moo suggests something we've wanted all along

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/parenting/2013/08/29/a-new-airline-class-for-the-child-intolerant/?referer=



But she still turns it into a dig jab lol

The article writer sounds like the intolerant one. She can't seem to get it that people don't want to be stuck in a flying tin can, 30,000 feet up in the air with no escape, only to be stuck next to a shrieking brat with a loaded diaper.

Did it ever OCCUR to breeders that the majority of people complaining are other parunts? I guess it never crosses their pea brains that the majority of people are fucking parunts and therefore they are the ones who are bitching the loudest about other people's kyds. Gawd, these breeder brains are idiots.

if I want extra leg space I have to pay for it
if I want more comfortable seating I have to pay for it
if I want to take more baggage I have to pay for it
if I want priority boarding I have to pay for it
if I want to scream and bawl for hours then others should pay for it

I have a suggestion for airlines: Hire me as a professional screamer. I love to fly, can scream real loud (for much longer than an average baby with its small lungs), and apparently it's commonly accepted that if someone wants to enjoy some quiet, they should pay for it, not the one making the noise. It would be a win-win situation for everyone.

Why is the mom so pissed about the no-kid area on Scoot? Given her attitude toward "cranky" passengers who don't wanna deal with kid issues, you'd think she'd be GLAD to have them in a different area so she can be spared the dirty looks.

Isn't it mostly the parents with the kickers and shriekers who are actually the crankiest passengers? And spare me the "child intolerant" stamp. If your kid does something stupid and you don't give a shit, or you make the even stupider decision to bring a newborn that's inevitably going to wail its lungs out for hours several thousand feet in the air, it's YOU I'm not going to tolerate.