I have had it with these Adorable babies on this adorable plane!

Ranger Rick wrote:
Jonman wrote:

When I get on a plane, I expect babies to scream because they're babies. I expect adults to talk to each other and to me, because that's what adults do.

That's why I get on the airplane WiFi and talk loudly on Skype. Like an adult!

;)

Jonman wrote:

Is it different? I'm not sure it is. Why do we expect different behavior from adults or kids just because they're on a plane?

When I get on a plane, I expect babies to scream because they're babies. I expect adults to talk to each other and to me, because that's what adults do.

Attempt to engage in conversation with fellow adult != force another adult to endure, despite requests to shut up and use of headphones, your 75-minute treatise on how the Jews are trying to undermine America in order to build a Zionist world government (a coworker got that experience earlier this year on a flight).

I submit that there are/should be societal expectations of how we conduct ourselves in public. You asserted the opposite, since everyone else paid the same fare and should be able to do whatever the hell they feel like doing in that confined space. If your kid can't handle being on a plane, don't bring them on a plane(excluding emergency situations). If you can't handle being on a plane and sitting in a narrow seat for hours on end, don't get on one. Air travel isn't for everyone - psychological issues, medical limitations, etc. - these things happen. When my wife and I have kids, nothing short of a medical emergency is getting us on a plane until our kids can handle it.

I think we should treat kids like people, and treat people like they are members of a polite society. I don't want people in restaurants that they aren't ready for, I don't want them in movies that are past what they are ready for, and I don't want them on long flights that they can't handle. I don't care if they are kids, if they are drunken louts, if they are reality TV-wannabees, etc.

Kraint wrote:

I submit that there are/should be societal expectations of how we conduct ourselves in public. You asserted the opposite, since everyone else paid the same fare and should be able to do whatever the hell they feel like doing in that confined space. If your kid can't handle being on a plane, don't bring them on a plane(excluding emergency situations). If you can't handle being on a plane and sitting in a narrow seat for hours on end, don't get on one. Air travel isn't for everyone - psychological issues, medical limitations, etc. - these things happen. When my wife and I have kids, nothing short of a medical emergency is getting us on a plane until our kids can handle it.

I think we should treat kids like people, and treat people like they are members of a polite society. I don't want people in restaurants that they aren't ready for, I don't want them in movies that are past what they are ready for, and I don't want them on long flights that they can't handle. I don't care if they are kids, if they are drunken louts, if they are reality TV-wannabees, etc.

I think I'm agreeing with you. Where we disagree is what those societal expectations are. My societal expectation of babies and young children is to be loud enough to be inappropriate were they adults.

I'm certainly not saying that people can do "whatever the hell they feel like". What I'm saying is that expecting them to explicitly cater to your needs is naive. They're going to cater to their own needs, and those needs might be in conflict with yours. That's not a lack of societal expectations, that's realism.

You say, "If you can't handle being on a plane and sitting in a narrow seat for hours on end, don't get on one." I couldn't agree more, it's just that I count putting up with your fellow passengers, kids and adults alike, as part of that handling.

Jonman wrote:

You say, "If you can't handle being on a plane and sitting in a narrow seat for hours on end, don't get on one." I couldn't agree more, it's just that I count putting up with your fellow passengers, kids and adults alike, as part of that handling.

Excellent point, and I agree.

The arguments that amount to "well if they have babies and/or small children they should use another transportation method" are no less viable than "well if you can't tolerate babies and/or small children crying or otherwise being noisy, you should use another transportation method."

Sometimes flight is the only viable transportation method, and that applies to people with young children or infants just as much as to the ubiquitous business traveler.

Well let's be clear (and I might be channeling LarryC on this); flyinng is never the only viable transportation method, minus a few places where boats cannot reach. Keeping one's job and maximizing vacation days are elements of luxury, as is being hurtled through the air in fifth century sorcery.

I honestly mean no disrespect here, but I would classify that response as hyperbole, Seth.

[edit]I'm sure I could find a better word than "viable" in the strictest sense, but I didn't think I needed to.

Farscry wrote:

I honestly mean no disrespect here, but I would classify that response as hyperbole, Seth. :)

I AM INSULTED!

...I dunno why I am even here. I *am* the crying baby of this thread.

