http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html

November 9, 2005

At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops

By JODI WILGOREN

"CHICAGO, Nov. 8 - Bridget Dehl shushed her 21-month-old son, Gavin, then
clapped a hand over his mouth to squelch his tiny screams amid the Sunday
brunch bustle. When Gavin kept yelping "yeah, yeah, yeah," Ms. Dehl whisked
him from his highchair and out the door.

Right past the sign warning the cafe's customers that "children of all ages
have to behave and use their indoor voices when coming to A Taste of
Heaven," and right into a nasty spat roiling the stroller set in Chicago's
changing Andersonville neighborhood.

The owner of A Taste of Heaven, Dan McCauley, said he posted the sign - at
child level, with playful handprints - in the hope of quieting his
tin-ceilinged cafe, where toddlers have been known to sprawl between tables
and hurl themselves at display cases for sport.

But many neighborhood mothers took umbrage at the implied criticism of how
they handle their children. Soon, whispers of a boycott passed among the
playgroups in this North Side neighborhood, once an outpost of avant-garde
artists and hip *** couples but now a hot real estate market for young
professional families shunning the suburbs.

"I love people who don't have children who tell you how to parent," said
Alison Miller, 35, a psychologist, corporate coach and mother of two. "I'd
love for him to be responsible for three children for the next year and see
if he can control the volume of their voices every minute of the day."

Mr. McCauley, 44, said the protesting parents were "former cheerleaders and
beauty queens" who "have a very strong sense of entitlement." In an open
letter he handed out at the bakery, he warned of an "epidemic" of antisocial
behavior.

"Part of parenting skills is teaching kids they behave differently in a
restaurant than they do on the playground," Mr. McCauley said in an
interview. "If you send out positive energy, positive energy returns to you.
If you send out energy that says I'm the only one that matters, it's going
to be a pretty chaotic world."

And so simmers another skirmish between the childless and the
child-centered, a culture clash increasingly common in restaurants and other
public spaces as a new generation of busy, older, well-off parents ferry
little ones with them.

An online petition urging child-free sections in North Carolina restaurants
drew hundreds of signers, including Janelle Funk, who wrote, "Whenever a
hostess asks me 'smoking or non-smoking?' I respond, 'No kids!' "

At Mendo Bistro in Fort Bragg, Calif., the owners declare "Well-behaved
children and parents welcome" to try to stop unmonitored youngsters from
tap-dancing on the 100-year-old wood floors.

Menus at Zumbro Cafe in Minneapolis say: "We love children, especially when
they're tucked into chairs and behaving," which Barbara Daenzer said she
read as an invitation to cease her weekly breakfast visits after her son was
born.

Even at the Full Moon in Cambridge, Mass., a cafe created for families, with
a train table, a dollhouse and a plastic kitchen in a carpeted play area,
there are rules about inside voices and a "No lifeguard on duty" sign to
remind parents to take responsibility.

"You run the risk when you start monitoring behavior," said the Full Moon's
owner, Sarah Wheaton. "You can say no cellphones to people, but you can't
say your father speaks too loudly, he has to keep his voice down. And you
can't really say your toddler is too loud when she's eating."

Here in Chicago, parents have denounced Toast, a popular Lincoln Park
breakfast spot, as unwelcoming since a note about using inside voices
appeared on the menu six months ago. The owner of John's Place, which
resembles a kindergarten class at recess in early evening, established a
separate "family friendly" room a year ago, only to face parental threats of
lawsuits.

Many of the Andersonville mothers who are boycotting Mr. McCauley's bakery
also skip story time at Women and Children First, a feminist bookstore,
because of the rules: children can be kicked out for standing, talking or
sipping drinks. When a retail clerk at the bookstore asked a woman to stop
breast-feeding last spring, "the neighborhood set him straight real fast,"
said Mary Ann Smith, the area's alderwoman.

After a dozen years at one site, Mr. McCauley moved A Taste of Heaven six
blocks away in May 2004, to a busy corner on Clark Street. But there, he
said, teachers and writers seeking afternoon refuge were drowned out not
just by children running amok but also by oblivious cellphone chatterers.

Children were climbing the cafe's poles. A couple were blithely reading the
newspaper while their daughter lay on the floor blocking the line for
coffee. When the family whose children were running across the room to throw
themselves against the display cases left after his admonishment, Mr.
McCauley recalled, the restaurant erupted in applause.

So he put up the sign. Then things really got ugly.

"The looks I would get when I went in there made me so nervous that I would
try to buy the food as fast as I could and get out," said Laura Brauer, 40,
who has stopped visiting A Taste of Heaven with her two children. "I think
that the mothers who allow their kids to run around and scream, that's
wrong, but kids scream and there is nothing you can do about it. What are we
supposed to do, not enjoy ourselves at a cafe?"

Ms. Miller said that one day when her son, then 4 months old, was fussing, a
staff member rolled her eyes and announced for all to hear, "We've got a
screamer!"

Kim Cavitt recalled having coffee and a cookie one afternoon with her
boisterous 2-year-old when "someone came over and said you just need to keep
her quiet or you need to leave."

"We left, and we haven't been back since," Ms. Cavitt said. "You go to a
coffee shop or a bakery for a rest, to relax, and that you would have to
worry the whole time about your child doing something that children do -
really what they're saying is they don't welcome children, they want the
child to behave like an adult."

Why suffer such scorn, the mothers said, when clerks at the Swedish Bakery,
a neighborhood institution, offer children - calm or crying - free cookies?
Why confront such criticism when the recently opened Sweet Occasions, a
five-minute walk down Clark Street, designed the restroom aisle to
accommodate double strollers and offers a child-size ice cream cone for
$1.50? (At A Taste of Heaven, the smallest is $3.75.)

"It's his business; he has the right to put whatever sign he wants on the
door," Ms. Miller said. "And people have the right to respond to that sign
however they want."

Mr. McCauley said he had received kudos from several restaurant owners in
the area, though none had followed his lead. He has certainly lost customers
because of the sign, but some parents say the offense is outweighed by their
addiction to the scones, and others embrace the effort at etiquette.

"The litmus test for me is if they have highchairs or not," said Ms. Dehl,
the woman who scooped her screaming son from his seat during brunch, as she
waited out his restlessness on a sidewalk bench. "The fact that they had one
highchair, and the fact that he's the only child in the restaurant is an
indication that it's an adult place, and if he's going to do his toddler
thing, we should take him out and let him run around."

Mr. McCauley said he would rather go out of business than back down. He
likens this one small step toward good manners to his personal effort to
decrease pollution by hiring only people who live close enough to walk to
work.

"I can't change the situation in Iraq, I can't change the situation in New
Orleans," he said. "But I can change this little corner of the world."

</>

Gregory Morrow wrote:

> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
>
> November 9, 2005
>
> At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
>
> By JODI WILGOREN
>
> "CHICAGO, Nov. 8 - "... what they're saying is they don't welcome
> children, they want the
> child to behave like an adult."

It were not that long ago that this was the norm. Children were
expected to display a certain decorum based on adult behavior. Small
children incapable of this would not be taken to a public place they
could disturb. Even when i was growing up many theater's had special
sound proof viewing rooms for mothers with small children to sit in or
remove themselves to if the children got unruly.
---
JL

On 2005-11-10, Gregory Morrow <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote:

> wrong, but kids scream and there is nothing you can do about it. What are we
> supposed to do, not enjoy ourselves at a cafe?"

That's fscking right, bitch! If your enjoying yourself means making
everyone else miserable, you ain't got shit comming!

