|
Users viewing this topic:
none
|
|
Login  | |
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 12:32:50 AM
|
|
|
lw9
Posts: 1131
Joined: 7/22/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
solo_soprano: I think some are just upset that America (as a whole) sees breasts as sexual, EVEN when it's for the purpose of feeding. If a breast is out, it can be seen as sexual...feeding someone or not feeding someone. In my experience, the breastfeeding mothers want the breastfeeding part to not be sexual...but this is America, and IMO, stuff like that isn't happening anytime soon. I do not see it as fair to expect people to see breasts as sexual, but then automatically condition them to create a disconnect if one is out for a baby (or feeding purposes). That's not a "sexual issue" to me...not the fact that there are breasts out in order to breastfeed. If a breast is seen as sexual, purpose doesn't matter. If you want a solution, then find a way to de-sexualize breasts when the breasts are being used for feeding (or altogether).
Finally... a fair and thoughtful response. I agree that it's unfair to expect society in general to magically change their views of breasts. And I agree that America does see breasts as sexual, but so does the Bible. I think that's a key point that many here have missed. I have to side with the Bible and say that breasts should remain a private part of the body whenever possible. I'm perfectly willing to accept that there are 'clothing malfunctions', but that's a bit different from what I've seen here in this thread, which included telling everyone they should just put up with it and making lists of how we should accomodate their choice to uncover themselves. Or even worse.... telling people they have sexual issues just because they were caught off-guard and were subjected to someone else's boobs. 
_____________________________
Aperture Science. We do what we must because we can.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 12:42:00 AM
|
|
|
lightshineon
Posts: 3463
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
I do not think you have sexual issues, I was kidding a little with you. I understand some things can make people feel odd. I would feel odd, and embaressed if I back when I brestfed, accidently exposed myself. Though with all honesty, I would tell the person next to me, my intentions, giving them a chance to turn away while I modestly covered myself, and baby. I did have an aunt that used no modesty when I was a teenager, who called it meals on wheels. She just flopped her breast out in Dunkin Donuts. I was so humilated, I was fifteen, there was no attempt at modesty.
quote:
ORIGINAL: lw9
quote:
solo_soprano: I think some are just upset that America (as a whole) sees breasts as sexual, EVEN when it's for the purpose of feeding. If a breast is out, it can be seen as sexual...feeding someone or not feeding someone. In my experience, the breastfeeding mothers want the breastfeeding part to not be sexual...but this is America, and IMO, stuff like that isn't happening anytime soon. I do not see it as fair to expect people to see breasts as sexual, but then automatically condition them to create a disconnect if one is out for a baby (or feeding purposes). That's not a "sexual issue" to me...not the fact that there are breasts out in order to breastfeed. If a breast is seen as sexual, purpose doesn't matter. If you want a solution, then find a way to de-sexualize breasts when the breasts are being used for feeding (or altogether).
Finally... a fair and thoughtful response. I agree that it's unfair to expect society in general to magically change their views of breasts. And I agree that America does see breasts as sexual, but so does the Bible. I think that's a key point that many here have missed. I have to side with the Bible and say that breasts should remain a private part of the body whenever possible. I'm perfectly willing to accept that there are 'clothing malfunctions', but that's a bit different from what I've seen here in this thread, which included telling everyone they should just put up with it and making lists of how we should accomodate their choice to uncover themselves. Or even worse.... telling people they have sexual issues just because they were caught off-guard and were subjected to someone else's boobs.
So many here just don't get it. I'm not looking to see someone's breasts. I've been in many public places where I just happen to glance in a certain direction only to see someone trying to latch their child onto their nipple. And somehow I'm to blame for this???
_____________________________
Remember, whenever you have pearls, there are always plenty of pigs nearby who would be glad to step on them.
F.T., 2007
Be sure you vote for those, whose views you want your children to emulate.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 12:43:41 AM
|
|
|
lw9
Posts: 1131
Joined: 7/22/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
buckifn: Ok, so who is making you look? I think it is very beautiful to see a woman breastfeeding her child and also very natural.
Great... then stare away.
You guys are just not getting it. I don't choose to look. I've been in several public places where I just happen to glance in a certain direction only to see someone trying to latch their child onto their nipple. And somehow that's my fault because I didn't know that I should not be looking in that direction? Solution: Cover up or go somewhere private.
_____________________________
Aperture Science. We do what we must because we can.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 12:46:38 AM
|
|
|
lw9
Posts: 1131
Joined: 7/22/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
lightshineon: I do not think you have sexual issues, I was kidding a little with you.
