Kids and resturants

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-15-2003
Kids and resturants
892
Sun, 12-12-2004 - 11:57am

Hey all...


Did you have rules about resturants and babies? Or did you just take them everywhere?


Dh and I went to a VERY pricy resturant as a treat for ourselves a couple of weekends ago. All dressed up and having cocktails. Anyway, right next to us is a party with an 8 month old whining in a high chair. Mind you, our reservations were for 8 pm and they sat after we did.


This is incredibly rude, imo, for many reasons.


First of all, most 8 month olds are done by 8 o'clock. Secondly, there are just some resturants that are not meant for babies... a $75 dollar-a-plate resturant being one of them, imo. I do think that older

Meldi

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 10:38am

"As the latter has not yet happened to me." Not surprising considering that it's much less likely for your own personal reasons to bother you if your high-quality restaurant companion is drunk than if your high-quality restaurant companion is your child.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 10:42am
Hey, people seem to enjoy it, and as I said, it nets over a quarter million for the school every year, so more power to 'em. Gives people a chance to go and sneer over women like me who might be wearing a dress more than once, let 'em have their fun!
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2000
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 10:43am

I understand where you are coming from and I wish that I could be as optimistic as you.

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-27-2000
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 10:44am
LOL, I hadn't thought about it that way!
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-20-2004
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 10:45am

Unless, like Lois, you read Scripture as the more or less literal Word of God. (Literally the Word of God, but in which some verses of which have a clearly figurative meaning--however, the Scriptures in question are those that I believe Lois believes literally).

There are a great many clearly literally intended verses in Scripture, both Old and New Testament, which very plainly command a generousity of spirit and tangible assets to the needy as well as those that warn against personal greed at the expense of the needy.

Further, a good many verses support the idea that given the Spirits diversity of gifts throughout the body of Christ, different followers will be convicted differently, based on their assets, gifts and heart. It is simply not accurate to say that because you read the compassion verses with different meaning than Lois, than her interpretation of them is wrong, that her conviction of the Spirit is inaccurate or that she is being needlessly frugal. if the Spirit has seen fit to convict her in this regard, who are any of us to question her on it? Particularly given the manner in which she chooses to express that conviction (i.e., selflessly).

I am unaware of a single post from Lois claiming that anyone ELSE should limit herself to one party dress, despite the many that have here implied she's just this side of miserly for not wanting to spend the money on something that is nothing less than a frivolous expenditure. is there anything wrong with others liking and having more than one party dress? No--and certainly no wrong has been implied by Lois. Yet the vehemence with which people here have criticized Lois' stance *does tend to make me wonder where the intensity of such rejection comes from...and then I have to wonder at their real motivation in criticizing Lois.

Karen

"A pocketknife is like a melody;
sharp in some places,
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-25-2003
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 10:50am

I understand where you're coming from. . .and I can't say that in that moment I was this optimistic. . .with time comes healing.


It frustrates me when people talk about ruined rehersal dinners or weddings or birthing plans that didn't go according to 'plan'. . .events that were negatively impacted at the time, but still ended up in an overall positive manner. . .and they refer to those events in the same terms now as they did then.

Virgo
 
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 10:51am
I find it bemusing that you don't know anyone who didn't get married in a white gown. Don't you know anyone from another ethnic group where a long white dress isn't part of the marriage ceremony? Did no one you know elope, or have a civil ceremony somewhere, or get married in a meadow or along the seashore or in some other venue? Nobody have a hurried up wedding because the fiance was being shipped to the Persian Gulf or Afghanistan or something? Do you only know people who are just like you?
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 10:57am
Yes, we can all think of times where for our own reasons we are especially sensitive to things both big and small. That does not mean, however, that people who are wholly unaware of our special sensitivities and would have no reason to concern themselves with them even if they did are being inconsiderate merely by doing something that happens to upset someone with such a sensitivity.
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-04-1997
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 11:02am
No, what you need is two people willing to honor the vows that they took at their wedding ceremony. That's the bottom line. If two people staying together is dependent upon "spark," then all is lost -- there are always going to be sparkier sparks available outside the marriage. I
iVillage Member
Registered: 08-09-2004
In reply to: meldi
Wed, 12-15-2004 - 11:07am

>Don't you know anyone from another ethnic group where a long white dress isn't part of the marriage ceremony?

Some people aren't that culturally sophisticated and don't see the world outside of where they happen to live... I find it amusing that many people seem to believe a white wedding gown is indicative of virginity or purity. It might have acquired that meaning over time, but white became popular when Queen Victorian wore a white wedding gown in the 19th century. Several centuries earlier, another member of royalty (a "Queen Anne"?) had worn white and for a while, white was the "in" color for wedding gowns, at least for a while. This is why I think its such an ignorant thing to judge a woman who gets married for the second time, if she wants to wear a white gown. The color white is simply a traditional bridal color, that's all.

Pages