Ahem... That pretty much sums up my stance on the subject.

nb

Back to the old adage "children should be seen and not heard."

Can't say I blame the business owners who are doing these things. In
my trade one frequently sees store signs such as "unattended children
will be sold as slaves" "no children under 12 allowed" and "dogs
welcome, please keep children on leash."

If I want to see a bunch of loud kids being ignored by their parents
I'll go to the park, public beach or grocery store. I either did
something right or got lucky, my kidlet has always been well behaved in
restaurants and the like. Alas if she did opt to be a brat we were out
of there or at least one of us was while the other got the meal wrapped
& paid the check.

Jessica

"notbob" > wrote

> On 2005-11-10, Gregory Morrow
> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote:
>
>> wrong, but kids scream and there is nothing you can do about it. What are
>> we
>> supposed to do, not enjoy ourselves at a cafe?"
>
> That's fscking right, bitch! If your enjoying yourself means making
> everyone else miserable, you ain't got shit comming!
>
> Ahem... That pretty much sums up my stance on the subject.

Get this:

"We left, and we haven't been back since," Ms. Cavitt said. "You go to a
coffee shop or a bakery for a rest, to relax

YEAH lady, you got it! and I don't find it relaxing with screaming kids
running all over. Okay with you? I mean, it doesn't have to be like
a church, for pete's sake, but it's not a playground, either.

nancy

One time on Usenet, notbob > said:
> On 2005-11-10, Gregory Morrow
> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote:

> > wrong, but kids scream and there is nothing you can do about it. What are we
> > supposed to do, not enjoy ourselves at a cafe?"
>
> That's fscking right, bitch! If your enjoying yourself means making
> everyone else miserable, you ain't got shit comming!
>
> Ahem... That pretty much sums up my stance on the subject.

Funny, you fixed on the same part of the article that really got to
me as well. Parents like this woman (and others quoted in the article)
make the rest of us look bad.

Back when my son was a small child, Miguel and I would take turns
removing him from a public place if he started fussing -- we didn't
like hearing it, why would anyone else? Sure, it's a pain having to
disrupt your meal and/or plans, but it's part of the child-rearing
responsibility package. And by 3 years old, he was a model restaurant
patron. Go figure. If parents don't like having to deal with it, then
perhaps they shouldn't have had children in the first place!

Grumble, grumble...


--
Jani in WA (S'mee)
~ mom, Trollop, novice cook ~

On 2005-11-10, S'mee > wrote:

> Funny, you fixed on the same part of the article that really got to
> me as well. Parents like this woman (and others quoted in the article)
> make the rest of us look bad.

I blame my generation, the 60's boomers. They were the first to rebel
with, "Do your own thing, man" and "whatever" and "It's your bag".
These kids grew up, had kids, and that's when I first became aware of
parents becoming incensed over adults other than themselves
disciplining their children. "How dare you discipline my child?!? Who
do you think you are?". This to an adult who is entrusted with a room
full of kids for 6-8 hrs. Then corporal punishment was abolished.
The beginning of the end. It's gone downhill ever since. These
run-amok kids are the one's that will be terrorizing their own parents
in another ten years.

nb

at Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:51:25 GMT in
. net>,
(Gregory
Morrow) wrote :

>
>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
>
>November 9, 2005
>
>At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
>
I'm going to voice an alternative opinion. Naturally, people hoping for a
quiet meal are not happy when confronted with screaming kids. And kids,
once past a certain very young age, should have picked up enough social
graces to restrain themselves. IMHO certainly a 4-year-old should be able
to be reasonably quiet. If parents of kids in this age group have their
children screaming in public places, there's been a lack of training and
discipline. Furthermore, the parents of such older screamers have no right
to demand that their children be given free rein to shout and misbehave in
public.

However, restaurant owners and patrons could also do with being more
tolerant of very young children. It's unfair to expect children below a
certain age to be perfectly behaved. IMHO a 2-year-old can't be expected to
be able to maintain fully disciplined behaviour.

And it's unfair to exclude children from establishments simply on the
grounds that they might misbehave. There are many reasons for this. First
of all, there is no way kids are going to be able to learn the social
graces without being exposed to environments where those kinds of social
graces are expected. If every establishment they visited is similarly
packed with loud, boisterous kids, they're going to expect that this is the
social norm and never really learn to behave, certainly not at a reasonably
young age. Second, the risk is high that exclusionary policies will
relegate kids only to lowest-common-denominator places. Shut off from
higher culture, they get no chance to develop a more broad-minded, cultured
background from a younger age, and miss out on a critical developmental
opportunity that means later they may develop a disdain for or at least
ignorance towards high culture. Most importantly, it sends a terrible
message to young kids: that they're second-class citizens. Even fairly
young kids pick up, if often unconsciously, cues that they're not welcome
and each event where that happens will eat away at their self-esteem.

So I think exposing young kids to high-end restaurants, theatre, opera,
etc. pays off enormously in the long run in the development of kids with a
larger world-view and better understanding of culture. It is imperative,
however, for parents to maintain discipline and have some sensitivity to
others in the establishment. Once a kid starts misbehaving, you immediately
take him outside until he regains his composure. And if he persists, the
evening is over! It's ridiculous to have a kid screaming at the top of his
lungs without end and have the parents sitting there doing nothing about it
or worse still, acting like everyone else should put up with it. That goes
back to the picking-up-social-graces bit. If the kid gets no cues from his
parents that this sort of behaviour is not tolerable, he's likewise not
going to learn to behave.

However, if staff and/or patrons make moves to expel a kid permanently at
the *first* sign of trouble, it is they that could use the attitude
adjustment. A kid may, yes, explode momentarily, but if he brings it under
control in short order, then I don't think he should be admonished or his
parents excoriated. If you do so you are sending another terrible message:
that there can be no forgiveness for certain offences, even if they are
relatively minor.

I'm sure a lot of the resentment and hostility is not directed against kids
but against that group of insensitive, undisciplined parents who refuse to
take action when their kids are turning into little devils. I've seen
first-hand what happens when parents exert no discipline: you create kids
who are literally the limb of Satan! And again, no discipline is another
terrible message to give a kid: it implies that fundamentally you don't
care enough about them to teach them very much. In that sense, blatant
misbehaviour is usually a kid crying out for attention - attention he's not
getting from his parents. Really, the kids should be pitied, not condemned.
It might be fair to lay the blame on parents, and it's tempting to do so,
but it's not productive. Such accusations only make people defensive.
Better I think as the friend of such parents is to try to offer your help
with the kids. Then by setting an example you might at least be able to
send the parents a message, and if nothing else the kids might have someone
who pays attention to them. One might claim that as a friend it's not your
responsibility to raise their kids, but if they're not doing it, who will?
In times past people could turn to extended families for support with
child-raising, but todays era of the nuclear family has broken those sorts
of bonds and perhaps friends need to step in to fill that social void.
--

Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

[snip]
> "The litmus test for me is if they have highchairs or not," said
> Ms. Dehl, the woman who scooped her screaming son from
> his seat during brunch, as she waited out his restlessness on
> a sidewalk bench. "The fact that they had one highchair, and
> the fact that he's the only child in the restaurant is an indication
> that it's an adult place, and if he's going to do his toddler
> thing, we should take him out and let him run around."

BRAVO! One ****ing parent brave enough to teach her toddler that it
isn't the center of everyone else's universe is interviewed out of that
whole herd of clucking hens.

