Man in Sainsbury's cafe-was I out of order?(348 Posts)
Took 3 DCs (2,3 & baby) on my own to Sainsburys,3 year old was hungry after swimming so decided to go to cafe first.
Was getting the lunch when 3yr old DS went to man in queue with a croissant on his tray and pointed to it & toched it saying "I want one of those."Big fuss,man said don't want that,boy touched it etc,lady on till sympathetic and said of course,no problem,I'll get another one etc.
Meanwhile I was furious with DS,he knows not to touch in cafes & shops,and I td him off,made him come and stand with me,hold my hand(which he hates) and wait quietly.I also made him go and apologise to the man,which he did.
The man did not even acknowledge him though and said loudly to me "Just control your children!"
I was very offended.I was upset he had not accepted the apology from DS.He was none the worse off as he had a new croissant.
The cashier said to me "Sorry about that rude man" afterwards and I said "Don't worry,I'm going to say something."
So once my DCs were nicely sitting down I went over and said "Excuse me,no need to be so rude,my son apologised,he's only 3 and I had already told him off." He then said "Well it's not very nice for someone to touch your breakfast."
I then said something about don't criticise me and I think you were unnecessarily rude" and walked off.
We then continued eating ours co,the DCs were well behaved,that was the end.
I know I was angry and maybe acted impulsively confronting him and an now wondering if I was out of order?I'm prepared to be told I was,I'm not expecting everyone to agree with me as I can see it from both sides but after what the cashier said I felt maybe he was unnecessarily rude to me?
Even if we accept that small children are naturally curious the man wasn't under any obligation to have his space invaded and accept involvement in parenting the OP 's child. She should have apologised, offered to replace the croissant and then left the man in peace.
So, a cafee at a supermarket is adult only environment?
No, but your personal space is your own. There is no law that says you have to interact with any other human being if you choose not to. If you want to sit in the corner and read your paper in peace, then you are under no obligation to engage with anyone else around you, adult or child. Just like you are under no obligation to play peekaboo with the kid on the seat in front of you on the train, or to have a chat to the little old lady sitting next to you. If you want to eat your croissant without being interrupted constantly by a toddler and his ranting mother, then you should be allowed to.
what is it with people? Of course the chap shouldn't have to be OK with strange children touching his food, but the offending croissant was replaced free of charge and the 3 year old apologised. It was rude of the man not to accept his apology - he got a new croissant, no harm done. He sounds about 3 himself.
there are some right dickheads on this thread. all this sanctimonious 'well you should be controlling your child'... i dont even have a child and i can see how easily one might get away from you while youre choosing what to have at a cafe for 5 seconds.
just cos its aibu doesnt mean you have to be a twat. its not the rules you know.
The man was lucky. Had I been there with my big strapping teen ds1 he may well have sniffed it (it has happened before) then he'd have had a real reason to get the hump.
We don't know he was old do we?
I really couldn't ignore a 3 year old boy saying sorry to me.
YABU for going back to him and having it out. We can't control other peoples actions, people don't behave as we would like so it's unreasonable to expect anything more from him. Your actions count, you control you - and if you want to behave like that then that's also your prerogative. We seem to spend too much time trying to change other people#s actions rather than concentrating on our own.
However, to me your son obviously didn't mean to poke it. I have a 3 year old who points to show me things and he ends up touching a painted fence or something daft. Children are clumsy, so you had full control of your children as much as you possibly could of at the time.
No she didn't nooby. In a cafe setting having him stood next to her would have a)stopped this happening and b) made sure he was safe. What would have happened if he had poked his finger into someone's hot coffee? Or walked into a tray of hot food?
I agree the child didnt mean to do anything bad but the whole thing could have been avoided with basic supervision.
Such perfect parents on here.
Give the op a break. She had 3 dc with her, alone.
And I doubt the child would have poked hot coffee. Not very appealing to a small child.
I don't think supervising children in a cafe makes parents perfect. Simply sensible.
I don't know Sirzy and don't care all that much to be honest!
Simply commenting on how I see it
It is sensible but the fact the OP had 3 very young dc with her alone I think the fact that her dc wandered a few feet away from her could be forgiven. ( in my world anyway )
Yes, you were out of order to go up to the man afterwards. That's really stupid and argumentative.
Reading some of the posts on here, I think several posters live in their own worlds a little too much and could do with living in the real world a bit more often.
I wouldn't have gone to a cafe on my own with three such young children. In fact, what I should say is that I didn't go to a cafe when my three children were this age, simply because I wouldn't have been able to keep them under control and buy my self-service food. The OP is being unreasonable in doing so and then moaning about the consequences as though it was beyond her control.
What if the OP were a single parent? And had no choice to go alone. Jesus.
You don't HAVE to go to a cafe. If your child is likely to be hungry after a swimming lesson, it is possible to pre-empt this with snacks and drinks in your bag.
There's a clear divide here:
In the RED corner; those who think that children shouldn't impose on other people and that it's up to the attending parent to control them. Should child(ren) do something they should then the parent is expected to apologise and not get aerated that the provoked person doesn't fall over themselves with gratitude.
In the BLUE corner; those parents who feel that the public at large should accept children and their behaviour, no matter what it is. The parent feels they have the right to be aggrieved if anybody (adult) falls short of those expectations.
Maybe we'd stop the angst if we met somewhere in the middle... PURPLE?
Those in the Blue corner though really should stop name-calling because that really does indicate the fact that they have no idea of personal parameters nor any consideration of others outside their own narrow field of interest, ie. their DCs. It's also more than a little bit pathetic.
Yep in that perfect stepford wives world we have children that stand by our side, a partner or other capable adult to assist us, a bag full of snacks and drinks.
God help us if we ever stray from perfection.
this event lasted 5 minutes
it has been analysed ot death
OP grow some
I am a single parent, often out with 3 young children but if a child in my care wandered off I would blame myself not the child and certainly not the person that they went to annoy for getting annoyed.
everlong I think the issue is more around where one would like to apportion blame when things don't go quite as perfectly as you might like, rather than expecting perfection in our every day lives. I would also fall into the Sirzy camp.
what if the man had a learning disability & didnt know how to handle the situation?! poor bloke having some strange woman shouting at him! yabvu & out of interet did you pay for the wasted food because if you didnt, again yabu.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.