Kids aren't badly behaved, they're SPIRITED
Ok...the argument here gets a little tl;dr but I'll try to give the highlights.

Over in booju_newju, an article is posted about A toddler that trampled some monks' sand artwork. The OP asks the members of the comm if they would have reported it if it was THEIR child that had done it.

The fun begins when threekidsinky posts her two cents:

Oh please. Report it to whom? It's not a crime, for goodness sake. If the monks wanted it to remain whole, they should have done it someplace where no one could get to it, or in a more secure area. It was a toddler who did it, but it could very well have been any aged person who wasn't watching what they were doing, or a daring teen, or an elderly person falling into it...could have been anything. I would apologize profusely and then forget it.

Wanky? Not wanky? Matter of opinion perhaps, but it goes downhill from there:


glamscene: well, considering it was blocked off by rope...

threekidsinky: In a public area, someplace where people bring children, it's not enough. In an art museum, sure. If the mom wasn't expecting it to be there, for example, and if she's brought her child there before and not had any reason to think there was something he could destroy, then I don't see how I can fault her. I try hard not to take my kids places, but sometimes it's inevitable...but I can't always have ahold of them 100% of the time. Trying to deal with mailing something and holding onto a squirming toddler isn't ever easy, and there have been times where my kid has gotten away from me quicker than I could catch up with him. Again, if they didn't want it messed up, they needed to have it sheltered more than having a rope around *half* of it (not even all the way around!!). And apparently the monks aren't upset. The toddler was being a toddler and we don't know the woman's situation, how the toddler got away, etc. *IF* she was truly negligent...in that she could have prevented the toddler from running and she purposely did not...then maybe I'd say she should make some kind of restitution. But ONLY then.

glamscene: What a lame excuse, really. If the mother didn't see that display being blocked off and her toddler was running loose? thats bad parenting. If something would have gone wrong and the child got hurt by trying to hang off the rope things, Union Station would have been in deep shit.

threekidsinky brawls with some people in that thread, while further down we get this gem (with bonus childfree slang mini-wank):

ladyartemisa: hooray for parents that let their sprog do anything without watching them!!!!

threekidsinky: Hooray for people who likely aren't raising spirited children.

And further down:

threekidsinky: HOW MANY OF YOU SKIPPED RIGHT OVER THE WORDS "I WOULD APOLOGIZE PROFUSELY"????

That in no way means that I think the mom was OK in just running off. When I see "REPORT IT" it makes me think of s police report, or a security report, neither of which I think was called for. But an apology? Yes, I think that would have been appropriate. That part of my post was probably unclear, and for that I apologize. But I also do think that if something is that easily destroyed and they want to keep it whole, it needs to be better protected.

agateway: so should everything out there be covered in bubble wrap and with armed guards because someone refuses to teach their children to respect the personal space of others? it could be a child screaming loudly in the face of someone on the train or destroying art; respect is respect. if you don't teach that to the child, there is no amount of safety guards in the world that can keep a child with no PERSONAL boundaries or respect for others out of something.

that's the point


I...honestly am not entirely sure what's going on. Is everyone misunderstanding threekidsinky like she claims, or is he just covering her ass? Perhaps I'd know if I wasn't so hopped up on allergy meds. Anyway, have at.