Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Alan Dale Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Good point about babysitters.

>

> I think you have to have children before you can

> be 'child free' otherwise childless is more

> appropriate.

>

> Child free in the place of childless sounds like

> people are putting a positive spin on a bad

> situation.


No, Alan Dale, not at all and that was kind of my point.

Childless is only appropriate if you feel it's a loss.

If a couple have chosen not to have children it's their choice and doesn't require any positive spin, because it's not, for them, a bad situation.

Sorry to go on about it, I know it's not strictly on topic, but I don't see why you can't accept that some people choose not to have children.

Dulwich_ Park_ Fairy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Pretty much hit the nail on the head there Asset, how many of the anti-family pub crowd would have dared to venture into the Plough or the Forresters before they were re-invented.


In the interests of fairness, The Goose & Granite (The Plough) had loads of kids in there, they were just a bit more chavy, but equally f**king annoying!


*Runs for the hills*


Seriously, I don't think there is an "anti family pub brigade", or maybe there is. I just think most people think that if a kid is in the pub, the parents should take responsibility for it and not let it run wild. Is that unreasonable?


If the pub is actually running a baby session like the EDT and Plough have recently, then of course those who don't want to be around kids should use their heads and avoid those places, and don't really have the right to moan about kids being in there at those times.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • But I don't think that was what you meant, was it? But he can hardly be held responsible for what somebody else did! Just discovered I forgot to post the above  last night, and now it's overtaken by long posts.  I don't have sufficient knowledge  to counter some of what has been said above, some of which appears to be opinion rather than facts, so it would be pointless for me to say anything else.
    • I am sure our lovely Evri delivery team, who do a firkin hard job, take the time between drops to read the East Dulwich Forum 🤫
    • For every person like OP that moans their doorbell was rung and there was a knock on the door, there's someone else moaning that they didn't hear the delivery drivers. If you've ever done delivery work you'll know that loads of people's bells don't work. The delivery drivers probably goes to a hundred doors a day: press bell, knock door, drop package, move on. If you don't like delivery drivers, insist on delivery by Royal Mail where the workers have wages and a union - or just stop ordering shit online that's artificially cheap. But most of us (me included) don't want that
    • If someone comes to my house and bangs my door and slams my gate, I'd speak to them about it nicely and ask if they would please not do that. And then subsequently less nicely if they keep doing it, ending in reporting them.  We don't slam doors at home and I don't put up with that either. I can see us moving to a culture where we bribe drivers to be nice by tipping them, but we shouldn't have to. It's not necessary - does not matter if they are on minimum wage or not, or if society means that delivery services are outsourced or whatever reason anyone would like to concoct.     
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...