The Baby Lobby:The Next Militant Constituency

Goddamn, do I hate babies and ALL mothers, 'cept my mom....she's perfect.


(endorsed by the "hyperentitled child-hating" committee for the preservation for Peace and Tranquility.)

Speaking as a hyperentitled child-hater, I think something that folks are missing is that while they may remove an ill-behaving child as quickly and efficiently as possible, it is quite likely that their ill-behaving child is not the only occurance of said behavior during a HCH's time at the venue. This would go double for those people/HCHs working at the venue who get to put up with the "rare" tantrums from various children of different parental units throughout the day/week.

Additionally, it should be noted that even the best behaved children are loud and as their numbers grow the noise level grows exponentially. I know for a fact that parents are way, way less sensitive to this noise level than those of us HCHs, and what feels nearly unbearable to us HCHs barely registers on parental conciousness. This perceptual difference probably accounts for much of the underlying resentment that so baffles parents.

Be that as it may, my HCH-ness is usually more pronounced at movies than restaurants (except when my table suddenly becomes a playground).

Fritz wrote:I know for a fact that parents are way, way less sensitive to this noise level than those of us HCHs, and what feels nearly unbearable to us HCHs barely registers on parental conciousness. This perceptual difference probably accounts for much of the underlying resentment that so baffles parents.

Be that as it may, my HCH-ness is usually more pronounced at movies than restaurants (except when my table suddenly becomes a playground).

Agreed on both counts.

I do feel that, as a parent, you adjust to ear-piercing loudness and then put it out of mind, and that such loudness is way less tolerable in movies than in restaurants. (Imagine what it's like when you're trying to sleep -- which is another angle of the story: sleep-deprived parents zone themselves into a soundless, senseless realm where nothing but the most alarmed yelp from their whelps can rouse them: it's a survival skill).

Hammond

To counteract the HCH links,

http://buggydoo.blogspot.com/2005/11/pro-childchildfree-blah-blah-bullshit.html

It is real simple.... you or your kids right to make noise, or to be disruptive, ends where my right not to hear or see you begins

I feel that way about everyone. Could you all stay home on any night when I want to go out? You don't realize how irritating you all are.

Me, I live in the city BECAUSE I enjoy the presence of other people, the rich diversity of the city, the teeming fascinating life of all ages, races and persuasions around me. Kids, old folks, foreigners, homeless people, even Trixies and Chads. The city contains multitudes; that's the cool thing about it.

I make a judgement call about where my kids are appropriate and where they're not; you will notice, for instance, that they did not attend my anniversary dinner at Avenues. However, a place selling muffins and coffee hardly seems so privileged and exquisite an atmosphere that you can reasonably expect to be sheltered from any experience which might not be precisely in tune with your mood and demographic. It is, frankly, hard to know which extreme is more dubious: the much-maligned, semi-mythical parents who imagine every destructive thing their children do is adorable, or the non-parents who apparently imagine that for $2, a muffin joint ought to be the reading room of the Newberry if not, indeed, a perfectly sealed sensory deprivation tank. I fear the going price of escape from urban reality in all its forms is a little higher than that....

MAG wrote:To counteract the HCH links,

http://buggydoo.blogspot.com/2005/11/pro-childchildfree-blah-blah-bullshit.html

That's pretty good. I like the point about people making an effort. Even a small effort is fine. I don't mind the kids melting down; I mind when the parents start complaining to bystanders about how loud their *own freaking kids* are being. (I shared a long plane flight with a woman who was doing this and who acted put out when I proceeded to put my earphones on and ignore her.) Or the people whose kid was throwing toys and who got mad because we didn't want to carry the toys over to them each time they landed on our table. Or the ones who keep yelling ineffectually at the kid and telling them, "If you do that one more time we're leaving"-- for hours. And the loud backwards counting from ten and then starting over, which again can go on for hours. (The next time someone does that around me, I'm going to start counting even louder.)

"or the non-parents who apparently imagine that for $2, a muffin joint ought to be the reading room of the Newberry if not, indeed, a perfectly sealed sensory deprivation tank"

Frankly, this is horsesh*t. I'd expect a $2 muffin joint to allow me to be free of a "cool" homeless guy asking me for money every couple minutes or different people playing different stereo systems at adjoining tables; I don't expect to be free of such things when walking down the street.

