Jets vs Oilers Heritage Classic

[StevetheClub]

I know this will probably be an unpopular position, but I say good on them.

[Atomic]

I don't get it really.  No one is saying the baby can't come, just that they have to pay for a ticket.

So pay for the ticket.  This isn't a human rights violation, it's a couple trying to save money.

[The Unknown Poster]

19 minutes ago, Jimmy Pop said:

What an absolute joke these people are!  I thought they were whiny, entitled brats before....no they think this is a human rights violation!?  My head hurts!

 

Yup.  Personally I think the NHL should have just allowed it in the first place.  Their reasoning that babies need their own seat for safety reasons is obviously not true.  Maybe they were worried about 10,000 babies showing up.  But that's probably unlikely.  Personally, Im not sure a 4 hour out door experience in late October is the best thing for a baby but who am I to say.

What annoys me is they seem to be trying to connect this to breastfeeding, which isnt the issue at all.  The NHL is not forcing them to not breastfeed by not providing free entry.

The media aspect has nothing to do with their complaint.  This isnt uncovering some grave injustice.  So its really just them wanting some fame. 

[Rich]

Maybe someone should lodge a complaint with Child and Protective Services about them being neglectful parents in wanting to bring a 6 month year old child to a stadium where Winnipeg sports fans are apparently very apt to ridicule and pour beer on their child.   

And yes, I think that complaint would be just as ridiculous as calling this a human rights violation. 

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, Atomic said:

I don't get it really.  No one is saying the baby can't come, just that they have to pay for a ticket.

So pay for the ticket.  This isn't a human rights violation, it's a couple trying to save money.

Yeah its a weird connection they are making.  That the NHL is preventing her from breastfeeding by not allowing the baby to attend the game for free because she is going to be there.  What odd logic.  By the same token, if she walked into a nightclub and the bouncer said sorry, no babies, she would still go on and lament the fact the nasty bouncer stopped her baby from receiving the nourishment it needs to survive. 

If you want to breastfeed and wont pump and insist on the baby sitting outside with you in October for 4 hours, then buy a ticket.  Frankly, I dont think the baby should need a ticket to be honest.  But these two are not fighting an injustice.

[Jimmy Pop]

8 minutes ago, Rich said:

Maybe someone should lodge a complaint with Child and Protective Services about them being neglectful parents in wanting to bring a 6 month year old child to a stadium where Winnipeg sports fans are apparently very apt to ridicule and pour beer on their child.   

And yes, I think that complaint would be just as ridiculous as calling this a human rights violation. 

I'd like Child and Protective Services to know because this couple has a decent chance of damaging the kid's hearing, permanently. 

13 minutes ago, StevetheClub said:

I know this will probably be an unpopular position, but I say good on them.

So, pretty much F*ck the real Human rights violations going on?  It's a good thing to equate paying for a hockey ticket to a lack of running water, adequate housing, social services, pay equality, gender rights..... ?  Atomic said it more eloquently than me, but wow, mind bottling how people support this clowns.   White privilege alive and well, and I guess for some Canadians too, that Trumps all else. 

[The Unknown Poster]

I dont have an issue with them complaining to the NHL.  They did, were offered free tickets and still want to be seen as SJW.  Their issue has been resolved.  So whats the problem?

[StevetheClub]

It's unfair, and potentially discriminatory, to tell a woman who is breastfeeding her child to either pay for a ticket or she can't go. There is plenty of precedent for this and the intensity of the reactions in this thread is honestly confusing to me. The practice of allowing a child under 2 to sit in a lap and not pay for a ticket is quite common. Airlines and athletic venues everywhere, including our own MTS Centre, have a policy allowing this.  Certain events where quiet is both important and expected, such as the opera or live theatre, have no babes-in-arms policies and given the context this makes sense. For a hockey game or a flight this does not make sense.

Nowhere in the article does anyone say the mother is not allowed to breastfeed, that is very clearly not the issue. The issue is being forced to buy a ticket for the child who would sit in her lap. Again, it is common practice to not have to do this and why the NHL would do this does not make sense.

As to what the problem is, the problem is that the policy is still not to allow this, which is, again, unfair and potentially discriminating. They are standing up for breastfeeding mothers everywhere and for that, I say good on them.

[StevetheClub]

As for those who say it is a child protection issue, the kid could wear protective gear, like many do of that age at events like this. There's no reason for CFS to be called.

Edited September 16, 2016 by StevetheClub
unnecessary statement

[The Unknown Poster]

1 minute ago, StevetheClub said:

As for those who say it is a child protection issue, the kid could wear protective gear, like many do of that age at events like this. There's no reason for CFS to be called and saying so contributes nothing to the discussion.