> Mr. McCauley said he would rather go out of business than
> back down.
[snip]

That _is_ his prerogative but I have a feeling that his business will
eventually increase as the clucking hens move further afield to find
other places that allow such antisocial training as each feels they are
entitled...

The Ranger
==
"The Irish believe wiff a most-'oly furor that eatin' food shoul' be a
test of courage. If we can't boil it t' deff, fry it in a vat o' grease,
or stuff it in an animal intestine, we're posit've it shouldn't be
eaten."
-- John Woolery, London Underground, 1992

Alex Rast wrote:

> at Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:51:25 GMT in
> . net>,
> (Gregory
> Morrow) wrote :
>
> >
> >http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
> >
> >November 9, 2005
> >
> >At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
> >
> I'm going to voice an alternative opinion. Naturally, people hoping
> for a
> quiet meal are not happy when confronted with screaming kids. And
> kids,
> once past a certain very young age, should have picked up enough
> social
> graces to restrain themselves. IMHO certainly a 4-year-old should be
> able
> to be reasonably quiet. If parents of kids in this age group have
> their
> children screaming in public places, there's been a lack of training
> and
> discipline. Furthermore, the parents of such older screamers have no
> right
> to demand that their children be given free rein to shout and
> misbehave in
> public.
>
> However, restaurant owners and patrons could also do with being more
> tolerant of very young children. It's unfair to expect children below
> a
> certain age to be perfectly behaved. IMHO a 2-year-old can't be
> expected to
> be able to maintain fully disciplined behaviour.
>
> And it's unfair to exclude children from establishments simply on the
> grounds that they might misbehave. There are many reasons for this.
> First
> of all, there is no way kids are going to be able to learn the social
> graces without being exposed to environments where those kinds of
> social
> graces are expected.

"No way"? should not these "social skills" be developed in the home and
not left to commercial establishments to instill them?

I have several acquaintances that do not even try to have structured
family meals, the kids eat what is available when they want it,
microwaving or other wise heating as the situation warrents, ordering
pizza and calling it a meal or otherwise just not practicing the more
traditonal forms of the family meal.

These are the kids of working parents, who prefere to 'hanging out' with
their friends to a sit down meal with family.

The one family i know that still insists there kids not only come home
for dinner but require them to dress for it can be criticized for a
number of other things but not their childrens manners.
---
JL

> --
>
> Alex Rast
>
> (remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

On Wed 09 Nov 2005 07:43:58p, Thus Spake Zarathustra, or was it Alex Rast?

> Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
> Subject: At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
> From: (Alex Rast)
>
> at Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:51:25 GMT in
> . net>,
> (Gregory
> Morrow) wrote :
>
>>
>>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
>>
>>November 9, 2005
>>
>>At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
>>
> I'm going to voice an alternative opinion. Naturally, people hoping for
> a quiet meal are not happy when confronted with screaming kids. And
> kids, once past a certain very young age, should have picked up enough
> social graces to restrain themselves. IMHO certainly a 4-year-old should
> be able to be reasonably quiet. If parents of kids in this age group
> have their children screaming in public places, there's been a lack of
> training and discipline. Furthermore, the parents of such older
> screamers have no right to demand that their children be given free rein
> to shout and misbehave in public.

< snip >

Very well expressed, Alex, and I don't disagree at all with your premise.
However, for the most part, I shall continue to seek out "adult only"
venues. It's enough to endure the rowdy ones in other inescapable
situations without having my meal ruined in a nice restaurant. Since I
don't particularly like childre, it's better left to other to train them.

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
_____________________________________________

A chicken in every pot is a *LOT* of chicken!

Alex Rast wrote:

> And it's unfair to exclude children from establishments simply on the
> grounds that they might misbehave.


Nope, it's a GREAT reason...

Thats because a child in an establishment is a HUGE unknown
quantity...the kid might act up, it might be just fine, in any case
even the presence of a kid creates a lot of tension for many people,
you have to make all this extra accomodation for them. If adults act
up you can toss them out, no problem. With a misbehaving kid there is
always the potential for a lot of extra drama, e.g. the fact that your
establishment might end up being mentioned in the _New York Times_, the
fact that you might have some angry jerk parent on your hands...

There are plenty of places for kids to go act up, they are welcome to
go there...they don't have to infest each and every place that exists,
many of which us adults frequent in order to try and enjoy ourselves.


Besides which this place mentioned in the article is a BUSINESS...a mom
coming in with her kid for a treat is in most cases a PITA from a
financial standpoint, e.g. they don't spend much, they take up lots of
extra room with those friggin' Humvee strollers, kids are are a real
turn - off for many from an aesthetic standpoint, etc....



> So I think exposing young kids to high-end restaurants, theatre, opera,
> etc. pays off enormously in the long run in the development of kids with a
> larger world-view and better understanding of culture.


Yep, AFTER they have learned proper behavior at HOME...

We had to learn proper behaviour at home, only later were we permitted
to go to restaurants, church, movies, etc. When I was a kid (I'm 51)
even events such as weddings, funerals, etc. were primarily adult
functions, kids were rarely taken along even to these types of
things...

The thing that gets me about these yupmoos that are complaining is that
they a

1) stay - at - home moms...

2) they are financially well - off (daddy usually has a big - cheeze
job at some broker or lawyer firm downtown) and thus are very well -
indulged materially. They want for nothing. At a very early age they
have all the nice things that money can buy, unlike earlier generations
they don't have to postpone gratification for *anything*...

3) these kids are *endlessly* exposed to other social settings via pre
- school, play dates, and myriad other things...

4) quite a few of these moms have part - time nannies or helpers (or
even full - time)...


My folks both worked, we were working class, and yet us kids knew
proper manners at an early age. SO what is this problem with this
particular mothering set? All these wonderful advantages and their
kiddies can't even behave decently in a public setting? I think the
problem is with the mothers - they themselves have been over - indulged
and they have never heard the phrases, "No..." and "You can't...".

There should be no reason why a business owner should have to put up a
sign asking patrons to use their "inside voices", there should be big
outrage on either side about this, and there should be no article in
the national press about this...but there ya go.

--
Best
Greg

"Michael "Dog3" Lonergan" > wrote in message
...
> "Gregory Morrow"
> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> looking for
> trouble wrote in
> ink.net:
>> Many of the Andersonville mothers who are boycotting Mr. McCauley's
>> bakery also skip story time at Women and Children First, a feminist
>> bookstore, because of the rules: children can be kicked out for
>> standing, talking or sipping drinks. When a retail clerk at the
>> bookstore asked a woman to stop breast-feeding last spring, "the
>> neighborhood set him straight real fast," said Mary Ann Smith, the
>> area's alderwoman.
>
> I think the breast feeding would depend on the establishment. Talking or
> sipping drinks is perfectly acceptable in my book.

Standing & talking during story time is not being considerate of the patrons
who would like to listen to the story. As for kids sipping drinks in a
bookstore, that's an invitation to lost inventory and sticky messes,
Chapters/Starbucks notwithstanding. Breastfeeding should be ignored in the
same way as bottle feeding would be.

Gabby

Nancy Young wrote:

> YEAH lady, you got it! and I don't find it relaxing with screaming kids
> running all over. Okay with you? I mean, it doesn't have to be like
> a church, for pete's sake, but it's not a playground, either.


Been to church lately? In my experience, religious institutions are the
worst for tolerating bad behavior in children, um, er, for putting up
with parents who don't take the monsters to the cry room when they start
to fuss.