As has been pointed out several times, this is about a sign asking people to use appropriate modes of communication in a coffee shop, not making sure it's silent. "Indoor voices" does not indicate to me a demand for reading room conditions or the banishment of patrons under some sort of Soup Nazi regieme.

Enough of Mr. McCauley and his fifteen minutes of fame. May he enjoy great success drawing the people who admire his policies away from wherever I and my kids will be.

I was in Paulina Market today with one of my little perfect angels, and, almost as if they knew this thread was going on, they gave a textbook demonstration of how a neighborhood business that's been around for 60 years treats its smallest customers-- the first guy who helped us gave Liam a slice of bologna before taking our very first order; then, when he turned us over to another guy (to go on break or something), the second guy said "Would he like some bologna?" and when I said he'd already had one, the second guy said "But he hasn't had any from me!" and cut Liam two more slices. Then he started telling me that Liam looked like his own grandson, and pulled out his wallet to show me the picture (he did look similar, vaguely); Liam of course got into the conversation and held him as long as he could with a typical four-year-old's stream of consciousness monologue. (Soon he'll have a cell phone for that purpose.) In the meantime a third guy came up and asked if Liam wanted bologna, and with perfect comic timing just as we were about to leave a fourth guy walked by and said offhandedly "Does he want some bologna?" And that's without even mentioning the couple-- older, but not that much older-- who beamed at every adorable thing he did, even if it wasn't particularly adorable. They never said a word, but gave me a couple of looks to say, lucky dad, appreciate it while it lasts.

Roscoe Village came in for a little bashing above as being less diverse than it used to be, and I suppose in some ways that's true, but this was a good example of what I like about it as a little suburb in the city, that its commercial sphere is not so completely divided by target demographics and marketing and us vs. them identity politics like some hot neighborhoods, that businesses exist that treat four-year-olds well because they simply expect to still be around by the time they're 40-year-old customers with their own four-year-olds; because it's in a community and people of every age are part of that community, period. It was just what I needed-- along with 3/4 lb. baked ham, a dozen slices of bologna, 1-1/4 lb. ground beef and some dill pickles.

cowdery wrote:Yes, "it takes a village," but you have no right to complain if some of the villagers choose to opt out.

It seems like it's the complaining parents who are opting out. If you accept "it takes a village," then you have to accept other villagers as arbiters of standards for your children: lawmakers, teachers, your religious leaders, babysitters, taxpayers in the community in which your child attends public school and, yes, the owners of businesses to which you choose to take your children.

Make it stop. Can we please get back to something that matters, say whether New York pizza is better than Chicago pizza.

I did want to relay a story that a friend of mine told me in the context of this discussion. She was travelling with her children by air and their flight was cancelled and then the next delayed. Eleven hours later they were still in the airport and hungry. Their choices were fast food or a sit down restaurant. Given that she cares about what her children eat, they chose the latter. The kids were obviously tired, the mother frustrated. At one point they walked (not ran) around their table - not in front of a server or a door. As she got up to leave, another patron called her over and looked at her straight in the eye and told her that she was the worst mother he had ever seen. She went back to her hotel and cried.

At the core of discipline is empathy. We have empathy for others, therefore we can understand how our actions might impact them. So while parents have a duty to develop empathy in their children and therefore discipline, they also may rightfully expect empathy and patience while doing so.

And like Mike G., I'm done on this matter. It's polluted too much of my week already.

MAG wrote:At the core of discipline is empathy. We have empathy for others, therefore we can understand how our actions might impact them. So while parents have a duty to develop empathy in their children and therefore discipline, they also may rightfully expect empathy and patience while doing so.

MAG, I agree with you completely.

And thank you for telling your friend's story.

Amata

"So while parents have a duty to develop empathy in their children and therefore discipline, they also may rightfully expect empathy and patience while doing so. "

Even though you're apparently not going to reply, I'll respond.

Yes, of course one and all are deserving of patience and respect while out and about in the world.

People are inherently annoying, and others like to complain about them-- check writers for example. Rudeness is rudeness, from running red lights to littering to not picking up after your dog. So why is it that the only poor behavior I'm supposed to not only put up with but indulge with good humor is clueless parents?