Seth wrote:

Well let's be clear (and I might be channeling LarryC on this); flyinng is never the only viable transportation method, minus a few places where boats cannot reach. Keeping one's job and maximizing vacation days are elements of luxury, as is being hurtled through the air in fifth century sorcery.

I live in the UK. My son's grandparents live in Australasia. We're flying to visit her. Cope.

Maq wrote:
Seth wrote:

Well let's be clear (and I might be channeling LarryC on this); flyinng is never the only viable transportation method, minus a few places where boats cannot reach. Keeping one's job and maximizing vacation days are elements of luxury, as is being hurtled through the air in fifth century sorcery.

I live in the UK. My son's grandparents live in Australasia. We're flying to visit her. Cope.

You monster.

Seth wrote:
Farscry wrote:

I honestly mean no disrespect here, but I would classify that response as hyperbole, Seth. :)

I AM INSULTED!

...I dunno why I am even here. I *am* the crying baby of this thread.

That's ok, I have noise-cancelling headphones here in my desk somewhere.

Maq wrote:

I live in the UK. My son's grandparents live in Australasia. We're flying to visit her. Cope.

Dude, there is a perfectly viable ocean-going alternative, the round trip is around 80-90 days and would only run you around £7000-£8,000!

I can't get behind statements that people with babies/kids shouldn't fly, nor statements that no one's allowed to complain when a baby cries because it's what babies do. I can, however, get behind statements that both people with kids and the people that find them annoying need to cut each other some slack. Outside of a few people on each side, I think everyone's pretty much in agreement.

People annoyed at kids: kids can and do act up, and sometimes there's nothing the parents can do to help it. They've got the same right as you to be there.
People with kids: if your kid is acting up, expect people to be annoyed. That it happens and is sometimes unavoidable doesn't mean they have to like it.

Stengah wrote:

I can't get behind statements that people with babies/kids shouldn't fly, nor statements that no one's allowed to complain when a baby cries because it's what babies do. I can, however, get behind statements that both people with kids and the people that find them annoying need to cut each other some slack. Outside of a few people on each side, I think everyone's pretty much in agreement.

People annoyed at kids: kids can and do act up, and sometimes there's nothing the parents can do to help it. They've got the same right as you to be there.
People with kids: if your kid is acting up, expect people to be annoyed. That it happens and is sometimes unavoidable doesn't mean they have to like it.

Yeah. I'm more annoyed that people think I should be 100% happy with screaming babies. I reserve the right to not like that. In the meantime I buy 1st class tickets and wear noise canceling headphones and I can tune it out for the most part. If I can't tune it out I reserve the right to simmer a bit to myself. I don't know why that's controversial.

I never disagreed with that. What I said was, "If you can't help with keeping the human species alive, then at least keep your annoyance about the necessity of doing so to yourself." So long as you're not being a dick about it, we're cool.

DSGamer wrote:

Yeah. I'm more annoyed that people think I should be 100% happy with screaming babies. I reserve the right to not like that. In the meantime I buy 1st class tickets and wear noise canceling headphones and I can tune it out for the most part. If I can't tune it out I reserve the right to simmer a bit to myself. I don't know why that's controversial.

Come on now, that's a tad hyperbolic, DS. No-one's claiming that you have to be 100% happy with screaming babies. Just that you should accept that if you're on an airplane, chances are that they'll be part of the experience.

I don't like children in general, but when I see a crying child I just get kind of sad.

Kid, you have no idea. You have no idea.

f*ck. I am flying to San Juan next week. One leg of the trip is to Orlando and then a puddle jumper. I forgot about the damn kids.

KingGorilla wrote:

f*ck. I am flying to San Juan next week. One leg of the trip is to Orlando and then a puddle jumper. I forgot about the damn kids.

IMAGE(http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-kRChhJz5NpU/TwMXkeq6rrI/AAAAAAAACB0/hU38ovh62Ho/s1600/Home+Alone+2+Lost+in+New+York+1992+-+mother+screams.jpg)

Jonman wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

Yeah. I'm more annoyed that people think I should be 100% happy with screaming babies. I reserve the right to not like that. In the meantime I buy 1st class tickets and wear noise canceling headphones and I can tune it out for the most part. If I can't tune it out I reserve the right to simmer a bit to myself. I don't know why that's controversial.

