To find Telegraph Poll: 'Should London Cafes Become Child Free Venues' offensive and discriminatory?

[greengoose]

AIBU to think that this poll, where currently 43% think children should be banned from cafes, is discriminatory and would never be allowed to be written about any other section of our society?
The article and poll can be found here: TELEGRAPH POLL
In the comments bellow there is an 'anti child' rant suggesting children should be unwelcome everywhere from small shops (which should have a no buggy policy) to cafes and galleries).
This has made me spitting bullets TBH, I cant believe the 'anti child' culture in this country sometimes (and especially in the capitol IME), I do understand people should keep their kids under control in cafes, but to turn that discussion into a 'ban kids' poll is downright awful....... the telegraph, which I dont support anyway, should be utterly ashamed.

If you think this is acceptable would it be acceptable to ban over 30's from bars because the youngsters find them a bore?

Club 18-30 holidays seem to exist without too many cries of discrimation.

I don't know where all these ghastly children come from. When I am out I rarely see the hooligans you are describing. The kids seem, for the most part, absolutely fine. I think this is typical English children should be seen and not heard nonsense. I bet cafes offering adult only clientele would see their profits fall sharply, so don't worry OP I don't see it catching on. And I certainly don't think Spanish or any other European children behave better than UK ones ime. Its all bah humbug.

Hardboiledpossum - do they create havoc and mean others can't enjoy the time they want? if they do then fine, otherwise them having a quiet drink doesn't really cause many issues so its not the same!

I've met just as many rude adults as I have children

It really depends what bothers you as well. I get joy out of watching children running around enjoying themselves.

OP, I think you've got the wrong end of the stick about 'discrimination'.

'Discriminating' really just means 'discerning differences and making decisions accordingly'. It's only bad when people discern differences that don't actually exist (eg seeing someone has different coloured skin and making assumptions about their personality based on their skin colour) and make decisions that are unjustly to someone's detriment (eg then not giving that person a job).

There are plenty of circumstances where discrimination is important and valuable. And being able to discriminate between children and adults is one of those circumstances. The differences between adults and children are real. They're not imaginary differences invented by an oppressive society determined to keep children subserviant, they're real differences based on the fact that they are humans who are still developing and have not entirely matured yet. That's why children don't get to vote (which, by your logic, is also discriminatory).

If you're reluctant to discriminate between adults and children, would you argue that children should go to work? Be allowed to join the army? Be assumed capable of consenting to sex?

Thought not.

So if you recognise that there are real differences between children and adults, then you may be willing to recognise that there are those who might prefer to drink their coffee surrounded by adults and not children. This is not offensively, needlessly, foolishly discriminatory in the way that wanting to drink your coffee surrounded only by white people would be, and while you may object on your children's behalf to the fact that someone don't want to share cafes with children borrowing the language of identity politics and the various rights movements just makes you look a bit silly.

I have no problem with watching children run around and enjoy themselves in appropriate situations.

Cafes/restaurants aren't the right place. Without even going into the fact it is annoying its also down right dangerous.

Peachy You confuse me. Yes, our kids will pay our pensions but the people who have no children will not have pensioner children - that's all I am saying.

I adore your screaming baby too, and the funny thing is that the baby probably reacts well to me. There are some of us, female and male, made that way. But I understand if some people prefer not to share the company of you and your baby.

Christina I know, I know. But as parents (and I am long past that stage, DS is adult) I think MNers are probably better than average!

werewolf My point is that this article and the way it is followed by the poll is discriminatory, in that it implies that children are as a group badly behaved, and not that that is only some cases..... ie it labels kids as noisy and disruptive and asks for a vote bases on that.
My original point was about the bias of the article being discriminatory...... clearly I am well aware that kids are different from adults etc. It is the bias in the article I was commenting on, and how that would influence the badly worded poll....... it is pushing people to express extreme views that in a more balanced article would not. (Ie many kids are v. well behaved).

Newspaper in biased article shocker! Op, you're taking this way too seriously.

