• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Olympics more important than week old baby?

Status
Not open for further replies.

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,754
Location
Essex
5c28fd70-08e2-fab1.jpg

I was outraged reading this in the Metro today. Apparently this woman considers the Olympics to be more important than their new baby. I'd also suggest that an event the size of the Olympics isn't the best place for a newborn.


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,856
Just so long as she never takes one to a tennis tornament, we all know what happens then!

I agree with you though.
 

Nonsense

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2009
Messages
293
In accordance with with WHO guidelines...

I had the misfortune to encounter the breast nazis. Hateful people. Really. They mean well, but seriously. No.

But yes, disgusted that Michelle's enjoyment of this prestigious international sporting event will be ruined by the miracle of childbirth and the unrivaled joy of parenthood. :roll:
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,784
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Sorry, but this was on BBC Breakfast before, it's in the T&Cs that you need to have a ticket for all atendees, and it should stay as such. Buy a ticket for them or sod off...

It has sod all to do with breastfeeding, simply that anyone in the audience needs a ticket to attend.

Also, why you taking a newborn to the olympics?
 

Nonsense

Member
Joined
20 Oct 2009
Messages
293
Sorry, but this was on BBC Breakfast before, it's in the T&Cs that you need to have a ticket for all atendees, and it should stay as such. Buy a ticket for them or sod off...
Quite right.

It has sod all to do with breastfeeding, simply that anyone in the audience needs a ticket to attend.
The article in the OP has everything to do with breastfeeding. The author of the letter can't attend the Olympics because they don't have a ticket for their newborn, which will require breastfeeding (if following the WHO misguidelines but conveniently overlooking the option to express), and therefore the mother must stay at home and miss the events.

Also, why you taking a newborn to the olympics?

? What sane person would take a newborn to the olympics?
 

Ferret

Established Member
Joined
22 Jan 2009
Messages
4,131
What sane person would take a newborn to the olympics?

The second word is where the problem lies. Remember, to some - a baby is either a fashion accessory or a benefits passport. Sanity doesn't come into it:(
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,856
[youtube]F1HZWuhcE88[/youtube]

Who takes a baby to a professional tennis match?!
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,821
If she deosnt want to go Ill have her ticket.
 

tony_mac

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2009
Messages
3,626
Location
Liverpool
Maybe she applied for tickets before she was pregnant?

If she wants to take her baby to the Olympics, then I think that should be her choice. Is she supposed to stay at home until her child is an adult?

Of all the bad things a parent can do to a child, I don't think taking them to a sporting event ranks very highly on my list; there are far more important things to be judgemental about.

I assume that the point of the story is to illustrate that requiring a ticket for a baby is a bit silly, which it is.
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,821
Maybe she applied for tickets before she was pregnant?

If she wants to take her baby to the Olympics, then I think that should be her choice. Is she supposed to stay at home until her child is an adult?

Of all the bad things a parent can do to a child, I don't think taking them to a sporting event ranks very highly on my list; there are far more important things to be judgemental about.

I assume that the point of the story is to illustrate that requiring a ticket for a baby is a bit silly, which it is.

Yet plenty of other attractions that require you to sit down also require you to have a ticket for a baby/toddler so I dont see why it should be any different for the Olympics
 

Smudger105e

Member
Joined
5 Jan 2010
Messages
1,012
Location
N 52° 53.492 W 001° 15.493
Yet plenty of other attractions that require you to sit down also require you to have a ticket for a baby/toddler so I dont see why it should be any different for the Olympics


I think you should have put infant/toddler, which would be appropriate, but a baby? Hardly going to need a seat, or disrupt the sporting event, is he/she? You don't even need a seat on an aircraft for a baby...
 

Clip

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2010
Messages
10,821
I think you should have put infant/toddler, which would be appropriate, but a baby? Hardly going to need a seat, or disrupt the sporting event, is he/she? You don't even need a seat on an aircraft for a baby...

No but you do need to ttell them in advance - you dont just turn up with a bairn and be hunky dory.

I still dont understand why you would take a baby anyway but as I say - other places require you to have a ticket whether you use a seat or not. Licensing probably has something to do with it.
 