Ideally, the parents would take their kids to church, and one of them
would exit with the baby whenever it got noisy. That could be
squawling, or it could be the happy vocalizing of a pre-verbal toddler.
Ideally, before the child had any real understanding of behavior
modification, s/he would have some pre-conscious understanding that
noise doesn't happen in that place. This wouldn't be a foreign concept
since it would be reinforced with the idea that food never happens in
the living room and running never happens in the department store. The
older members of the congregation would then coo and tsk and say nice
things about liking children while the parents pace up and down the
foyer or front lobby (I like the word and concept of "cry room.") with
the kid.


The reality is somewhat different. Parents (some of them, I'm not
making accusations) have the idea that children will grow into an
attention span and grow into an ability to stay still and quiet the way
they grow into walking and talking. They think those things just happen
and don't realize all the ways they encourage them. They think that the
religious service will somehow foster quiet in the kids. So they bring
the kids and let them yell.


None of that bothers me too much. What gets me is the handwringing of
the clergy and the board of directors. The newsletter is filled with
pleas for parents to keep their kids quiet. In one instance, they had
this idea to put toys in the back of the room so the kids would play
quietly by themselves during the service. But not once did anyone take
responsibility for telling the parents to remove the children! What's a
religious congregation for if it's not to give advice and help to young
parents who could benefit from the wisdom of those who have been there
ahead of them? But the board and clergy know that if they insist that
kids who are being active and noisy be removed, the parents will
effectively boycott, and they need the money.


--Lia

This is exactly the thinking that got us to this point! I'm only 40 but buy
the time I was 3 I was expected to sit at the table during the meal at home
and behave- sounds terrible nowadays for sure. Before that my parents would
have got a babysitter- I was taught control BEFORE being in public
situations like restaurants. I would have known what would HAPPEN to me if
I didn't behave- this is what is lacking today. Besides, I go to a
restaurant to enjoy my meal- not to help you raise your child. FRC

Michael "Dog3" Lonergan wrote:

> "Gabby" > looking for trouble wrote in
> :
>
> >
> > "Michael "Dog3" Lonergan" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> "Gregory Morrow"
> >> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> looking
> >> for trouble wrote in
> >> ink.net:
> >>> Many of the Andersonville mothers who are boycotting Mr. McCauley's
> >>> bakery also skip story time at Women and Children First, a feminist
> >>> bookstore, because of the rules: children can be kicked out for
> >>> standing, talking or sipping drinks. When a retail clerk at the
> >>> bookstore asked a woman to stop breast-feeding last spring, "the
> >>> neighborhood set him straight real fast," said Mary Ann Smith, the
> >>> area's alderwoman.
> >>
> >> I think the breast feeding would depend on the establishment. Talking
> >> or sipping drinks is perfectly acceptable in my book.
> >
> > Standing & talking during story time is not being considerate of the
> > patrons who would like to listen to the story. As for kids sipping
> > drinks in a bookstore, that's an invitation to lost inventory and
> > sticky messes, Chapters/Starbucks notwithstanding. Breastfeeding
> > should be ignored in the same way as bottle feeding would be.
> >
> > Gabby
>
> I must have gotten the wrong impression of the storytelling. I had the
> impression it was a bookstore/coffee house combination establishment. We
> have 1 or 2 in St. Louis and it's perfectly acceptable to sip a drink or
> talk quietly during a book reading. The talking is usually done in the food
> area and the story telling off the food area.


It's two different businesses Michael - the Taste of Heaven cafe place
and the Women and Children FIrst bookstore...they are both on the same
street.

There was a segment on the local nooze about this tonight, the owner of
the cafe struck me as obviously ***. Lots of us queers don't quite
cotton to the entitlement moo - stroller set that has invaded our
formerly mostly - *** nabes*...these chicks are real pushy and
generally obnoxious. Squawking on cell phones, double - wide strollers
blocking everything, careening around in SUV's, shrieking kids, etc....

The Andersonville area (5200 North Clark St.area) where these
businesses are located is an old - fashioned nabe of generally single
family dwellings mixed with older low - rise apartment buildings, it's
got nice quiet side streets, has good public transport, etc. About 15
years ago it started to become a viable lower - cost alternative for
*******s and gays to the increasingly congested and higher - priced
East Lakeview aka "Boystown" area (where I live). Gays (and especially
*******s) "pioneered" the Andersonville area, woke it from it's torpor,
and it had lotsa *** businesses, bars, etc. Now with the stroller set
yuppies moving in some of those earlier folks are being displaced, real
estate prices have zoomed, and friendly little offbeat places have to
move on or close, they can't afford the rent. These yuppies are also
real entitlement - minded, invariably one of the first things they'll
try to do is shut down local bars that have been there for years. With
construction of their tacky new condos they also cause a real
congestion problem...

So it's also kind of a clash between the older *** - ******* set who
moved in years ago and the crass new moneyed yuppies who have no regard
for the neighborhood. It's a common tale in many cities around the
country (The Castro, NY's Chelsea, etc,)...used to be a working couple
with a decent but not extravagant income could afford a house in
Andersonville, no more. That's life, as Frankie Sinatra so sadly
sang...

I was kinda surprised to read about the breastfeeding "incident" at
Women and Children First, maybe the owners are a coupla bitter 'n
barren old bulldykes, lol...

[*but we don't mind looking at their husbands...and I've seen a few of
those husbands "out and about" if ya know what I mean ;--p ]

--
Best
Greg

Gregory Morrow wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
>
<snip>

> "I love people who don't have children who tell you how to parent," said
> Alison Miller, 35, a psychologist, corporate coach and mother of two. "I'd
> love for him to be responsible for three children for the next year and see
> if he can control the volume of their voices every minute of the day."

Oh, FFS. I have a 21 month old son. If you can't control your kids,
take them home!
We are having this same discussion at misc.kids.

>
> Mr. McCauley, 44, said the protesting parents were "former cheerleaders and
> beauty queens" who "have a very strong sense of entitlement." In an open
> letter he handed out at the bakery, he warned of an "epidemic" of antisocial
> behavior.
>
> "Part of parenting skills is teaching kids they behave differently in a
> restaurant than they do on the playground," Mr. McCauley said in an
> interview. "If you send out positive energy, positive energy returns to you.
> If you send out energy that says I'm the only one that matters, it's going
> to be a pretty chaotic world."

Amen. I just wish more proprietors were as enlightened.

>
> And so simmers another skirmish between the childless and the
> child-centered, a culture clash increasingly common in restaurants and other
> public spaces as a new generation of busy, older, well-off parents ferry
> little ones with them.
>
> An online petition urging child-free sections in North Carolina restaurants
> drew hundreds of signers, including Janelle Funk, who wrote, "Whenever a
> hostess asks me 'smoking or non-smoking?' I respond, 'No kids!' "
>
> At Mendo Bistro in Fort Bragg, Calif., the owners declare "Well-behaved
> children and parents welcome" to try to stop unmonitored youngsters from
> tap-dancing on the 100-year-old wood floors.
>
> Menus at Zumbro Cafe in Minneapolis say:

I love this place. One of my fave Mpls hang-outs.