As for beastfeeding issue, the child could drink from a bottle filled with pumped breast milk.  Its not a breast feeding issue.  Its a "we want our kid to get in for free" issue.  On that one, I actually agree.  A baby that young shouldnt need a ticket.  The issue I have is this not a human rights issue.  its a "we want free stuff from a private business" issue.  They whined, got free stuff, declined and get whining.  They want MORE free stuff.

[StevetheClub]

3 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

As for beastfeeding issue, the child could drink from a bottle filled with pumped breast milk.  Its not a breast feeding issue.  Its a "we want our kid to get in for free" issue.  On that one, I actually agree.  A baby that young shouldnt need a ticket.  The issue I have is this not a human rights issue.  its a "we want free stuff from a private business" issue.  They whined, got free stuff, declined and get whining.  They want MORE free stuff.

The thing is, none of what you wrote is actually true (although I suppose I'm not convinced it's a human rights issue, so perhaps that and yeah, we agree the kid shouldn't need a ticket, so there's that too).

What I mean to say, is that I don't see anything in the article that states they want free stuff. Everything I see points to them wanting to right a wrong policy.

And breastfeeding is not just a milk delivery system. It is a more complex interaction than that, and a mother shouldn't have to compromise on this.

Edited September 16, 2016 by StevetheClub

[The Unknown Poster]

3 minutes ago, StevetheClub said:

The thing is, none of what you wrote is actually true (although I suppose I'm not convinced it's a human right issue, so perhaps that).

 

Which part isnt true? 

Child can drink from bottle.  True. 

Milk can be pumped from breast.  True.

Pumped breast milk can be placed in bottle for child to drink. True.

Parents complained.  True.

NHL rectified situation by allowing baby to attend game for free.  True.

Parents declined.  True.

Parents went back to media.  True.

 

Edited September 16, 2016 by The Unknown Poster

[Jimmy Pop]

Just now, The Unknown Poster said:

As for beastfeeding issue, the child could drink from a bottle filled with pumped breast milk.  Its not a breast feeding issue.  Its a "we want our kid to get in for free" issue.  On that one, I actually agree.  A baby that young shouldnt need a ticket.  The issue I have is this not a human rights issue.  its a "we want free stuff from a private business" issue.  They whined, got free stuff, declined and get whining.  They want MORE free stuff.

Exactly...How is it discrimination to make them pay for 3 tickets, when there's 3 of them?!  They aren't barring them or the baby from coming.  They're asking for fair value; i.e what a "regular" patron to the event would pay.

....ya know, the ones that actually watch the game, buy stuff, cheer, feed themselves etc.

Entitlement at it's finest. 

[StevetheClub]

 

2 minutes ago, The Unknown Poster said:

Which part isnt true? 

Child can drink from bottle.  True. 

Milk can be pumped from breast.  True.

Pumped breast milk can be placed in bottle for child to drink. True.

I edited my post. As I said, breastfeeding is more than just delivering milk.

Parents complained.  True.

NHL rectified situation by allowing baby to attend game for free.  True.

Parents declined.  True.

Parents went back to media.  True.

This actually indicates that they weren't in it for the free stuff and instead it was a matter of principle.

 

 

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, Jimmy Pop said:

Exactly...How is it discrimination to make them pay for 3 tickets, when there's 3 of them?!  They aren't barring them or the baby from coming.  They're asking for fair value; i.e what a "regular" patron to the event would pay.

....ya know, the ones that actually watch the game, buy stuff, cheer, feed themselves etc.

Entitlement at it's finest. 

To be fair, if someone asked me if they could take their very young baby for free, I'd assume its yes.  Can parents take babies to Jets game free?  I dont have an issue with them asking the NHL (which controls this game) for free admission for the baby.  I dislike the narrative that the NHL is somehow forcing this mother not to breast feed.  That is not true.  This is about buying a ticket or not.  The NHL gave them tickets.  They declined.  They now have lost whatever right they had to complain.  They have nothing to complain about now.

Taking a baby places does not supersede other rules.  Can you take your baby into a nightclub because you want to breast feed?  No.  Can you drive with your baby suckling on your teat?  No.  Again, those are silly no brain examples but this isnt about breast feeding.  Its about two young know it all parents who think they should take little timmy who wont know the difference to the heritage classic and get him some media.  This newspaper story will be framed on his nursery for years to come.

[Atomic]

Mothers should be allowed to breastfeed whenever and wherever they please.  And no one with the NHL is saying she can't.

It is a common practice to allow mothers to bring a baby to certain places without having to pay for a ticket.  This is not a right.  This is not a law.  This is not a rule.  This is a common practice, granted by each individual entity, and as such the NHL has the right not to do it.  They look like jerks, sure, but nobody's rights are being violated here.

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, Atomic said:

Mothers should be allowed to breastfeed whenever and wherever they please.  And no one with the NHL is saying she can't.

It is a common practice to allow mothers to bring a baby to certain places without having to pay for a ticket.  This is not a right.  This is not a law.  This is not a rule.  This is a common practice, granted by each individual entity, and as such the NHL has the right not to do it.  They look like jerks, sure, but nobody's rights are being violated here.

bingo.