Oh no, no, no lightshineon! I didn't make that comment because of you! I was actually accused of having sexual issues, having an unclean mind, and being 'fascinated' a few pages back because I dared to propose that breastfeeding women should be modest and cover themselves. Go figure. 
_____________________________
Aperture Science. We do what we must because we can.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 12:48:08 AM
|
|
|
solo_soprano22
Posts: 2431
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
Well, in MY experience, some breastfeeders want you to accommodate them and they are always right in their minds (and always want their way or no way). Just the way it is; I just don't agree with all of them. (Some breastfeeders do share my sentiments.) I see the real "issues" are with American culture and conditioning towards breasts; but that's the world we live in-- or the sector of the world we live in. A woman (in the women's forum) said it perfectly (and she was a breastfeeding mom)... I just can't remember who it was. But no, I don't expect for people to make a magical disconnect just because the breast now has to be out for feeding. It's still an exposed breast...no matter what you're trying to do with it.
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 1:42:35 AM
|
|
|
SovereignIsHe
Posts: 5921
Joined: 4/15/2005
From: Northern Califonria
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: rcjames
What is it with all these children (baby) hating folks out there.
Thanks
RC
I believe the better question is where are all those folks who let their children run and roam free and take issue even with polite request to take charge of their children and not make the village deal with their disrespectful selves and sadly children.
John
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 7:46:51 AM
|
|
|
Annie64
Posts: 967
Joined: 6/4/2007
From: Indianapolis, IN
Status: offline
|
When I first saw this thread, I thought it was a fairly good idea to have kid's sections on airplanes, not because the kids might bother other people, but because the kids might be bored, and a special kid's section might make flying a better experience for them. The only reason I joined the discussion was because Soninme had the outrageous suggestion that a breastfeeding mother let her child go hungry for the duration of a flight. At least none of the other people who didn't like breastfeeding in public said anything like that. I flew with a baby once, about 12 and a half years ago, I guess. I don't remember whether I nursed him or not. I flew with three young children on that flight, and my husband and myself. I don't remember any problems, anyone looking at us badly, anyone giving us the idea that our children weren't welcome, whatsoever. That is, except in the terminal when I attempted to wear my son in a baby carrier so I could carry my share of the luggage. My husband, my other two children, and my MIL and FIL were all standing waiting for me to get him fixed and a security guard came up to us and told us to get moving and quit loitering. But the plane itself was no problem. As my then three-year-old daughter disembarked, she shouted, "Oh, I LOVE to fly!" The flight attendants loved it.
_____________________________
On Christ the solid rock I stand
ALL other ground is sinking sand.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 9:59:04 AM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3934
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: lw9
You guys are just not getting it. I don't choose to look. I've been in several public places where I just happen to glance in a certain direction only to see someone trying to latch their child onto their nipple. And somehow that's my fault because I didn't know that I should not be looking in that direction? Solution: Cover up or go somewhere private.
No, you just don't get it. The latch on is the most difficult time to remain modest. The mom often needs both hands just to get the baby on. The overwhelming majority of us do try for modesty, but that is by far the most critical time, although it is usually very short.
And if we're on a plane, especially during take off and landing when it is most vital that the baby be swallowing, not just sucking on a paci, the mom can't go anywhere (especially to a disgusting bathroom).
And I still hold that if accidentally catching a glimpse of a mom struggling to latch her baby on to the breast causes you to be upset, then you do have issues you need to work on, preferably with the Lord God.
< Message edited by Sideways -- 8/18/2008 11:42:16 AM >
_____________________________
This warranty does not include shark bites, bear attacks and children under five.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 10:10:50 AM
|
|
|
stellaluna
Posts: 4407
Joined: 4/11/2005
Status: offline
|
I don't personally care if anyone breastfeeds, and I'm sure every parent here has perfect angels for children who are capable of quietly flying anywhere, but I can count on one hand the number of flights I've taken that did NOT have a child disturbing half the other passengers. And I typically fly several times a year.
The problem is rarely babies. The problem is kids, 3-10 probably, who have parents that purposely ignore their bad behavior. REMEMBER: You may tolerate certain behavior from your children, or you ignore it, or you are used to it...but no one else is!!! Like I mentioned, on my last flight there were two screaming, yelling children...one about 4 or 5, the other a couple of years older. Their mother sat in the aisle in front of them and read a book. At one point, my husband turned around to her and said it might be better if she switched places with one of them. She ignored him, too. Finally, about half an hour before landing, one of them fell asleep and the other one started quietly looking at the Skymall catalog.