>"We love children, especially when
> they're tucked into chairs and behaving," which Barbara Daenzer said she
> read as an invitation to cease her weekly breakfast visits after her son was
> born.
>
> Even at the Full Moon in Cambridge, Mass., a cafe created for families, with
> a train table, a dollhouse and a plastic kitchen in a carpeted play area,
> there are rules about inside voices and a "No lifeguard on duty" sign to
> remind parents to take responsibility.
>
> "You run the risk when you start monitoring behavior," said the Full Moon's
> owner, Sarah Wheaton. "You can say no cellphones to people, but you can't
> say your father speaks too loudly, he has to keep his voice down. And you
> can't really say your toddler is too loud when she's eating."
>
> Here in Chicago, parents have denounced Toast, a popular Lincoln Park
> breakfast spot, as unwelcoming since a note about using inside voices
> appeared on the menu six months ago. The owner of John's Place, which
> resembles a kindergarten class at recess in early evening, established a
> separate "family friendly" room a year ago, only to face parental threats of
> lawsuits.
>
> Many of the Andersonville mothers who are boycotting Mr. McCauley's bakery
> also skip story time at Women and Children First, a feminist bookstore,
> because of the rules: children can be kicked out for standing,

That's a bit excessive. Most toddlers will not sit for 30 minutes
straight. I understand no drinks and no talking.

> talking or
> sipping drinks. When a retail clerk at the bookstore asked a woman to stop
> breast-feeding last spring, "the neighborhood set him straight real fast,"
> said Mary Ann Smith, the area's alderwoman.
>
> After a dozen years at one site, Mr. McCauley moved A Taste of Heaven six
> blocks away in May 2004, to a busy corner on Clark Street. But there, he
> said, teachers and writers seeking afternoon refuge were drowned out not
> just by children running amok but also by oblivious cellphone chatterers.
>
> Children were climbing the cafe's poles. A couple were blithely reading the
> newspaper while their daughter lay on the floor blocking the line for
> coffee. When the family whose children were running across the room to throw
> themselves against the display cases left after his admonishment, Mr.
> McCauley recalled, the restaurant erupted in applause.
>
> So he put up the sign. Then things really got ugly.
>
> "The looks I would get when I went in there made me so nervous that I would
> try to buy the food as fast as I could and get out," said Laura Brauer, 40,
> who has stopped visiting A Taste of Heaven with her two children. "I think
> that the mothers who allow their kids to run around and scream, that's
> wrong, but kids scream and there is nothing you can do about it. What are we
> supposed to do, not enjoy ourselves at a cafe?"

Correct. If you have a screamer, leave.

>
> Ms. Miller said that one day when her son, then 4 months old, was fussing, a
> staff member rolled her eyes and announced for all to hear, "We've got a
> screamer!"
>
> Kim Cavitt recalled having coffee and a cookie one afternoon with her
> boisterous 2-year-old when "someone came over and said you just need to keep
> her quiet or you need to leave."
>
> "We left, and we haven't been back since," Ms. Cavitt said. "You go to a
> coffee shop or a bakery for a rest, to relax, and that you would have to
> worry the whole time about your child doing something that children do -
> really what they're saying is they don't welcome children, they want the
> child to behave like an adult."
>
> Why suffer such scorn, the mothers said, when clerks at the Swedish Bakery,
> a neighborhood institution, offer children - calm or crying - free cookies?
> Why confront such criticism when the recently opened Sweet Occasions, a
> five-minute walk down Clark Street, designed the restroom aisle to
> accommodate double strollers and offers a child-size ice cream cone for
> $1.50? (At A Taste of Heaven, the smallest is $3.75.)
>
> "It's his business; he has the right to put whatever sign he wants on the
> door," Ms. Miller said. "And people have the right to respond to that sign
> however they want."

Bingo. That includes telling you to take your brat home.


>
> Mr. McCauley said he had received kudos from several restaurant owners in
> the area, though none had followed his lead. He has certainly lost customers
> because of the sign, but some parents say the offense is outweighed by their
> addiction to the scones, and others embrace the effort at etiquette.
>
> "The litmus test for me is if they have highchairs or not," said Ms. Dehl,
> the woman who scooped her screaming son from his seat during brunch, as she
> waited out his restlessness on a sidewalk bench. "The fact that they had one
> highchair, and the fact that he's the only child in the restaurant is an
> indication that it's an adult place, and if he's going to do his toddler
> thing, we should take him out and let him run around."
>
> Mr. McCauley said he would rather go out of business than back down. He
> likens this one small step toward good manners to his personal effort to
> decrease pollution by hiring only people who live close enough to walk to
> work.
>
> "I can't change the situation in Iraq, I can't change the situation in New
> Orleans," he said. "But I can change this little corner of the world."

Good for him. I seriosuly cannot fathom why so many parents think this
is unreasonable. One does not NEED to patronize a coffee shop - it is
a luxury. If you cannot control your child, don't take him in there.
Yes, "kids will be kids" - but they do not have to "be kids" every
place in society.

Here in PDX there are plenty of kid-friendly places to dine, get
coffee, play. Why people feel the need to take their toddler to adult
venues is beyond me. I get so ****ed off with parents who fail to
PARENT their children. If you do not want the responsibility of
making the child behave in public, don't have the kid.

-L.

Alex Rast wrote:
<snip>

>
> However, restaurant owners and patrons could also do with being more
> tolerant of very young children. It's unfair to expect children below a
> certain age to be perfectly behaved. IMHO a 2-year-old can't be expected to
> be able to maintain fully disciplined behaviour.

Then don't take him places he will be disruptive.

>
> And it's unfair to exclude children from establishments simply on the
> grounds that they might misbehave. There are many reasons for this. First
> of all, there is no way kids are going to be able to learn the social
> graces without being exposed to environments where those kinds of social
> graces are expected. If every establishment they visited is similarly
> packed with loud, boisterous kids, they're going to expect that this is the
> social norm and never really learn to behave, certainly not at a reasonably
> young age.

Bologna. You groom them at the family diners. You test them at home.
You take them elsewhere when they past the tests at home. Certainly
not before the age of 6 or so.


Second, the risk is high that exclusionary policies will
> relegate kids only to lowest-common-denominator places. Shut off from
> higher culture, they get no chance to develop a more broad-minded, cultured
> background from a younger age, and miss out on a critical developmental
> opportunity that means later they may develop a disdain for or at least
> ignorance towards high culture.


Puh-leez! Do you think my 21 month old son is lacking in development
because he doesn't get to eat halibut at a ritzy restaurant, or misses
a theater show? I can assure you he gets far more postitive
stimulation wrestling with other kids at Peanut Butter and Ellie's.
http://www.peanutbutterellies.com/




> Most importantly, it sends a terrible
> message to young kids: that they're second-class citizens. Even fairly
> young kids pick up, if often unconsciously, cues that they're not welcome
> and each event where that happens will eat away at their self-esteem.

<rolls eyeball> Great - instill in them that they are entitled to do
whatever the hell they want. Go ahead. Just what society needs. I
suppose you allow your kids in the bedroom when you're making babies?
Afterall, if they're not welcome - it will eat away at their
self-esteem!


-L.

Gabby wrote:
> Standing & talking during story time is not being considerate of the patrons
> who would like to listen to the story.

Depends on the age group. Toddler story time is uusally filled with
kids who cant sit still or be quiet. I expect 5 year olds and up to do
so.

> As for kids sipping drinks in a
> bookstore, that's an invitation to lost inventory and sticky messes,
> Chapters/Starbucks notwithstanding.

I think they were referencing noisy straw sipping which is rude
anywhere.

>Breastfeeding should be ignored in the
> same way as bottle feeding would be.

Unless Moomie is wantonly showing her breast. Then she should be asked
to leave. There are titnazis out there who think nothing of shoving up
the shirt, baring all, and sticking the kid on - no bothering to cover
up. That's just plain rude, not to mention, gross.
-L.