Come on now, that's a tad hyperbolic, DS. No-one's claiming that you have to be 100% happy with screaming babies. Just that you should accept that if you're on an airplane, chances are that they'll be part of the experience.

I think the main issue is with people who seem completely unapologetic about their noisy kids. If someone acknowledges that their kid is being a nuisance to the rest of the flight I'm willing to cut them slack and try to ignore it the best I can, but "deal with it" is just a bastard attitude to have in an enclosed, public environment.

Jonman wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

Yeah. I'm more annoyed that people think I should be 100% happy with screaming babies. I reserve the right to not like that. In the meantime I buy 1st class tickets and wear noise canceling headphones and I can tune it out for the most part. If I can't tune it out I reserve the right to simmer a bit to myself. I don't know why that's controversial.

Come on now, that's a tad hyperbolic, DS. No-one's claiming that you have to be 100% happy with screaming babies. Just that you should accept that if you're on an airplane, chances are that they'll be part of the experience.

Beat me to the punch, Jonman. This right here is the best summation of the "issue" yet:

Stengah wrote:

People annoyed at kids: kids can and do act up, and sometimes there's nothing the parents can do to help it. They've got the same right as you to be there.
People with kids: if your kid is acting up, expect people to be annoyed. That it happens and is sometimes unavoidable doesn't mean they have to like it.

ruhk wrote:
Jonman wrote:
DSGamer wrote:

Yeah. I'm more annoyed that people think I should be 100% happy with screaming babies. I reserve the right to not like that. In the meantime I buy 1st class tickets and wear noise canceling headphones and I can tune it out for the most part. If I can't tune it out I reserve the right to simmer a bit to myself. I don't know why that's controversial.

Come on now, that's a tad hyperbolic, DS. No-one's claiming that you have to be 100% happy with screaming babies. Just that you should accept that if you're on an airplane, chances are that they'll be part of the experience.

I think the main issue is with people who seem completely unapologetic about their noisy kids. If someone acknowledges that their kid is being a nuisance to the rest of the flight I'm willing to cut them slack and try to ignore it the best I can, but "deal with it" is just a bastard attitude to have in an enclosed, public environment.

I dunno, we had a few posts that seemed to suggest that not only should we be ok; but if we're not, then we're self-absorbed or selfish for not just hands down being merry about screaming babies in an enclosed space at however many thousands of feet up.

I really don't care either way, I think people should understand that everyone is gonna travel and you gotta deal with a whole range of obnoxious behavior from just about everyone.

I'm also of the opinion though that for really long flights, to take infants to people... maybe people should come to infants. New parents deserve the chance to stay at home and not deal with the hassles of traveling with a small child. When I have a baby, I'll pay for mom to visit ME, not pay to deal with all hassle, there and back while not sleeping in my own bed after dealing with half of that!

Jonman wrote:

Come on now, that's a tad hyperbolic, DS. No-one's claiming that you have to be 100% happy with screaming babies. Just that you should accept that if you're in a movie theater, chances are that they'll be part of the experience.

Please tell me why this is a different scenario. Almost all travel is voluntary, and family travel is pretty much always for pleasure/vacations. Critical air travel (moving, medical reasons, etc.) is obviously excluded in the larger discussion here.

Sometimes people travel when they want to travel, and some of those people will have children. I never particularly knew what to do with kids before I had any but I understood what immaturity meant, and took things in stride when annoying kids were around. After all, I used to be an annoying kid myself.

[size=3]And sometimes still am.[/size]

Kraint wrote:
Jonman wrote:

Come on now, that's a tad hyperbolic, DS. No-one's claiming that you have to be 100% happy with screaming babies. Just that you should accept that if you're in a movie theater, chances are that they'll be part of the experience.

Please tell me why this is a different scenario. Almost all travel is voluntary, and family travel is pretty much always for pleasure/vacations. Critical air travel (moving, medical reasons, etc.) is obviously excluded in the larger discussion here.

In a movie theater, the entire purpose is to quietly watch a film. A crying baby will make that incredibly difficult. For flying, the purpose is to get from point A to point B. A crying baby can make it slightly unpleasant, but it won't crash the plane or make the plane land somewhere other than point B.

