous to reignite passions? 

Children should be neither seen nor heard. If a child is insolent enough to foist their presence on an unaffiliated adult then said miniature person shall be placed in a burlap sack and beaten with reeds upon first offense.

[Myrddin]

2 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

Have you tried force-feeding the lad subpar steak from a chain restaurant?  I

That's where the initial conversation I posted came from... Long Horn Steakhouse. 

 

[Spockydog]

6 hours ago, Lany Freelove Cassandra said:

While this is annoying, sometimes it really just can't be helped. Sometimes it is not vacation, but parents moving, or the child no longer has parents and a relative has flown out to take custody of the child and has to make long haul flights.

That's why I specified vacation. Taking a baby from London to Bali is child abuse.