In >, on 11/10/05
at 04:39 AM, Wayne Boatwright > said:



>On Wed 09 Nov 2005 07:43:58p, Thus Spake Zarathustra, or was it Alex
>Rast?

>> Newsgroups: rec.food.cooking
>> Subject: At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
>> From: (Alex Rast)
>>
>> at Thu, 10 Nov 2005 00:51:25 GMT in
>> . net>,
>> (Gregory
>> Morrow) wrote :
>>
>>>
>>>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
>>>
>>>November 9, 2005
>>>
>>>At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
>>>
>> I'm going to voice an alternative opinion. Naturally, people hoping for
>> a quiet meal are not happy when confronted with screaming kids. And
>> kids, once past a certain very young age, should have picked up enough
>> social graces to restrain themselves. IMHO certainly a 4-year-old should
>> be able to be reasonably quiet. If parents of kids in this age group
>> have their children screaming in public places, there's been a lack of
>> training and discipline. Furthermore, the parents of such older
>> screamers have no right to demand that their children be given free rein
>> to shout and misbehave in public.

>< snip >

>Very well expressed, Alex, and I don't disagree at all with your premise.
> However, for the most part, I shall continue to seek out "adult only"
>venues. It's enough to endure the rowdy ones in other inescapable
>situations without having my meal ruined in a nice restaurant. Since I
>don't particularly like childre, it's better left to other to train them.


Hell, the parents haven't been trained. First things first.


jim

--
-----------------------------------------------------------

-----------------------------------------------------------

Gregory Morrow wrote:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
>
> November 9, 2005
>
> At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
>
> By JODI WILGOREN
>
> "CHICAGO, Nov. 8 - Bridget Dehl shushed her 21-month-old son, Gavin,
> then clapped a hand over his mouth to squelch his tiny screams amid
> the Sunday brunch bustle. When Gavin kept yelping "yeah, yeah, yeah,"
> Ms. Dehl whisked him from his highchair and out the door.
>
> Right past the sign warning the cafe's customers that "children of
> all ages have to behave and use their indoor voices when coming to A
> Taste of Heaven," and right into a nasty spat roiling the stroller
> set in Chicago's changing Andersonville neighborhood.
>
> The owner of A Taste of Heaven, Dan McCauley, said he posted the sign
> - at child level, with playful handprints - in the hope of quieting
> his tin-ceilinged cafe, where toddlers have been known to sprawl
> between tables and hurl themselves at display cases for sport.
>
> But many neighborhood mothers took umbrage at the implied criticism
(snippage)

Guess what? I don't care what people think about their children. Would
they want someones dog peeing on their pants leg? Would they pet Fido on
the head and say he is just being precocious? I don't think so.

I don't want a loudly whining child sitting next to me at a table, whether
I'm having coffee or anything else. It's one thing for a child to be a
little cranky; they usually get over that. It's a totally different thing
for the parent to be oblivious to the fact that the child is just being
obnoxious. In fact, the parent being oblivious *is* the problem.

I was on a flight from Atlanta, I'd been in the airport on a layover for 5
hours so I wasn't exactly a happy camper, you know? This little boy, I'm
guessing about 2, was crying, getting progressively louder. Obviously you
don't have many places to go on an airplane, but his mother completely
ignored him. She was too busy discovering the people seated across the
aisle were from the same area as she and her husband and chatting away with
them. Meanwhile, the boy got louder and louder, crying, screaming,
demanding her attention. You'd have thought she was deaf.

I don't usually speak up in situations like this. But it was I wasn't
exactly feeling like I should have to play hostess. I finally turned and
said to this woman, "Would you shut the F*** up or at least find out what
your kid is screaming about?" You'd have thought I'd asked her to drop her
pants and demonstrate what to do with the little oxygen mask thing (that
might have been fun!). But guess what? She did shut up... gave the boy a
bottle of juice and he shut up, too.

Modern mother, if thy name is Oblivious... stay out of my establishment.

Jill

On Thu 10 Nov 2005 01:38:53a, Thus Spake Zarathustra, or was it -L.?

<long snip>

> Here in PDX there are plenty of kid-friendly places to dine, get
> coffee, play. Why people feel the need to take their toddler to adult
> venues is beyond me. I get so ****ed off with parents who fail to
> PARENT their children. If you do not want the responsibility of
> making the child behave in public, don't have the kid.

But the're "entitled" doncha know, and to hell with everybody else. It's
enough to make you puke.

--
Wayne Boatwright *¿*
_____________________________________________

A chicken in every pot is a *LOT* of chicken!

> wrote in message
news
> This is exactly the thinking that got us to this point! I'm only 40 but
> buy the time I was 3 I was expected to sit at the table during the meal at
> home and behave- sounds terrible nowadays for sure. Before that my
> parents would have got a babysitter- I was taught control BEFORE being in
> public situations like restaurants. I would have known what would HAPPEN
> to me if I didn't behave- this is what is lacking today. Besides, I go to
> a restaurant to enjoy my meal- not to help you raise your child. FRC

Going to a restaurant to help raise your child -- hmm. Yes, indeedy, this
is sorta like people taking their dogs out to be around people to
'socialize' them. A lot of the dogs, tho, have leashes and muzzles. On our
way home from CT last week, we stopped in to have a cup of coffee at a place
where we knew there would be children running wild, but it truly was an
experience to watch one couple coddle one of their children who ran the
restaurant back and forth frustrating the parents who were trying to control
him. When they would pick him up, he would bend his back over and scream.
Father finally took him to the car and father sat in the car with the door
open, putting the subdued child in the back seat. For some reason, this
calmed the child and he was sitting their all happy as could be. This was
such a family farce that mother looked uphappy, and another child was
sitting with a sullen face. No one drinking their coffee could drink it
without participating in this family's probably-familiar tragedy. As we
were driving down the road later, I said, just think, they are still living
this nightmare while we can walk away from it. It will probably be the same
for them for years to come, and we ARE FREE!!!!
Dee

Dee Randall wrote:

> I said, just think, they are still living
> this nightmare while we can walk away from it. It will probably be
> the same for them for years to come, and we ARE FREE!!!!


Too often, kids are in caffiene/sugar shock from too much soda and juice,
causing the bad behavior.

Imho,

Andy
Who's idea of daycare is kids in velcro suits stuck on velcro walls.

"Andy" <q> wrote in message
.. .
> Dee Randall wrote:
>
>> I said, just think, they are still living
>> this nightmare while we can walk away from it. It will probably be
>> the same for them for years to come, and we ARE FREE!!!!
>
>
> Too often, kids are in caffiene/sugar shock from too much soda and juice,
> causing the bad behavior.
>

Yep, she had brought in from the car their own soda drinks (to same money -
a good idea) for the kids, while they had coffee. One kid was depressed,
looked like he was in a coma, and the other one was acting riotuously
insane.
They will need an exorcist to get out of this dilemma.

Funny, but all our parents and grandparents had to do was "give us the eye."
There were never any whippings, just the 'look.' We knew what that meant -
disapproval. Wonder why this doesn't work today.
Dee Dee

On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:45:34 -0500, "Dee Randall"
> wrote:

>
>"Andy" <q> wrote in message
. ..
>> Dee Randall wrote:
>>
>>> I said, just think, they are still living
>>> this nightmare while we can walk away from it. It will probably be
>>> the same for them for years to come, and we ARE FREE!!!!
>>
>>
>> Too often, kids are in caffiene/sugar shock from too much soda and juice,
>> causing the bad behavior.
>>
>
>Yep, she had brought in from the car their own soda drinks (to same money -
>a good idea) for the kids, while they had coffee. One kid was depressed,
>looked like he was in a coma, and the other one was acting riotuously
>insane.
>They will need an exorcist to get out of this dilemma.
>
>Funny, but all our parents and grandparents had to do was "give us the eye."
>There were never any whippings, just the 'look.' We knew what that meant -
>disapproval. Wonder why this doesn't work today.
>Dee Dee
>

Probably because somewhere along the line we actually got punished. I
got a few spankings and remember at least one time being sent outside
to pick a switch. Don't bother to go back in with a thin twig. And
no I was not abused.
--
Susan N.