Galaxy the typical behavioural recommendations for toddler tantrums is to ignore them. They are a fact of life. How can children learn to behave in public if they are banned from some public places? Having said that I rarely see parents letting their kids run riot. I see the opposite.

I suspect young families make up a large part of the revenue for cafes so I doubt anywhere will ban them.

If you are out in public though you have to adapt that surely?

If DS had a tantrum when we are out and doesn't calm quickly I pick him up and move him out to a place where he can tantrum to his hearts content without disrupting others who just want a quiet meal.

Why should a parents decision to ignore there child spoil a meal for everyone else?

onemorning I know, already given hormonal disclaimer. Had tea and settled kids, so now feel much calmer (on my child free couch). I just hate that they twist opinions to extremes in this way......

children used to be banned from pubs until they where at least 14 and really 18, adults could escape to the pub fr a port and lemon without a child in sight. Was that discrimination?

well the pubs are still there and they all serve coffee.

OP - YANBU. I find it pretty depressing myself, but utterly unsurprising. In our dear fucked-up little island we have such a bizarre history of how we treat children and we are famous for being a truly crap country for babies, children and young people to grow up in. It seems they must either be fetishised as perfect or envied for being young - and the speed at which everyone reaches for their favourite, crassly stereotyped 'screaming child' anecdote is truly chilling - an argument which is up there (or rather 'down there') with the hideous old chestnut 'old people smell of wee' often heard from people in their late teens and twenties. Note how all children are lumped in with said screaming child, regardless of who they are or how they behave. Werewolef - I think it is often true that someone who exhibits an intolerance to one section of society often exhibits the same intolerance to many others who do not confirm to their ideals or over whom they feel have no control or who make them feel threatened therefore 'no children' coudl be the thin end of the wedge. Europe has some great examples of how families and communities can integrate in their shared social spaces (the cliched but true image of families out in sunny squares in the evening springs to mind) but with cross, fucked-up, inwardly seething little Britons this would never work.

I just had a look at the poll, and the option with the most votes is now:

Children should be welcome everywhere, but if they don?t behave venues should be allowed to tell them and their parents to leave. 54.5%

If DS had a tantrum when we are out and doesn't calm quickly I pick him up and move him out to a place where he can tantrum to his hearts content without disrupting others who just want a quiet meal.

But other parents don't take this action they leave the child to have a tantrum and everyone has to stop talking as no one can hear a thing, so everyone looks at each other glumly and eats in silence getting enraged thinking we should have stopped home for peace and quite. Every one sighs releif when the child stops, then it all starts up again 5 minutes later and we want to weep into our tea.

no one actually says anything as we are far to british for saying oh goodness it is annoying do you think you could take the child outside

as we know that it will cause a stir and daggers at dawn looks from the parents

As already stated Ivy its not the idea of child free spaces that Im arguing against or calling discriminatory, (although draw line at Costas), its the discrimination shown by the article in grouping all kids under the 'cant behave' banner.
They have opened a debate up for a vote with only one side of the argument, which I dont think is right.....

helpmabob - but so are the children, they are no longer banned and go into pubs frequently - no escaping children in a pub.

I agree Ivy that was the point I was making to a PP who commented on how tantrums should just be ignored. That works fine at home but needs adapting in public.

The truth is if everyone thought about others - both parents in dealing with children, and others with putting up with a little bit of noise - there wouldn't be problems but to many parents thing the whole world will come to a stop when they have children and nobody mind listening to there 3 year old screaming, or watching them run around where its dangerous!

grengoose "They have opened a debate up for a vote with only one side of the argument, which I dont think is right....."

I don't understand. Have you looked at the poll?

It offers four options you can vote for, including:

"No. Children are entitled to the same degree of respect as adults and shouldn?t be banned from venues simply because of their age."

and

"Certain venues are obviously geared towards families; if other people don?t like that they shouldn?t go there."

Where is the "one sided" you describe?

Children are allowed in pubs? So, children in pubs-yes, smoking in pubs-no?
Where can grown-ups go now to misbehave?