DH being U about baby in restaurant?

[StripedSwad]

We are on holiday with 3 month BF baby. There's a fancy restaurant on site which we are booked in to

we have his mother with us, who will babysit, but she would need to bring baby down to us if he needs to be fed. Restaurant has said no to this as is adults only.

DH thinks this is terrible and wants to complain as baby will only be down a short while and purely for feeding, whereas I think it's just one of those things you accept with a baby and we will just have to eat elsewhere. So who is right?

Again, please take your 17 humans and your boobs to somewhere I don't have to listen to

17? Does Math have 17 kids? Oh my, surely not? You'd spend your whole adult life raising children. No retirement. No rest from the daily grind.......... E-V-E-R

Jayzus.

How do you know that women in adult only restaurants have left their children in the care of a properly checked out and responsible babysitter? For all you know, their babies and children are in the tender care of some 16 year old and her tattooed and multiply-pierced boyfriend.

It would be nice to see an answer from NNChange to that one.

I am loving the continuing use of 'sophisticated' to refer to 'child-free' evenings out. Hopefully this is not what you have in mind though there doesn't seem to be a child in sight so it really should count as sophisticated.

Do you find that spectacle more or less entertaining than the sight of a women nursing her baby in a restaurant, Husky?

What terms would you use for someone who expected other people out and about in the evening to provide entertainment for her or to not bring back memories of mastitis, or who judged others out minding their own business because they found them 'boring'? 'Entitled' springs to mind. Also 'profoundly self absorbed'.

I seem to have really annoyed a lot of people here by insisting that breastfeeding women have rights that are not separable from the rights of their babies, because you can't have one without the other. The apparently novel idea that breastfeeding women are human and even - gasp - sophisticated whether they have a baby at the boob or not seems to have caused a surprising degree of disagreement too. Once the baby is in tow, it seems the women who wants to be out and about becomes 'entitled'. Her baby turns into some sort of bawling, intolerable monster.

You seem to be a crowd that is easily annoyed (as evidenced by the worrying level of hostility expressed throughout the thread towards babies and children who are actually innocent creations of the fecklessness of so called adults whose company you seem bewilderingly attracted to).

So I will shrug off the annoyance. I am pretty sure my reaction to the presence of babies and children is normal and yours is aberrant.

Your use of the word 'boobs' is infantilising and demeaning to women math. They are called breasts. Your terminology displays a worryingly dismissive and disrespectful attitude towards breastfeeding mothers.

Oh dear, and there was me thinking it might serve as a means of effectively communicating with you all, given the prevailing attitude towards breastfeeding women.

Breasts it is, so. Very relieved you are not offended by the very word.

math a baby cannot be allowed everywhere that a parent can be.

You seem to think that every parent is perfect and be left totally to their own devices. It takes society to raise children. Most assaults and damage done to babies and children are done bt=y their own parents.
Parents can make wrong decisions and be feckless, They are not this way because they are parents or women, they are like this because they are human.
Chikdren are protected by many of these banning laws you think are to do with entitlement.

I can think of many places that children are not welcome for their own benefit.

Many workplaces
White knuckle rides
casinos
betting shops
drinking establishments
tattoo parlours
legal brothels
sex shops
night clubs
needle exchange centres

Restaurants which don't allow children are relatively rare, our society is generally very welcoming of children.

math do you mean to be so insulting?

I actually think you have a very interesting point, but your hostility is not furthering your position here.
We are not the enemy.
Most of us are women who have breastfed.

I seem to have really annoyed a lot of people here by insisting that breastfeeding women have rights that are not separable from the rights of their babies, because you can't have one without the other.

No Math you have annoyed a lot of people on here because you are an idiot.

At different times throughout your 'argument' you have been offensive to.

Women who breastfeed
Women who don't breastfeed
Women who can't have children
Women who chose not to have children
Men
People who have piercings
People who have tattoos
Teenagers

The only reason that I (and I can't speak for
anyone else) have kept this argument going is for entertainment. It's like reading the Daily Mail just to see what shocking lies they're going to sprout next.

I notice on another thread you're advocating the use of tablets and phones at the table because sometimes you don't want your chIldren to actually interact with you in a restaurant. So not only do you want to take your kids to adult only restaurants you want to annoy the hell out of everyone else along the way, while you let nanny-iPad take charge.

I've been here a while, I know you're not a troll which just leaves self-absorbed, entitled idiot.

So math thinks that laws to protect children are simply there to interfere with mothers and erode their liberties?

restless find rather funny how one poster has managed to insult so many people in such few posts yet says they stand for women? ( is that as long as they are not childfree with piercings and tattoos )

Most assaults and damage done to babies and children are done by their own parents.
So why not take them all from their parents at birth and slap them in orphanages?
Why are we wasting our time banning them from betting shops?

I notice on another thread you're advocating the use of tablets and phones at the table because sometimes you don't want your chIldren to actually interact with you in a restaurant.
RestlessTraveller, not for the first time, I urge you to take a course in reading comprehension.