"Moral indignation is in most cases two percent moral,
48 percent indignation, and 50 percent envy."
Vittorio De Sica, Italian movie director (1901-1974

notbob > writes:
>On 2005-11-10, Gregory Morrow <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote:

>> wrong, but kids scream and there is nothing you can do about it. What are we
>> supposed to do, not enjoy ourselves at a cafe?"

>That's fscking right, bitch! If your enjoying yourself means making
>everyone else miserable, you ain't got shit comming!

>Ahem... That pretty much sums up my stance on the subject.

And sums it up well, I think. The "there's nothing you can do about
it" line is crap. Be a parent and control your children. Many parents
just tune it out when their child is behaving like an animal and then
get defensive when confronted with it. They are defensive because they
know it's their responsibility and they are shirking it.
Besides, a restaurant or cafe can have all the rules they want. It's
their business. Mommies who have nothing better to do than to try and
force a cafe owner to put up with their bratty, misbehaving children are
pathetic.

Stacia

In article >,
The Cook > wrote:

> On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:45:34 -0500, "Dee Randall"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Andy" <q> wrote in message
> . ..
> >> Dee Randall wrote:
> >>
> >>> I said, just think, they are still living
> >>> this nightmare while we can walk away from it. It will probably be
> >>> the same for them for years to come, and we ARE FREE!!!!
> >>
> >>
> >> Too often, kids are in caffiene/sugar shock from too much soda and juice,
> >> causing the bad behavior.
> >>
> >
> >Yep, she had brought in from the car their own soda drinks (to same money -
> >a good idea) for the kids, while they had coffee. One kid was depressed,
> >looked like he was in a coma, and the other one was acting riotuously
> >insane.
> >They will need an exorcist to get out of this dilemma.
> >
> >Funny, but all our parents and grandparents had to do was "give us the eye."
> >There were never any whippings, just the 'look.' We knew what that meant -
> >disapproval. Wonder why this doesn't work today.
> >Dee Dee
> >
>
> Probably because somewhere along the line we actually got punished. I
> got a few spankings and remember at least one time being sent outside
> to pick a switch. Don't bother to go back in with a thin twig. And
> no I was not abused.

Oh lord! <lol>

My dad used to do the same thing!
A thinner one was worse than a thick one!

And no, I was not abused either... ;-)
But I sure as hell learned to behave in public by age three!

Ever get grabbed by the ear???? Ouch!

Funny, dad has apologized to me about that, but I told him I not only
forgave him, but was grateful for it.
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

Glitter Ninja wrote:
> notbob writes:
> > Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
> >> wrong, but kids scream and there is nothing you can do about it.
>
> >That's ****ing right, bitch! If your enjoying yourself means making
> >everyone else miserable, you ain't got shit comming!
>
> >Ahem... That pretty much sums up my stance on the subject.
>
> And sums it up well, I think. The "there's nothing you can do about
> it" line is crap. Be a parent and control your children. Many parents
> just tune it out when their child is behaving like an animal and then
> get defensive when confronted with it. They are defensive because they
> know it's their responsibility and they are shirking it.
> Besides, a restaurant or cafe can have all the rules they want. It's
> their business. Mommies who have nothing better to do than to try and
> force a cafe owner to put up with their bratty, misbehaving children are
> pathetic.

What's pathetic is all this blathering... if restaurant proprietors
want to control behaviour they should not have granted access... a
proprietor is not required to permit access to minors. Of course a
prerequesite for success in a capitalistic society is to be a greedy
bastid... but folks seem to want it both ways. If a proprietor grants
access to minors they can't expect them to behave differently from how
typical minors do... no different if they permit patrons to bring in a
dog, then they need to expect those dogs to poop on the floor.
Personally the crying doesn't really bother me so much (plenty of
adults are more boisterous bastids), but I don't think any kids who are
still in diapers should be permitted inside eateries of any type...
even if dining on a big mac I don't feel I should have to be subjected
to the stench of your kid's poop... yoose got kids in pampers drive
around back and speak to the clown.

Sheldon (who doesn't know which is worse, the stench of baby poop or
baby powder)

The following is from another newsgroup, which had two or three threads
about "A Taste of Heaven."

Lenona.




> >The owner of John's Place, which resembles a kindergarten
> >class at recess in early evening, established a separate "family
> >friendly" room a year ago, only to face parental threats of lawsuits.


> What, what, WHAT do they want??????? There is truly, absolutely **NO**
> pleasing breeders!



Ah, but you see, any given entitlemoo is firmly entrenched in a fantasy
it's
only "those other peole" who have bratty, obnoxious, out-of-control
spawn.
HER little angles are "just being children." She would (huff) NEVER
let
them behave in an anti-social manner! Poor moo just wants to have a
peaceful cup of coffee. She learned long ago to tune out their
relentless
assault on the senses; why would anyone else mind the presence of a
such
adorable, spirited little cherubs?

Being thrown in the "family room" along with others of her kind
strongly
suggests that she and her brood are no better, and at least as
annoying, as
all the others. That tends not to set well with any given moo of a
future
cancer-curer or architect of world peace.


TL

OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:

> In article >,
> The Cook > wrote:
>
>
>>On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:45:34 -0500, "Dee Randall"
> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"Andy" <q> wrote in message
6...
>>>
>>>>Dee Randall wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>I said, just think, they are still living
>>>>>this nightmare while we can walk away from it. It will probably be
>>>>>the same for them for years to come, and we ARE FREE!!!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Too often, kids are in caffiene/sugar shock from too much soda and juice,
>>>>causing the bad behavior.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Yep, she had brought in from the car their own soda drinks (to same money -
>>>a good idea) for the kids, while they had coffee. One kid was depressed,
>>>looked like he was in a coma, and the other one was acting riotuously
>>>insane.
>>>They will need an exorcist to get out of this dilemma.
>>>
>>>Funny, but all our parents and grandparents had to do was "give us the eye."
>>>There were never any whippings, just the 'look.' We knew what that meant -
>>>disapproval. Wonder why this doesn't work today.
>>>Dee Dee
>>>
>>
>>Probably because somewhere along the line we actually got punished. I
>>got a few spankings and remember at least one time being sent outside
>>to pick a switch. Don't bother to go back in with a thin twig. And
>>no I was not abused.
>
>
> Oh lord! <lol>
>
> My dad used to do the same thing!
> A thinner one was worse than a thick one!

Oh that sounds like a horrid thing to do!
>
> And no, I was not abused either... ;-)
> But I sure as hell learned to behave in public by age three!
>
> Ever get grabbed by the ear???? Ouch!

DH has the patience of a saint and very rarely lost his cool when the
kids were younger. If he was really, really perturbed, he would grab
them by the ear and calmly say "How many times have I told you..."
speaking through his tongue that was curled to one side and clenched
through his teeth. It's the funniest thing you ever saw. I can recall
only a very few times that happened and generally it was with the
youngest one that has always been a hell cat right from the day he was
born. Neither of us believe in spankings or even hitting our kids. The
above ear thing was the only thing in the way of violence and I think it
came out when he got very upset because that is what his Dad did to him.
>
> Funny, dad has apologized to me about that, but I told him I not only
> forgave him, but was grateful for it.