I am somehow reminded of a guy I saw once on a bike trail wearing a T-shirt that said "Don't ask me for sh*t."

He was, at that particular moment, stopping strangers in hope of borrowing a tire repair kit....

Declaring a discussion over while continuing to engage in it is probably a pretty good way to insure it will never die.

" am somehow reminded of a guy I saw once on a bike trail wearing a T-shirt that said "Don't ask me for sh*t." "

So now you're just going to take snarky shots at me?

Please give an example of what I've posted that would show me deserving this characterization.

All right, in the interesting of not having this devolve further into point by point rebuttals, at which point Gary will come to my house and kill me with a rib roast, I withdraw the remark.

I suggest we continue the discussion over sugar drinks at Chuck E. Cheese's. I'll bring the Ritalin.

I must say I've followed this thread in much the same way I used to follow the Jim Leff vs. the world threads - like watching a train wreck, not liking what's happening but too fascinated to turn away. I imagine I must be the only person that interpreted the portion of the sign stating "children of all ages" to indicate it wasn't really targeted at only very young people but, rather, everyone - and requesting that which is, ironically, so very rare these days - common sense in how each patron behaves around others.

I humbly admit my naieve gullibility and now see it for what it really is - a diabolical scheme to drive a deep wedge between the "dining with children" and the "dining without children". I look to this new demographic of divide and conquer as the basis on which many negative campaigns will attempt to leverage for the next election, as surely the current red vs. blue has had its day.

This reminds me of a frequent flyer board I read, where some of the favorite recurring debates are whether children should be allowed in first class, as well as who owns the property right to recline/not or keep the windowshade up/down.

I like a Ritalin buzz as much as the next dope fiend but I'll have to pass on CEC. Split the difference and hit the Berghoff?

Kman wrote: I imagine I must be the only person that interpreted the portion of the sign stating "children of all ages" to indicate it wasn't really targeted at only very young people but, rather, everyone - and requesting that which is, ironically, so very rare these days - common sense in how each patron behaves around others..

I interpreted it the same way, but the article did a good job of making me believe it was only about children of all ages under 18. I dont know if that's correct or not.

I want this thread to go away. To just disappear.

I didn't find the sign offensive, really. I don't have kids, not really planning on having any. I know that makes me biased, but, eh. I love kids, and I love parents who take their kids out of my general vicinity if they start being very loud/disruptive/crying.

I don't think buying a $2 muffin means I'm entitled to a library setting. I don't think most of the customers there think that, either. But, eh, whatever. It was an article meant to rile people up from a newspaper of little worth nowadays. Screw it.

I second, or third, or whatever. At this point, haven't we looked at just about every side of the issue? Please retire this thread!

What I find so interesting about this “train wreck” (and I totally agree, Kman, this IS a train wreck) is how far society has come in terms of the integration of children into almost all realms of our public life compared to when I was growing up.

In the 70s, I used to frequent a restaurant with my mother in Northbrook called the Cuisine Maison. Owned by a stern French woman who I knew only as Sabine, she was unquestionably the precursor to Seinfeld’s soup Nazi. Sabine made the most wonderful soups made daily from the freshest vegetables and finest cheeses. All she would serve was her soup and the best bread (baguettes, of course) I could recall having at that time.

Going to the Cuisine Maison with my mother is one of the great memories I have of my teenage years. But being classically French as she was, Sabine not only didn’t request proper decorum take place in her establishment, she posted a sign reading “NO CHILDREN”.

This never struck my mother as anything extraordinary being French. According to her, the French have a long history of segregating children from adults in many public places.

Now, I’m not trying to sound like I endorse such actions, because I don’t. But maybe we should take a step back and realize how far we’ve come from the times when parents didn’t have this all-encompassing stranglehold on their every child’s moves, demanding that their children accompany them where ever and whenever.

People like my mother and I embrace the changes that have evolved in society today in terms of the close parent/child connection. However, I believe strongly that, often times, it has recklessly gone the other way.

LTH,

81 posts and one week later we seem to have covered every possible permutation of this particular subject.

We now return to our regularly scheduled programming.

[Thread Lock/on]

Enjoy,
Gary for the Moderators