Whomever said no initially looks silly.  But whomever offered the tickets was correct in pegging these two as media ***** SJW.  I mean they wanted free entry, got it, declined and kept complaining. 

[Goalie]

I remember a similar story when the nhl had the all star game in Columbus. If you Google it... it's probably there. Pretty much the exact same thing here. Parents wanted to take their baby... had to pay to take the baby. It's nhl policy. It's stupid but it's not like it hasn't happened before. Is it stupid that a baby had to pay? Yup. Is it just as stupid to bring a baby to a game? Yup.

Edited September 16, 2016 by Goalie

[The Unknown Poster]

Just now, Goalie said:

I remember a similar story when the nhl had the all star game in Columbus. If you Google it... it's probably there. Pretty much the exact same thing here. Parents wanted to take their baby... had to pay to take the baby. It's nhl policy. It's stupid but it's not like it hasn't happened before. 

I wonder if its a legal issue.  For example if they say yes, then other parents could argue discrimination if they dont get free entry for their children and then the issue becomes at what age is the cut off.  NHL chose an across the board rule.  That might be why the NHL offered comps but was clear this was not a change in policy. 

I bet their complain will disappear when someone invited them to take in the game in a private suite.  That would be "justice".

[Jimmy Pop]

1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

To be fair, if someone asked me if they could take their very young baby for free, I'd assume its yes.  Can parents take babies to Jets game free?  I dont have an issue with them asking the NHL (which controls this game) for free admission for the baby.  I dislike the narrative that the NHL is somehow forcing this mother not to breast feed.  That is not true.  This is about buying a ticket or not.  The NHL gave them tickets.  They declined.  They now have lost whatever right they had to complain.  They have nothing to complain about now.

Taking a baby places does not supersede other rules.  Can you take your baby into a nightclub because you want to breast feed?  No.  Can you drive with your baby suckling on your teat?  No.  Again, those are silly no brain examples but this isnt about breast feeding.  Its about two young know it all parents who think they should take little timmy who wont know the difference to the heritage classic and get him some media.  This newspaper story will be framed on his nursery for years to come.

Bolded is my point. 

I'm not trying to be an anti-parent villian here - I just don't get what's so wrong about charging them for the kid's ticket.  

[The Unknown Poster]

I assume this is their first baby.  I am not a parent but grew up in a foster home setting and had the pleasure of being a sibling to more babies/kids than I can count.  Most parents would be astounded to learn someone wants to take their very young baby to an outdoor hockey game in October.  And if the kid isnt crying due to being uncomfortable, he will sleep most of it away...except for the one 10 minute period he's sucking teat.  So...whats the point of taking him again?

[FrostyWinnipeg]

1 minute ago, The Unknown Poster said:

I assume this is their first baby.

The fact they are taking it to a game that it will never remember is proof of that.

[Noeller]

**** I hate **** like this. Simple solution: Don't knock your broad up. Christ...

[bustamente]

Everyone wants something for free nowadays 

[StevetheClub]

I'm hesitant to keep posting in this thread because I don't want to take away from discussion of the game itself - I would actually recommend the mods move it to it's own thread - so this will be my last comment in this thread.

2 hours ago, The Unknown Poster said:

To be fair, if someone asked me if they could take their very young baby for free, I'd assume its yes.  Can parents take babies to Jets game free?  I dont have an issue with them asking the NHL (which controls this game) for free admission for the baby.  I dislike the narrative that the NHL is somehow forcing this mother not to breast feed.  That is not true.  This is about buying a ticket or not.  The NHL gave them tickets.  They declined.  They now have lost whatever right they had to complain.  They have nothing to complain about now.

Taking a baby places does not supersede other rules.  Can you take your baby into a nightclub because you want to breast feed?  No.  Can you drive with your baby suckling on your teat?  No.  Again, those are silly no brain examples but this isnt about breast feeding.  Its about two young know it all parents who think they should take little timmy who wont know the difference to the heritage classic and get him some media.  This newspaper story will be framed on his nursery for years to come.

I'm trying really hard to be tactful, but I'm honestly not sure if you've read any articles on this based on what you've written so far. The point, from the parent's mouths themselves, is to bring attention to a ridiculous policy. There is nothing in any of the articles that I have read that indicates that they are trying to get attention for themselves, or get free tickets, or whatever.

I don't feel like going through the thread and quoting every else, but it's also not about privilege or entitlement. 

Damn right they can still complain and with the NHL trying to pay them off they should complain louder. Because not only is the NHL going to do nothing about their insensitive and out-of-touch policy, they tried to bribe them with tickets on the condition they stay quiet.

Of course, the NHL has every right to have stupid policies, just like these people have the right to bring to light one policy that goes against the standard practice at every other similar venue.