I maintain that while I don't think mind control is viable, children are good for a society and a nation. People have to come from somewhere. They don't just magically appear, adult, at age 20 with an education and an upbringing. Sometimes people travel, and if some of those people have children, then that's not just inevitable - that's fantastic. It means that 20 years down the line, you have people who will carry on the workforce, the culture, and the nation in general. If everyone just stopped having kids, you're in big trouble.

There have been suggestions on this thread that children and parents ought to be relegated to second citizen status and just not participate in the majority of places and events in society at large. It feels quite alien and off-putting. Children should participate in society at large. That's part of how they learn how to be adults.

Kraint wrote:
Jonman wrote:

Come on now, that's a tad hyperbolic, DS. No-one's claiming that you have to be 100% happy with screaming babies. Just that you should accept that if you're in a movie theater, chances are that they'll be part of the experience.

Please tell me why this is a different scenario. Almost all travel is voluntary, and family travel is pretty much always for pleasure/vacations. Critical air travel (moving, medical reasons, etc.) is obviously excluded in the larger discussion here.

Yes, family travel is certainly not for weddings, funerals, graduations, reunions, anniversaries, births, holidays or other special occasions for which both parents may wish to attend and naturally bring along their small children.

Yes, technically those are (mostly) for "pleasure," but if special occasions warranting family together-time are less important than travel for business reasons, then this world sucks and we should just kill ourselves now.

Anecdotally, out of all the times I've flown, exactly twice (out of ten+ times I can recall) have been for a genuine vacation, and both of those times that vacation consisted of traveling to visit my family anyway (that WAS my vacation). And I was a single guy for most of those trips.

Farscry wrote:

Yes, family travel is certainly not for weddings, funerals, graduations, reunions, anniversaries, births, holidays or other special occasions for which both parents may wish to attend and naturally bring along their small children.

Yes, technically those are (mostly) for "pleasure," but if special occasions warranting family together-time are less important than travel for business reasons, then this world sucks and we should just kill ourselves now.

Anecdotally, out of all the times I've flown, exactly twice (out of ten+ times I can recall) have been for a genuine vacation, and both of those times that vacation consisted of traveling to visit my family anyway (that WAS my vacation). And I was a single guy for most of those trips.

I'd classify at least half of those as purely optional, purely pleasure vacation trips. For my own anecdotes, all of my friends who have small children have skipped events like those, or had just one parent go. My coworker with two kids hasn't been to visit his family across the country for several years because of this. His parents and childless brother come visit him every year or so. Several people skipped my wedding because flying across the continent and going through immigration/customs is a PITA with kids. I fully support those decisions. On the other hand, the 3+ kids who screamed themselves hoarse on my recent trip to Hawaii? Very little support for their parents.

Jonman wrote:

My societal expectation of babies and young children is to be loud enough to be inappropriate were they adults.

My societal expectation is that parents will have enough sense not to bring a newborn on a plane or be able to control their young children so they aren't being loud and disturbing everyone around them.

OG_slinger wrote:
Jonman wrote:

My societal expectation of babies and young children is to be loud enough to be inappropriate were they adults.

My societal expectation is that parents will have enough sense not to bring a newborn on a plane or be able to control their young children so they aren't being loud and disturbing everyone around them.

I think you may have a mistaken notion over how much control parents are really able to exert over their children without the use of means you may not endorse. They're not robots. They're actual human beings with independent thoughts.

This thread is making me look forward to my sixteen hour flight to NYC in a couple of weeks... from HK via Beijing. Ugh. If there's one thing worse than the occasional screeching from a baby, it's elderly Chinese tourists doing their clapping exercises.

LarryC wrote:

I think you may have a mistaken notion over how much control parents are really able to exert over their children without the use of means you may not endorse. They're not robots. They're actual human beings with independent thoughts.

Yeah, that one doesn't fly with me. One of the biggest surprises I had when traveling was a flight that connected through Salt Lake City. When I got on board the flight was about 1/3 full of young Mormon couples and their families--all young kids, toddlers, and newborns. I thought it was going to be hell, but it turned out the complete opposite. The kids were all exceptionally well behaved and if a newborn got upset, the mother did everything possible to quiet the child instead of just letting it scream it's head off like normally happens.

Parents can have a great deal of control over their children. It's just that many parents are, well, bad parents.