Nym

Established Member
Joined
2 Mar 2007
Messages
9,784
Location
Somewhere, not in London
Also, where does one draw the line for a child in lap, someone could turn up with an 8 year old and claim he's going to be sat in her lap, then kick off.... Best to be unambiguous and say... ALL NEED TICKETS!
 

Wath Yard

Member
Joined
31 Dec 2011
Messages
864
Also, where does one draw the line for a child in lap, someone could turn up with an 8 year old and claim he's going to be sat in her lap, then kick off....

Indeed. A grandmother could have her 20 year old daughter on her lap, who in turn has her baby on hers. It could end up like a human pyramid!

Sportsmen often have to abstain from sex before big events so it's only fair that spectators do so for 9 months before the event.
 

Hydro

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2007
Messages
2,204
As if the Olympic ticketing policy makers were sitting one day around their 5 interlinked ring table, deciding on how to implement the ticketing policy when suddenly one pipes up: "Hang on, lads. What about women who have become pregnant between being allocated their ticket and attending, giving birth a matter of weeks before their event, and wish to breastfeed their newborn baby in accordance with WHO guidelines? Shall we write a clause into the policy for this eventuality?" "Good thinking there, Hans. It can go under the "Actions on a ticket holder's sister in law suffering a sudden bereavement in the family up to one week before the ticket holders event, with the ticket holder taking temporary guardianship of his/her niece/nephew over the validity period of the ticket holders ticket and it would be churlish to say no in the face of a bereavement" clause.

"Or we can just suggest every attendee needs a ticket. It may inconvenience a few people who succumb to fairly unlikely scenarios, but on the whole it would cut down on small print being the length of Eamonn Holmes' Treatise on the Pies of Wigan - Unabridged Version?"

"What about ticket holders gaining a sense of f*cking perspective?"

"I like that one."

"Thanks, Lord Coe."
 

tony_mac

Established Member
Joined
25 Feb 2009
Messages
3,626
Location
Liverpool

kylemore

Member
Joined
28 Aug 2010
Messages
1,047
Why anybody would want to spend good money to go and see some doughball throw a stick half a centimetre further than some other doughball or run the length of a field a millisecond faster than the other doughballs is beyond me.
Life is too short, watching paint dry would be a better use of time!:lol:
 

starrymarkb

Established Member
Joined
4 Aug 2009
Messages
5,985
Location
Exeter
I think you should have put infant/toddler, which would be appropriate, but a baby? Hardly going to need a seat, or disrupt the sporting event, is he/she? You don't even need a seat on an aircraft for a baby...

There was a mother once who got thrown off a flight for bringing too many kids (6 iirc), they'd booked a 3 year old as an adult and wanted to sit the younger twins on the 3 year old's lap.
 

Minilad

Established Member
Joined
26 Feb 2011
Messages
4,397
Location
Anywhere B link goes
Why anybody would want to spend good money to go and see some doughball throw a stick half a centimetre further than some other doughball or run the length of a field a millisecond faster than the other doughballs is beyond me.
Life is too short, watching paint dry would be a better use of time!:lol:

Why would anyone want to stand on the end of a platform watching trains go past or type anonymous messages on an internet forum.

Good job we don't all like the same things isn't it :roll:
 

WestCoast

Established Member
Joined
19 Jun 2010
Messages
5,665
Location
South Yorkshire
There was a mother once who got thrown off a flight for bringing too many kids (6 iirc), they'd booked a 3 year old as an adult and wanted to sit the younger twins on the 3 year old's lap.

I believe that it was in America and she tried to sue. It represented multiple serious safety violations, so the case was thrown out.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Why would anyone want to stand on the end of a platform watching trains go past or type anonymous messages on an internet forum.

Good job we don't all like the same things isn't it :roll:

Well said, we all have different interests,
 

kylemore

Member
Joined
28 Aug 2010
Messages
1,047
Why would anyone want to stand on the end of a platform watching trains go past or type anonymous messages on an internet forum.

Good job we don't all like the same things isn't it :roll:

Absolutely XCDriver, however I do like a bit of controversy!

The build up of Olympics propaganda is well under way now and I feel there should be a counter balance from those of us (a minority I admit) who see through it (or think they do!).:)
 

Tringonometry

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2011
Messages
157
On the basis of this thread, some of you are really quite odd, IMO.