_____________________________
Who should be allowed to attend church?
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 10:52:32 AM
|
|
|
moon_mouse
Posts: 361
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: stellaluna
The problem is rarely babies. The problem is kids, 3-10 probably, who have parents that purposely ignore their bad behavior. REMEMBER: You may tolerate certain behavior from your children, or you ignore it, or you are used to it...but no one else is!!!
I agree. I may cringe when someone's infant starts screeching, but I'm not going to give the parents a dirty look. The infant is just responding to physical discomfort the only way it knows how. (Of course, some parents get offended that I cringe a little...sorry, but it's not a pleasant sound in a small, hot, enclosed space, and I'm not always able to hide 100% of that.)
I agree that it's parents with young children that are most likely to cause problems. I think there's two reasons. One is just what you pointed out, that parents get accustomed to the noise and shuffle of young kids, and don't respond to it. (BTW, It's not just childless people that get bothered by it. I've seen parents of teens and empty nesters have the same reaction. It's a function of constant exposure.) The other issue is the self-centered nature of our society. It's very easy to lay full blame on "horrible child-haters" or "rude business people", but parents can be just as self-centered in their own way. Children are being taken places, and taken at times, where they were not frequently seen when I was growing up (red-eye flights, higher end restaurants, late R-rated movies) because the parents "work hard and want to go out". Some parents aren't willing to balance their "right" to go where they want with courtesy to others. So, we see parents, for example, who let their child kick the back of a seat because they didn't walk the kid around the terminal for a while before the flight. Not all parents do this, of course, but do think it's becoming more common.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 11:50:49 AM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3934
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: moon_mouse
The other issue is the self-centered nature of our society. It's very easy to lay full blame on "horrible child-haters" or "rude business people", but parents can be just as self-centered in their own way. Children are being taken places, and taken at times, where they were not frequently seen when I was growing up (red-eye flights, higher end restaurants, late R-rated movies) because the parents "work hard and want to go out".
Hey, I have a toddler, and I completely agree with you. That's one reason why I think the "children's section" of an airplane is a good idea. But we don't take our son to certain restaurants, and in one place that knows us really well, we order food ahead of time to have it waiting for us on the table. It keeps the toddler happy to have something to eat, and it reduces our overall time.
My senior year job was to show movies, and I was ordered by my boss to allow children to stay and watch an R-rated movie. Mom would drop the kid off, then go elsewhere for a drink. I nearly lost my job I was so ticked off at the one mom who dropped off her 5 year old to see a Jason movie, then left to go to the nearby bar.
Thinking back, I really should've quit.
_____________________________
This warranty does not include shark bites, bear attacks and children under five.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 12:58:40 PM
|
|
|
Jenny-Fair
Posts: 5801
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: WA
Status: offline
|
Or called CPS!
I agree that a child aged 4 and up should be able to sit quietly or take short walks without disturbing other passengers. I would never have allowed climbing on seats, etc. However, my children may have been annoying if you don't like hearing a question every two minutes.
_____________________________
Tony: Ziva, did you kill Houdini?
Ziva: It is possible. I do not remember all their names.
My Blog
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 3:43:14 PM
|
|
|
Jenny-Fair
Posts: 5801
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: WA
Status: offline
|
Did someone?
_____________________________
Tony: Ziva, did you kill Houdini?
Ziva: It is possible. I do not remember all their names.
My Blog
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 3:45:17 PM
|
|
|
solo_soprano22
Posts: 2431
Joined: 4/27/2005
From: I'm a Southern girl
Status: offline
|
Yup. I'm not sure what kind of trouble he got into though.
_____________________________
For God, For Learning, Forever.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 7:00:03 PM
|
|
|
Sideways
Posts: 3934
Joined: 4/12/2005
Status: offline
|
Oh my stars, lw9, someone just told me you're a woman! Wow, I have to say I'm pretty surprised.
I'm guessing you don't post much in the Women's Folder?
_____________________________
This warranty does not include shark bites, bear attacks and children under five.
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 9:15:07 PM
|
|
|
landabee
Posts: 2760
Joined: 4/11/2005
From: Central Florida
Status: offline
|
quote:
And I wouldn't blame her at all if she didn't want to, after all of this.
That's what I thought, too. There are many women that steer clear.
OT:
I see the situation from both sides.
Firstly: a baby needs to eat when it needs to. I invite adults to eat their meals in the toilet.