~patches~ wrote:

> Neither of us believe in spankings or even hitting our kids.

Pop used to spank us but we had to be extra-misbehaving. He'd always say
"this is gonna hurt me a lot more than it will you."

And one day it was actually true!



Andy

In article >,
~patches~ > wrote:

> OmManiPadmeOmelet wrote:
>
> > In article >,
> > The Cook > wrote:
> >
> >
> >>On Thu, 10 Nov 2005 09:45:34 -0500, "Dee Randall"
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>"Andy" <q> wrote in message
> 6...
> >>>
> >>>>Dee Randall wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>I said, just think, they are still living
> >>>>>this nightmare while we can walk away from it. It will probably be
> >>>>>the same for them for years to come, and we ARE FREE!!!!
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>Too often, kids are in caffiene/sugar shock from too much soda and juice,
> >>>>causing the bad behavior.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>>Yep, she had brought in from the car their own soda drinks (to same money
> >>>-
> >>>a good idea) for the kids, while they had coffee. One kid was depressed,
> >>>looked like he was in a coma, and the other one was acting riotuously
> >>>insane.
> >>>They will need an exorcist to get out of this dilemma.
> >>>
> >>>Funny, but all our parents and grandparents had to do was "give us the
> >>>eye."
> >>>There were never any whippings, just the 'look.' We knew what that meant
> >>>-
> >>>disapproval. Wonder why this doesn't work today.
> >>>Dee Dee
> >>>
> >>
> >>Probably because somewhere along the line we actually got punished. I
> >>got a few spankings and remember at least one time being sent outside
> >>to pick a switch. Don't bother to go back in with a thin twig. And
> >>no I was not abused.
> >
> >
> > Oh lord! <lol>
> >
> > My dad used to do the same thing!
> > A thinner one was worse than a thick one!
>
> Oh that sounds like a horrid thing to do!

He only had to do it a couple of times... ;-)
That kind of threat makes one behave themselves. Those damned switches
HURT!!! Later on, he'd have me go and fetch one (knowing I'd hide out in
the brush as long as possible), then "forget" about my transgression.

He really rarely ever physically punished me. And once I turned 12,
never again. Restriction of priveleges (as well as a lecture skill that
left me feeling much worse than a spanking would have done) sufficed.

The thing is, once a kid KNOWS that you WILL spank them, they will take
you seriously when you threaten to! The threat is enough most of the
time!

Kinda like when the cats see me grab the squirt gun. <G>
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

In article >, Andy <q>
wrote:

> ~patches~ wrote:
>
> > Neither of us believe in spankings or even hitting our kids.
>
> Pop used to spank us but we had to be extra-misbehaving. He'd always say
> "this is gonna hurt me a lot more than it will you."
>
> And one day it was actually true!
>
>
>
> Andy

<lol> Mom always used the flat of her hand...
She figured that she could not hurt us that way without hurting herself!
--
Om.

"My mother never saw the irony in calling me a son-of-a-bitch." -Jack Nicholson

On 10 Nov 2005 08:52:23 -0800, "Sheldon" > wrote:

>If a proprietor grants
>access to minors they can't expect them to behave differently from how
>typical minors do...

They're not expecting the *minors* to behave all that differently,
Sheldon. They're requiring the parents to actually act like
responsible adults, instead of the constant ME ME ME generations we
seem to have.

--
-denny-
"Do your thoughts call ahead or do they just arrive at your mouth unannounced?"

"It's come as you are, baby."

-over the hedge

In article . net>,
"Gregory Morrow"
<gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote:

> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
(snipped)
>
> "I love people who don't have children who tell you how to parent," said
> Alison Miller, 35, a psychologist, corporate coach and mother of two. "I'd
> love for him to be responsible for three children for the next year and see
> if he can control the volume of their voices every minute of the day."

He wouldn't have to control the volume if the patrons wouldn't drag
their kids along. Most kids are naturally boisterous and there are
places they don't belong. IMO, a coffee shop that is geared to adults
is one of them. Let the games begin!
--
http://www.jamlady.eboard.com, updated 11-9-05 finishing in four
parts the trip report from our vacation time in San Francisco
for Nephew Pat's wedding last weekend.

In article . net>,
"Gregory Morrow"
<gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote:

> http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
>
> November 9, 2005
>
> At Center of a Clash, Rowdy Children in Coffee Shops
(snip)
> Menus at Zumbro Cafe in Minneapolis say: "We love children, especially when
> they're tucked into chairs and behaving," which Barbara Daenzer said she
> read as an invitation to cease her weekly breakfast visits after her son was
> born.

Hmmm, looks like I'll have to travel across the river a few miles to
patronize the Zumbro. There's a good bakery in the neighborhood, too.
--
http://www.jamlady.eboard.com, updated 11-9-05 finishing in four
parts the trip report from our vacation time in San Francisco
for Nephew Pat's wedding last weekend.

Julia Altshuler wrote:
> foyer or front lobby (I like the word and concept of "cry room.") with
> the kid.
>
Our church used to have a "bawl room." Until some sensitive types
decided it wasn't the thing. I thought it was perfect, myself. The
room is still there, it just doesn't have that name.

N.

Melba's Jammin' wrote:
> In article . net>,
> "Gregory Morrow"
> <gregorymorrowEMERGENCYCANCELLATIONARCHIMEDES@eart hlink.net> wrote:
>
>
>>http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/09/na.../09bakery.html
>
> (snipped)
>
>>"I love people who don't have children who tell you how to parent," said
>>Alison Miller, 35, a psychologist, corporate coach and mother of two. "I'd
>>love for him to be responsible for three children for the next year and see
>>if he can control the volume of their voices every minute of the day."
>
>
> He wouldn't have to control the volume if the patrons wouldn't drag
> their kids along. Most kids are naturally boisterous and there are
> places they don't belong. IMO, a coffee shop that is geared to adults
> is one of them. Let the games begin!

I have 2 young kids (3 and 5) and I agree! There are places people
shouldn't take their kids! The coffee shop around the corner has a back
corner for children (small tables, toys, chalkboard) I feel comfortable
going in there for two reasons 1) my kids are more likely to behave for
a longer period of time 2) having a children's area (to me) would lead
other people to expect that there are children in there at times...

Even as a mother of two I enjoy going to places that are "grown up". I
get fairly annoyed when I get a chance to go somewhere without kids and
there are screaming kids running around. IF it is a place I expect to
be without small children. (a quiet coffee shop being one, a nice
restaraunt being another)

Mine don't always act perfect - no children do. I have, however, taken
the offending child (it's usually only one of the two) out to the car
and waited for "dad" and the other child to finish dinner and dessert.
I can't relax when they are out of control - I know no one else can
either.

Another thing I read in one of the parts of the article was about a kid
spilling the coffee and the mom leaving it - THAT was the worst part to
me! I make my kids pick up after themselves ALWAYS just as I pick up
after myself if I make a mess.


Roberta (in VA)

My solution to all this is to leave th kiddies AT HOME with a sitter
or a trusted friend of the family. That would go a long way in solving
this problem.
Start taking your children out after they reach the age of five, and
are less apt to exhibiting anti-social behavior.

Cheers,
Chuck Kopsho
Oceanside, California