Is this accepted now? Young children and electronics on public transport.

[AnneGrommit]

The last few times I've been on a train (not in quiet coach) and quite often on the bus I've had my peace disturbed by toddlers with phones/tablets either playing noisy games on them or watching programmes. When I've asked parents to rein them in I've been invariably met with either passive aggressive remarks about not liking children (I have three myself) or outright hostility and a statement along the lines of "it keeps them quiet". No, it doesn't. It stops them from pestering you but it's far from quiet. AIBU or is this an accepted "thing" now? Because it's fucking annoying.

zzzz if I am behaving in a way that causes distress to other passengers, and they bring it to my attention, then if it's within my power to do so I will then modify my behaviour.

Because it's public transport, not my personal transport, and it's just as well that we all do whatever we can to get along on it to make the journey as bearable as possible for everyone, not just ourselves.

My comment was to Granny who seems to be reading a completely different thread to me. I was merely asking a question. Is that not allowed on AIBU now?

I'm aware of that Frances, and you are of course entitled to say that. I think you can see if you look back at the preceding posts that there were assertions that no one was saying that any no noise rules applied to children with disabilities, that no one had said this at all. I assumed when quoting the people in question stand by their posts.

Francis agree entirely. One of the difficulties of ensuring accessibility is that one size does not fit all. I've seen this recently with an event where the organisers were discussing replacing clapping with BSL-style hand-waving, at the request of some people with sensory difficulties. They then got a number of other attendees with sight issues for whom this would have made the event difficult to take part in at all. There are often competing issues where not everyone can be accommodated, even when everyone is willing to make a situation as accessible as possible.

I didn't call anyone thick or dim. Some people do have problems with comprehension. You're just being obtuse.

I always make my 5 year old son wear over ear headphones, its rude and annoying otherwise so no, i don't think YABU.

Considering how rude and unpleasant you've been throughout this thread towards most people with a different point of view, I'd say that's a little rich.

rule bound silently righteous seethers - just an example from the last couple of pages.

It's name calling. That's not very kind behaviour.

It's clearly rude. Of course you know this, but just in case you genuinely don't, I've done a basic comprehension-type analysis on the words you've chose.

You're referring to people as 'rule bound' which has the evident negative implication of rigid, inflexible and dogmatic. Another way of describing people who prefer to follow rules or customs for the benefit of the majority might be 'law abiding' or 'civic minded' but those have much more positive associations, and you haven't chosen to use them.

'Silently righteous' is similarly negative, as it has the implication is of 'self-righteous' which tends to be used to refer to people who have a certainty, frequently an unfounded one, that they are right or morally superior. You don't seem to mean 'righteous' in the sense of followers of a particular faith. It also suggests that these people do not act on their feelings, so perhaps also implies cowardice or hypocrisy of some kind.

And 'seethers' suggests a level of anger that has not been articulated on this thread. You are using an inappropriateky emotive word to describe what in most cases appears to be a feeling of annoyance or irritation.

"chosen", not "chose", of course, in my first line

Well, I would never use any of those words to describe someone, on here or in real life.

A lack of comprehension is a deficit in understanding. There are plenty of areas where I lack comprehension and I'm happy to admit that.

Real life is different. If I don't like tech music, I shouldn't have to put up with it, or have to get off the bus, or not use public transport. You can get off MN. Just like you can get off the bus. People suggested using ear plugs or head phones for your own music to avoid other people's noise but were told that was unreasonable, why should people have to avoid the nuisance, the nuisance shouldn't be there. Well the same thing applies, why shouldn't I be able to read a thread without having to read people swearing. Is it necessary, no it is no more necessary than listening to PeppaPig and serves less purpose.

This is priceless! So you're characterising, not insulting? Have you thought of a career in politics zzzz?

If you're complaining about swearing on AIBU I really think you might like to consider that this is the wrong forum for you? Perhaps netmums?

My problem with your comment was that it used "lack of comprehension" as the stick to beat someone with (verbally), which is something I have come to dislike more and more. Most people in the uk would shy away from using terms like "retard" or "spaz", many expand that sentiment and avoid words like "idiot", "moron" or "stupid" used in an insulting way. That's the tone I got from your post Probably age discrimination, we aren't allowed to have an opinion when we start getting a pension.

What don't you get about the fact that you don't have to post here but that you do have to catch a bus to work.

Just like you can get off the bus.

Yes, granny, being on an internet forum has exactly the same level of necessity as getting to work, going to the doctor, getting shopping, picking your kids up from school...