Second: A section (non mandatory) would be a worthwhile thing to try. I don't think having children means that you deserve FIRST CLASS. But I do think that if the accomodations are the same for the rest of the passengers, fine.
Third: I forget who made the point...anyway........ It is SO true that as parents we can sometimes build a tolerance to noise and fidgeting.
RC is correct though, a little grace goes a long way. I will add: the grace needs to flow both directions.
I managed to keep my two "little preciouses" in check. Others can too.
_____________________________
"Sound theology discourages ignorance instead of promoting it." ~ CourdeLeon
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 9:46:36 PM
|
|
|
SonInMe1
Posts: 3164
Joined: 4/16/2005
From: my mom by God
Status: offline
|
This is just a microcosom of what this society truly is.
Me. Mine. Me first. Who cares about the other guy.
Babies usually get use to what they are comfortable with. Wouldn't it be prudent to get your baby use to being covered when you feed them so in public you can be MODEST?
Wether its right or wrong. Wether people should get over their lusts. The fact is an exposed breast for whatever purpose is not socially acceptable and a matter of immodesty. A responsible christian woman should find ways, when she is in public, to be modest and have a sence of responsibility to others.
I don't sence that here. Its my baby. Its my breast. To heck with what others think. Its this attitude that also makes spoiled chiuldren who cannot control themselves in public.
When I was a kid I did not ask my mom for stuff in the store and scream when I did not get it. I KNEW the consequences. A toddler who understands the word no, should be in control, to some extent. The child should not be running around or screaming.
Now, I am not as well to do as many here who fly like its nothing so I have only been on a plane a few times and my kids were older when we did that so I guess I don't have that experience but...I can tell you, my kids did not scream or act unruly in stores or church.
It can be done. This "family section" in planes, to me, is an excuse for people not to parent their kids.
A child out of control defines...the parent.
_____________________________
You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God.
James 4:4
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 9:53:01 PM
|
|
|
karlie
Posts: 16433
Joined: 4/10/2005
From: Central California
Status: offline
|
I just returned from a cross country plane trip where I boarded three flights to get there and four to get home, and I can tell you flying with out of control screaming children is a nightmare! I sat near several children, going and coming, who were very young, but very well behaved and even when tired, obviously had been taught respect for their parents and those around them. Even when they were getting cranky and a little unhappy, it was fine because they weren't over the top screaming and tantruming. I can show lots of grace to families like that.
I also had the "pleasure" of a 7 hour plane ride with two children that were so far out of control it made us all miserable. They were about 3 and 6(plenty old enough to have been taught better) and screamed, cursed(gotta love the F word coming from a toddler), kicked, wailed and slapped at their parents for pretty much the entire ride. One even tossed a beverage back at the flight attendant because he didn't want juice, he wanted Coke. This kind of behavior is not uncommon on flights...every time I have flown in the last five years, we've come across this at least once, usually more. My personal opinion is that if parents are going to allow that kind of behavior, they have no business bringing their children aboard an aircraft where no one is able to get away and those in authority have no choice but to let them ruin everyone's trip.
I can definitely be tolerant of a cranky, fussy toddler whose parents are doing their best to keep him entertained and happy and you can tell they are just tired. But those who have out of control children who have no discipline or respect whatsoever shouldn't be allowed to make travel miserable for everyone else. I am all for a children's section for parents and kids who can't seem to stay in control.
< Message edited by karlie -- 8/18/2008 10:17:21 PM >
_____________________________
You can't stop the waves, but you can learn how to surf~
|
|
|
|
|
RE: Special "Children's" Section on Planes... - 8/18/2008 11:43:38 PM
|
|
|
truthrevealed
Posts: 403
Joined: 12/6/2007
Status: offline
|
I've flown only once in my lifetime...so far...... but I must chime in about the breastfeeding in public. I was a breastfeeding mom, I am NOT sexually stimulated by the sight of breasts and the only thing that would be unclean in my mind concerning another womans' decision to breastfeed without "covering up," would be indignation at her attitude that because it's natural she should not take GREAT care and consideration to be mindful of those who may be uncomfortable. (In college, I roomed with a girl who had no problem walking the room naked after showering.... we could debate that I just needed to "get over" the fact that I didn't want to see her "business" or she could have chosen to be naked all she wanted when I was not there, respecting the fact that it made ME uncomfortable.
For me, it's more about an attitude of the heart concerning the person involved rather than seeing an exposed breast!
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Tools
Printable Version
