What’s the matter with kids today and why doesn’t anyone want them around? In June, Malaysia Airlines banned babies from many of their first class cabins, prompting other major airlines to consider similar policies.
Lately, complaints about screaming kids are being taken seriously, not only by airlines, but by hotels, movie theaters, restaurants, and even grocery stores.
“Brat bans could well be the next frontier in destination and leisure-product marketing,” writes Robert Klara in an article on the child-free trend in AdWeek.
Klara points to Leavethembehind.com, a travel website for kid-free vacations, with a massive list of yoga retreats, luxury resorts and bargain hotels around the world that ban children.
“Call me a grinch, a misanthrope, a DINK (dual-income-no-kids), or the anti-cute-police, but I hate (hate a thousand times over) ill-behaved children/infants/screaming banshees in upscale restaurants (ok, anywhere, really, but I don’t want any death threats),” writes Charlotte Savino on Travel and Leisure’s blog. She lists a slew of a popular destination restaurants with kid-free areas and policies for travelers looking for quiet vacation dining.
Well apart from not exactly finding kids “cute”* (I have a cat who is cute for a certain value of cute - meaning cute if you ignore his persecution of small birds or his gorging on Felix and then puking in the airing cupboard) anyone who has endured nine hours on an airliner without a fag but some screaming brat in the next row (they have overhead baggage lockers for a reason) knows it is something that would not even be allowed in Gitmo.
But read the comments…
Posted by Krystal K Tue Jul 26, 2011 2:12pm PDT
First cigarettes (which I agree with), now children… wow!
Posted by N G Tue Jul 26, 2011 2:16pm PDT
Ok, I can see banning them from certain places, like nice restaurants and Harry Potter showings (not really child appropriate anyways) but this is a little excessive.
[Harry Potter not for kids - I weep]
Posted by Stef J. Tue Jul 26, 2011 2:20pm PDT
This is starting to go too far. It is turning into age discrimination.
[bet you didn't say that about smokers did you? - until they came for you! Anyhow, babies (like telephones) are anti-social almost by definition. You can't stop a rug-rat from causing chaos - it is what they do - but an adult - well, that's different because unlike babies they are responsible moral agents and not mere forces of nature.]
Most of the rest of the comments acknowledge the problem but it’s the first I return to. What gets me is the inability to see the fundamental difference between a business or individual deciding a policy on it’s own turf and a government doing it for everyone whether they like it or not. This is really concerning. Too many people do not get that distinction. But it is fundamental. It is the touchstone of freedom.
What really gets me is the naivete of people thinking bansturbation ever stops at just what you want banned. You invite a vampire into your house and all that (you have seen “The Lost Boys”?)… And I guess the idea is also that corporate power = state power. The later concept is forgiveable given the cosiness of many big companies and government. I mean do I have any choice in a wire but BT? No.
H/T Dick Puddlecote.
*They can be construed as “cute” until they shit themselves with an accompanying Dame Judith most vile and then scream blue fucking murder. And you still get fucking “Baby on board stickers” on cars. Arseholes - utter wankers (if only, or if only they’d taken the Jean-Bertrand path). People who have the even viler “Little Princess on Board” sticker have of course made their own cross to bear (a neat case of the punishment not only matching the crime but being the crime itself). I will guarantee** that their daughter will be a crack whore with a bun in the oven by fourteen.
**Not actually a guarantee.