to think that if B&B's can state 'no kids' then why not 'no gay people'...?

[guiltyandfedup]

I think BOTH are wrong by the way.....BUT as far as I know children are citizens and should be entitled to 'human rights' the same as the rest of society. But often DP and I have found that they will not 'accept' children- what grounds have they to discriminate against them?

The reasons given are 'the comfort of other guests etc etc'. Well in that case why shouldn't B and B owners be able to argue that having gay people in the establishment could cause 'discomfort' to other guests or the oners themselves if it is a total taboo within their cultural or religious beliefs.

Juast wanted to guage others opinions as its been in the news a lot today but no-one seems to have noticed the paralel!

Well to be fair kids can be noisy if they wake at night crying which will disturb people.

Gay people are just other adults.

Not a great comparison tbh.

My Dad owns a hotel and says he doesn't want gay men staying there as they leave faeces on the bed when having bumsex. I love my Dad but he is a twat and this is the sort of attitude that needs stamping out. How would other people know the people are gay? It is none of their business.

I think that is the point yeah. You can object to anyone for a reason and noise is a reason.

I agree that children can sometimes wake in the night and that if it is very loud or goes on for a long period it could cause annoyance to other guests, but equally adults can and do make noise (sometimes a lot!).

I have been woken up frequently in hotels etc by other adults (usually pissed)and by tele's and people having ahem...'relations' lol, but NEVER by kids!

Some people just dont like kids as it spoils their egocentric view of the world, and unfortunately they are given free licence to refuse to offer them the 'service' which the law compels them to offer to everyone else!

So unfair!!!

yes i think it is as nikki says, there is a reason why they can refuse children, which can even be safety hazards, i.e. they have a pond in the garden or similar.
I think the B&B owner should have to justify their rules without resorting to plain prejudice! There must be a B&B inspection company or somethign who they'd have to answer to.

oh my word nikki! lol, its not funny at all, but i did laugh at his stupidity lol

yabu
if your eally think no kids is discrimination, yabvu

am i right in thinking a b&b has different laws to a guest house which you don't have to register?
if you own a guest house you can refuse anybody you don't like the look of for any reason you choose and you won't be breaking the law apparently.
sorry if thats wrong?

I don't think gay people tend to draw on the walls or break things or cry a lot, or run around and disturb other guests.

Saying no gay people is the same as saying no blacks.

But most kids dont draw on the walls or cry a lot and most decent parents i know wouldnt let their kids 'run around disturbing other guests.'

Surelt you either offer a service to the people who require it or you dont!

Because there's no discrimination laws relating to children in the same way.
There isn't a parallel to be noticed.

Eh, nikki's dad? Don't straight couples ever have bumsex in hotels then??

Can't believe people think that saying "no gay couples" is the same as saying "no drunks" or "no children". It's not catching you know

"No children" is a whole other argument, but I can at least see why people may object.

OP you really can't compare the two.

Children require specialist equipment and consideration (like the health and safety aspect). Gay people don't.

I don't care if a gay couple are sat at a table near me for breakfast, they are statistically no more likely to flick scrambled egg in my hair than a heterosexual couple.

The same cannot be said for a 3 year old.

Overmydeadbody, I have no problem with and b's saying 'we do not have high chairs/cots/stairgates/special kids menus etc when I ring up to enquire but I do object to having the decision of whether to stay in a particular place made for me on the ASSUMPTION that my child is going to cause a total nuiscance!

Gay40, you are correct that no equal laws exist to ensure children get fair treatment (discrimination wise) but I believe it is still an 'interesting' comp[arison even if not an obviosu one.

Often you can't know whether or not a child is going to be a pain in the frickin arse until it's 1 am and it's parents haven't bothered putting it to bed yet, in which case it's too late for the manager to change his/her mind and say "Actually, normally we don't mind children but yours are bloody horrible. Leave now."

If a 30 year old woman does that you can simply eject her.

Children shouldn't get equal treatment to adults, they do not have equal responsibility to adults. If a child urinates on the floor of a bed and breakfast, drunkeness is not assumed and the police are not called. If a child starts screaming unintelligably about "Mr Foo is COMING" nobody gives the child a shot of thorazine and a white coat. If a small child balls up his fist and shouts "Punch you inna face!!!" he's mildly reprimanded, but he is not taken to a police cell and cautioned for threatening behavior.

They do not have equal rights because they are shielded from equal responsibilities.

Children aren't the same as adults, they don't have the same rights.
I think its actually a little insulting to compare the two.

I can't quite put my finger on why, but in a nutshell:

I would think the proprietors of a 'No Kids' B&B were mean bastards.

I would think the proprietors of a 'No gay people' B&B were extremely nasty and possibly Nazi.

Having agreed that it's different and sometimes justified I think more/most places should accept children. I'd make allowances for other people's children and be happier about it than I would about some drunk falling about or yelling in the middle of the night.

I presumed the no kids thing is because they're warning you they don't have the facilities to deal with children. You wouldn't be impressed to turn up and find they had no highchair, no extra beds, very little space, uncovered plug sockets, lots of ornaments/breakables, steep staircases etc. but they didn't warn you the place was not suitable for children. I read no kids as meaning the environment for whatever reason is not safe or suitable for children. There are I'm sure health and safety laws governing on whether they can accept children. Also it could even mean that someone resident even had a criminal conviction which meant it is inadvisble to let children stay, or they have children of their own with sn that made other children staying potentially difficult. There's a whole host of legitimate reasons. Gay people on the other hand do not differ in their needs and safety requirements to straight adults.

Oh I agree onagar, I think more places should be child friendly. But its not the same thing.

But not everyone feels like that about children, onager. If I was on a child free weekend away, I would deliberately pick a place that had a 'no children' policy.

What? You really need this answering?

Because gay couples won't want to run about at 6am in the morning waking up everyone else. Because gay couples won't feel compelled to draw all over the eiderdown in felt tip. Because gay couples won't do stuff like plug the sink up and leave the tap running whilst their guardians have some "me" time.* Because gay couples are the same as straight couples except they shag people of the same sex fgs.

It's not prejudiced to stipulate no children, though I can see how parents with a rose-tinted view of kiddywinks and the belief that kiddywinks have the God-given right to be included in absolutely anything might think so.

*Disclaimer: SOME gay couples might feel compelled to draw on eiderdowns in felt tip. I'm not speaking for all of them.