Forums >General Running>OK, or NOT OK - A Short Poll
Why is it sideways?
The big issue (to me) that all of this raises is what sort of responsibility parents have to shield adults who don't like children (they are noisy and undeveloped little beings) from having to interact with children. My intuitions on this probably have to do with being a parent, but I think that parents have little to no responsibility for this. Children are a part of the human community. It takes work to deal with them, but the same is true for adults. You might not be good at dealing with children, but if that's the case, the onus is on you to either get better at it or make your peace with ti.
By and large, I think our culture is pretty hostile towards childhood. It is seen as something to be controlled, confined, disciplined, cordoned off into schools and family bathrooms, and educated away into adulthood. Childhood is seen as a necessary evil on the way to something else that is much better. But as this thread makes plain, adulthood without a bit of childhood in it quickly turns grumpy and foul.
Childhood is seen as a necessary evil on the way to something else that is much better.
Really? I don't personally know anyone who thinks that.
Hey, nice marmot!
I don't think it's at all about shielding adults from children. I think the original question was along the lines of "is it ok to bring kids into xx?" Surely, we can all agree there are some places kids should not be (e.g., liquor store, porn shop, construction site). Sometimes kids should not be somewhere because of the potential harm to the kid. But sometimes, they shouldn't be somewhere because they'll piss off everybody there (expensive restaurant, R-rated movie). I think it is important to take others into account, even if their inconvenience is only subjective. It's just the nice thing to do.
Ben
"The world is my country, science is my religion."-- Christiaan Huygens
They don't say this or think this. What they do is of course they romanticize childhood and paint a picture of it that is basically the opposite of the difficult things about adulthood. And then they say "oh childhood, isn't it great!" But this image of romanticized childhood is also an attack on actual childhood, which is neither romantic nor idealized, but basically a lot like the rest of life: mixed and interesting and weird and funny and incomplete.
But actual childhood, most people are really not into it.
(Quite possible I am just wrong about all of this.)
Okay, but a locker room in a facility that permits children is in no sense a child-free zone. Again: they are in the women's locker room. I don't get this "fear" of exposure prosecutions - that would exist with little boys in the locker room too, right? And with women in the women's locker room too.
#artbydmcbride
Is it OK, or NOT OK, for men to bring their small daughters (3 and under) into the Men's locker room at the gym?
Runners run
Interval Junkie --Nobby
The big issue (to me) that all of this raises is what sort of responsibility parents have to shield adults who don't like children (they are noisy and undeveloped little beings) from having to interact with children. My intuitions on this probably have to do with being a parent, but I think that parents have little to no responsibility for this. Children are a part of the human community. It takes work to deal with them, but the same is true for adults. You might not be good at dealing with children, but if that's the case, the onus is on you to either get better at it or make your peace with ti. By and large, I think our culture is pretty hostile towards childhood. It is seen as something to be controlled, confined, disciplined, cordoned off into schools and family bathrooms, and educated away into adulthood. Childhood is seen as a necessary evil on the way to something else that is much better. But as this thread makes plain, adulthood without a bit of childhood in it quickly turns grumpy and foul.
As a non-child bearing adult (who enjoys children a great deal), I have to disagree with most of this. At least, if I'm reading it right. I think that in most adult situations the introduction of a child into an adult context (US) society gives an abundance of allowance to the child. The plane is a good example. I consider the plan primarily an adult context (whereas the bus might be mixed) because of the cost and confines. A child is allowed to wail and wail all flight long. (I even had a child piss all over the seat next to me.) And while the sound disrupts the comfort of all adults without hearing-aids in the vicinity, the parents are never directly admonished to alter their child's behavior in any way (as their approach to parenting in sacrosanct). Just imagine one of 80 people annoyed by screaming walking up to the parents and asking them to please silence their child. How rude! (btw: in many other countries children are completely silent and well behaved in public [adult spaces] -- through probably at the threat to bodily harm at home]).
I'd consider the non-family gym locker-room an adult context. If a child is introduced, the onus is on the parent to mitigate the child's intrusion and experience in that context. That is, if the child is wailing or running around blissfully playing to the annoyance of members, it is the parent's responsibility to reign that in. If the members are . . . displaying their member, it is for the parent to shield the eyes of the child (if that's what they deem necessary). I have no problem with the child being present -- I just think it is the parent's responsibility to mitigate that presence.
Now, if an adult is on a playground (a child context) it is the adult who has the responsibility to behave in child-friendly ways (not drunk, swearing and other things considered inappropriate for kids to see as normal).
Social obligations are context sensitive.
2021 Goals: 50mpw 'cause there's nothing else to do
I think you are making my point for me, stads. A plane is not an adult context; it's just that you wish it were one. I'd say it's a public space.
Kids cry and piss everywhere, and admonishing the parents usually doesn't solve the problem. "Silence the child" -- Ha! Good luck! Chances are that parent is acutely aware of the kids' cries and the hostility towards those cries.
I think in other countries kids noise is everywhere, so it doesn't seem so unusual when it sounds.
I run on a bike path quite commonly, and often there are kids riding around or wandering around. Their parents are always yelling at them to stay out of my way. I find that quite rude, as if it were a problem for me to dodge a kid. I'd rather dodge a kid than be the source of a kid being yelled at.
Social obligations are context dependent, but contexts themselves depend upon the effects of social norms. The relationship is at least reciprocal.