If you are going to drag other threads into this (following Kali's shining example even though MN frowns on this practice - so here's a nice fat 'tsk tsk' to you both for that) you could at least drag my remarks in intact, and not insert what you fondly believe I posted, nicely twisted up to suit your purposes.

I believe it would be helpful at this point to provide a list of all the negative adjectives that people here have applied to babies and children?
Give me a few hours and I will come up with one.
It will all be C&P'd to ensure accuracy.

Most of us are women who have breastfed
And that is what makes the posts here so baffling.
Women (no less) who can't see how their own temporary self-interest erodes the long term and general interests of other women.
It's like people refusing to pay more taxes for improvements in education because they no longer have children in school or don't have children.

My comprehension skills are fine math but thanks.
Don't know how i've twisted
math argued for the woman who took her child to the greenday musical and then complained when asked to leave as that was true didn't mention Anythingelse... I apologise for breaking this rule though.

Still would like to know about all these people that have done wrong....
Piercerd people, tattooed people as you know parents do have these things? They are on here also?

OK, so what part of, "RestlessTraveller, not for the first time, I urge you to take a course in reading comprehension," do you think applies to you, Kali?

Copied from your post on the other thread about allowing children in restaurants to use tablets and phones at the table.

I love my DCs and love spending time with them, but quite honestly, sometimes I am crapped out after a long day of dealing with other people and I like to just sit in silence and eat, and so do my DCs."

Ok math fine, i was wrong, i apologise you weren't talking about me there.

The word 'restaurant' is mentioned exactly where, RestlessTraveller?

I may not have dropped a strong enough hint to you earlier about referring to other threads.

As I have stated a few times, you seem to have comprehension problems; perhaps this is your difficulty here.

So here it is in plain English:
You should not refer to posts on other threads here on Mumsnet.
It is not OK.
Obviously this includes C&Ping people's remarks from other threads.

Hoping this is now crystal clear.

The entire thread is about using tablets and phones in restaurants Math.

Is there a rule to say I can't refer to other threads? If there is then maybe I'm willing to break it just like you seem to be willing to break rules about taking children places where they are not allowed.

*I love my DCs and love spending time with them, but quite honestly, sometimes I am crapped out after a long day of dealing with other people and I like to just sit in silence and eat, and so do my DCs."

Bwuahahah! Fantastic

It would be nice to see an answer from NNChange to that one.

I'm pleased that you consider my contribution to this discussion a positive one, math.

When you stop avoiding questions, I'll do the same.

Your posts are still oscillating between the rights of parents to take their DCs everywhere, irrespective of their feeding choices, and the rights of breastfeeding mothers to take their DCs into child-free environments.
They are two very different scenarios (and of course, if you are supportive of the first, the second becomes superfluous).

My perception is that you've not really considered what your cause is, and are leaping to the defence of children where perceive them 'attacked'.

How have you raised your DCs to self reflect, consider all sides of a debate, and draw their own conclusions? Are they comfortable changing their minds? Because it strikes me that you will have struggled to model that behaviour - as you said upthread, you cannot accept that others think different to you.

RestlessTraveller,
Do you want me to C&P my whole post to show you that I did not refer to restaurants at all?

If there is a rule about reference to other threads, I am sure you will misread it.

So you don't know if there is a rule. You've just deemed it "not ok" and if you've said it, it must be true. Just like the rest of your argument.

Guys come on this is just turning into an argument, not a debate which is what it was can we wanted, just stick to this topic?

I will pause to point out the derogatory reference to my children (five of them, to clear up a little misunderstanding from upthread) before assuring you that thanks to their excellent performance in highly selective US universities so far, I have no worries about any of them having problems in their ability to 'self reflect, consider all sides of a debate, and draw their own conclusions.
But thank you for your concern.

Are they comfortable changing their minds?
See above.
Because it strikes me that you will have struggled to model that behaviour - as you said upthread, you cannot accept that others think different to you.
See above gratitude for your concern.
I do indeed find it baffling that women do not see how they contribute to the general hostility of the world that mothers find themselves contending with.

I am not going to change my mind in the face of the frankly silly remarks that have been put forth as 'arguments' here, interspersed with insults to my children and aspersions on my parenting approach, along with comments and adjectives referring to babies and children of other people that are simply hate-filled screeds.

A good example of the level of discourse is provided by RestlessTraveller: Is there a rule to say I can't refer to other threads? If there is then maybe I'm willing to break it just like you seem to be willing to break rules about taking children places where they are not allowed.
Now that's mature. Very adult indeed, and dripping with the spirit of rational debate.

Would you like to contact MNHQ and ask, RestlessTraveller?

I believe it is considered to be evidence of stalking, maybe even goady, and possibly a few other not-cricket-ish things.

We were off-topic as soon as math entered the thread and made it about breastfeeding.

StripedSwad Tue 18-Oct-16 17:43:09
Won't take bottle and don't have any with us, or steriliser etc. Glad people agree - I'd feel self conscious anyway

Three guesses what this is about, RestlessTraveller, and who posted it.