The reason to take a baby *anywhere* is simple - the baby belongs with you - because the baby needs you.

If it's feasible and sensible to take a baby somewhere then one should be able to. End of.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Maybe she applied for tickets before she was pregnant?

If she wants to take her baby to the Olympics, then I think that should be her choice. Is she supposed to stay at home until her child is an adult?

Of all the bad things a parent can do to a child, I don't think taking them to a sporting event ranks very highly on my list; there are far more important things to be judgemental about.

I assume that the point of the story is to illustrate that requiring a ticket for a baby is a bit silly, which it is.

+1 from me.
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,856
On the basis of this thread, some of you are really quite odd, IMO.

The reason to take a baby *anywhere* is simple - the baby belongs with you - because the baby needs you.

If it's feasible and sensible to take a baby somewhere then one should be able to. End of.

Does that include snooker or bowls tournaments? I suspect babies wouldn't be too welcome at either!
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,754
Location
Essex
Then stay at home with the baby. The baby is the most important thing, and taking a weeks-old baby to an international sporting event is silly.

My point was that if she considered her baby to be of higher importance than her Olympics tickets then she would relinquish them to look after the child.
 

Tringonometry

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2011
Messages
157
Then stay at home with the baby. The baby is the most important thing, and taking a weeks-old baby to an international sporting event is silly.

My point was that if she considered her baby to be of higher importance than her Olympics tickets then she would relinquish them to look after the child.

What a load of cr@p. Babies are portable. It's entirely feasible and sensible to take one with you to a sporting event. Why wouldn't you?

What's "silly" about it?
 

ralphchadkirk

Established Member
Joined
20 Oct 2008
Messages
5,754
Location
Essex
What a load of cr@p. Babies are portable. It's entirely feasible and sensible to take one with you to a sporting event. Why wouldn't you?

What's "silly" about it?

So you would be prepared to take a baby that's so young it can't Bergen be left with a babysitter for one day to an international sporting event? That my friend is "crap" (as you so intelligently and eloquently put it).


Sent from my iPhone 4 using Tapatalk
 

anthony263

Established Member
Joined
19 Aug 2008
Messages
6,892
Location
South Wales
Then stay at home with the baby. The baby is the most important thing, and taking a weeks-old baby to an international sporting event is silly.

My point was that if she considered her baby to be of higher importance than her Olympics tickets then she would relinquish them to look after the child.

I do have some agreement with this. I am sure there are plenty of people who would happily buy her tickets
 

Greenback

Emeritus Moderator
Joined
9 Aug 2009
Messages
15,268
Location
Llanelli
What a load of cr@p. Babies are portable. It's entirely feasible and sensible to take one with you to a sporting event. Why wouldn't you?

What's "silly" about it?

Very young babies require a lot of attention. They cry a lot. They need regular feeding, and regular changing. My own view is that taking a very young baby to the Olympics is going to be pretty disruptive, not elast for the mother herself.
 

Tringonometry

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2011
Messages
157
So you would be prepared to take a baby that's so young it can't Bergen be left with a babysitter for one day to an international sporting event? That my friend is "crap" (as you so intelligently and eloquently put it).

Bergen? ;)

I note - again - that you haven't said *why* a baby shouldn't be taken along. Why do so many people seem to think that a baby is some sort of strange object akin to a dirty bomb or other small thermonuclear device? :lol:

From experience, if you'd said "toddler" or "six-year-old" then I'd possibly agree with you, but babies are much easier to handle. If they cry, they either need feeding or changing, which takes no time at all. Mostly, they sleep.

I can't help but wonder how many people in the opposing camp to me don't have experience of taking a baby to places. It's a piece of cake. We took my little one to all sorts of sports events. Rugby, football, cricket ... never had a problem except people pestering us to have a look at the little man. :)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Very young babies require a lot of attention. They cry a lot. They need regular feeding, and regular changing. My own view is that taking a very young baby to the Olympics is going to be pretty disruptive, not elast for the mother herself.

Thank you for the parenting lesson. Maybe try it yourself one day. ;)

Just a guess. Am I right?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top