I think you are confusing public/private space with adult/kid space. While there is no strict, nor legal, nor even agreed upon, definition of adult vs kid space, I'm sure we could agree on various contexts promoting the natural proclivities of kids or adults. A research library might technically be a public space, but that doesn't mean it should tolerate noisy kids running around playing. Similar for the corporate work environment. That doesn't mean its illegal for a kid to be there -- just that they should abide by adult norms for behavior. Adults should be well within their rights to insist a child curb their playful behavior. However, on a playground -- a child space -- an adult should not be within their rights to insist a child curb playful behavior. Furthermore, adults congregating on a playground could be asked to leave by a parent wishing their kids to play there.
I'll yield that you may consider an airplane as not adult bias. I don't think discussing whether a specific place is adult or kid or both is really useful. I think parents have different reactions to their kids going nuts on planes. Many are embarrassed; many seem to think that this is natural and everyone should just put up with it because kids are the future. I'll certainly admit that if you haven't laid the groundwork to have your kids behave, there's only so much you can do in that setting. Other parents would rather not deal with their kid's obnoxious kicking at the back of your chair -- as if they don't know it's bugging the hell out of you. My point wasn't so much that the parent needed telling, but the social reaction to an adult making the request at all is considered rude.
While "yelling" at kids may or may not be a good way to curb their behavior, it is best that they are schooled in the proper use of public spaces like bike paths. They should be paying attention to other riders. That's just being a citizen of the bike path.
Just because they are kids doesn't give them free license to disrupt and disturb the lives of all adults around them -- except their parents . . . those guys asked for it.
Actually, forget the above. Let me sum it up this way:
Parents have a social (if not moral) responsibility to minimize the impact of their child's behavior that falls well outside the norms for whatever the social context.
Feeling the growl again
While "yelling" at kids may or may not be a good way to curb their behavior, it is best that they are schooled in the proper use of public spaces like bike paths. They should be paying attention to other riders. That's just being a citizen of the bike path. Just because they are kids doesn't give them free license to disrupt and disturb the lives of all adults around them -- except their parents . . . those guys asked for it.
Yup. Any good parent is going to teach their kids to be cognizant of others and respectful of them. If you take kids to a track meet, you'd better teach them early on to look "up-track" before crossing. Obviously yelling should be used somewhere farther along the disciplinary spectrum, less it lose its effectiveness due to over-use. If my kid is impeding others on a public path, darn straight I am going to correct their behavior.
My prior post was less of a comment on proper locker room etiquette, and more of a response to the apparent theme in the thread of "people need to deal with things being the way I want them or screw them they need to deal with it." A little respect for others goes a long way.
"If you want to be a bad a$s, then do what a bad a$s does. There's your pep talk for today. Go Run." -- Slo_Hand
I am spaniel - Crusher of Treadmills
Actually, forget the above. Let me sum it up this way: Parents have a social (if not moral) responsibility to minimize the impact of their child's behavior that falls well outside the norms for whatever the social context.
Ok. I'll put my point like this: parents have an educational/social/moral duty to create good citizens. Citizens have a moral duty to respect the facticity of childhood and not expect them to behave like adults.
I wouldn't be concerned about the effect on the kid. I'd be worried about the effect on the other men in the locker room. I can absolutely see why an American guy (yes, this is culturally determined) would be uncomfortable changing in front of someone else's little girl. On the other hand, as others have pointed out, sometimes a father will have no choice. It seems to me that it behooves everyone involved to be sensitive. If a father CAN avoid the situation, that would be preferable. If not, it can't be that hard for a guy who is uncomfortable to pop into a stall to change, or use a towel to cover up while he is changing.
I wouldn't be concerned about the effect on the kid. I'd be worried about the effect on the other men in the locker room. I can absolutely see why an American guy (yes, this is culturally determined) would be uncomfortable changing in front of someone else's little girl.
On the other hand, as others have pointed out, sometimes a father will have no choice. It seems to me that it behooves everyone involved to be sensitive. If a father CAN avoid the situation, that would be preferable. If not, it can't be that hard for a guy who is uncomfortable to pop into a stall to change, or use a towel to cover up while he is changing.
The father absolutely has choice, ie not to work out, stay at home and do 500 push-ups Instead. If this is done for the girl's swimming lesson, that would be a little different. I have asked other moms in that case to help out. If the girl needs to use the toilet, the dad has to take her to the men's room, that's ok, cause it's for the girl. Tell me why it is so important for you not to miss this workout and have to make others uncomfortable.
Some men just don't have basic manners. Sitting in the locker room, half or full naked while browsing emails on the phone. Geeze.
Walk-Jogger
Wow, I hope that remark wasn't aimed in my direction. I have 4 grown kids ( including 3 daughters) and 7 grand children. I drove a school bus for 8 years by choice, as a semi-retirement job just because I like being around kids, in the proper context.
When I first encountered a young girl in the men's locker room a month ago, it was a completely new experience to me, and then when it happened again a short time later I started wondering what other people's opinions were on this subject, because it was a brand new situation to me. Basically, this poll was simply a solicitation of what other people felt about bringing small girls into the male locker room. It makes me uncomfortable, but not grumpy. This poll is just an attempt to determine what and where the boundaries are, based on majority public opinion.
Here's a pic of this grumpy old man back when I only had 5 grand-kids:
Retired & Loving It