Posted by GIT on July 28, 2011, 12:37 am, in reply to "Re: Second Look"
It is for comfort, but so are fast food places, remote controls, automatic transmissions, heck even regular restaurants. Not everything has to be geared for a need.
None of these options discriminate against anyone so I do not understand the correlation to the discussion as a comfort item that excludes a group of people.
Second, I wasn't trying to say that an adult would want to spend time at a place geared towards kids. I'm just saying they exist. I might turn it around and say why would a family want to spend time at a place geared towards adults only?
Particularly the last part - families spending time at places geared for adults. I don't understand this either because places geared for adults would not allow children to be there. So I do not see how this correlates to the discussion if it cannot happen.
I'm saying it doesn't have to be either-or, why can't there be both. I don't understand why anybody would be upset at a place that gears towards kids, or a place that gears towards adults. It's a concept that's targeting a growing market. It's an additional option for those who choose it. If you don't like it, that's fine, but it's not discriminating towards anybody, it's just an added choice for people.
See I would agree with this if it was not geared towards people who do not have children and who do not want kids around. I understand the adult time thing believe me. If they were marketing say "a" restaurant as an option for parents to have a nice evening out alone and spend time together without the kiddos, that would be fine. But trying to assimilate an entire kid free option for people because someone just does not want to tolerate children? That is discrimination.
We certainly could flip this and make that any people group that another does not want to tolerate. Imagine if it was the elderly we didn't want to be around or people of a different race or whatever - that would drip with discrimination, but because it is children - somehow it is looking like a different face.
I still say hold the parents responsible and not the kids. Set firm guidelines in your restaurants and places of business and if someone is disruptive to other customers, ask them to leave.
How would it make you feel if say you wanted to hang out with your mom and dad and this particular restaurant or this store did not allow anyone in it over 50 years old? Do you think this would skew societies view on this group of people being discriminated against - less important than others etc... How do you think this would make the parents of children feel? I mean they cannot help the fact that their kids are kids, but they can help the behavior factor.
No, now that I see where this is coming from, I disagree and it is definitely discrimination.
on July 28, 2011, 12:37 am, in reply to "