scrubbedexpat141

Just imagine being happy all the time or never upset? Seems spineless and totally false to me.

Millhouse

It doesn’t make you weak, actually it’s really furfilling. Being able to understand and control feelings is really empowering.

Most people resort to passive aggression which is really the weakest and most spineless form of expressing feelings. I’d argue looking for support by posting videos, twitter etc is spineless.

I wonder how many passengers actually said anything or did something. Probably a lot less than those that were tutting and getting angry with their inflight meal.

scrubbedexpat141

I don't abjectly disagree with you, I'm doing the usual and going to an extreme to make a point because I think it's worth making....which is why being able to control and understand being upset or angry is equally empowering. Losing your shit doesn't help anyone, agreed, but this notion that you can only be happy if you're consistently positive and never allowed to be upset seems wrong to me.

I don't mind being angry or upset, it's part of life and being able to deal with it is good but to me, that doesn't mean backing away from it though or not letting it happen / grow / come out.

In that sort of situation I'd have probably go frustrated with the scumbag kid, turned the volume and tried to ignore it because kicking off when locked in a tube for 8 hours isn't going to help anyone.

morpeth

I am curious if anyone knows, why so many allergies to nuts these days ? I don't seem to recall when I was a child many people having serious nut allergies.

jam25mack

Agreed. It's not healthy either.

I went to Uni with a guy who was always happy and genuinely nice, to the point that he was known as 'Nice Guy Colin'..... but you know, for some reason I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him. It wasn't natural, and if anything a little creepy.

UKCityGent

Peanuts are not nuts. I believe they are legumes. Or isn't having a legume allergy trend enough. I have allegedly puy peanuts into someone's food and there were no issues (I only ground up 2 peanuts).

As for the parent of the rural - personally I would have started to scream very closely in their ears. I understand people have ankle biters who have special needs but surely they can be sedated with some form of medicine/valium

uk_grenada

The mechanism of sensitisation is known, you have to be exposed to x to become sensitised, eg its not the bee stung that actually killed you by inducing anaphylactic shock, it was the bee that stung you 5 years ago and made you sensitive.

However there is a theory that babies/young children are sometimes not challenged enough because they live in a soup of artificial fabrics, chemical cleaners, severely cleaned surfaces and antiseptically clean food, from places where anything that is frequently allergy inducing is eliminated. Household dust mites, peanuts, milk, you name it...

So if young babies were exposed to a little dirt and more foods early on, they might be better off. My sister was a midwife, she was telling me that other countries have very different norms for feeding babies, some start on meat from a month, some believe anything from the earth is dangerous for 6 months, some never sterilise anything, and these are countries in the eu...

Millhouse

Mostly because British people decided to stop giving kids nuts. It’s a problem almost exclusive to the UK.

Boomhauer

As common courtesy the mother of the child mentioned in the OP should have explained to the passengers and apologized for the ruckus caused by the child.

Would it be unreasonable for the airline to ask the mother to leave the flight? Airlines often ask certain passengers to leave a flight if their presence causes issues, but I am not sure on this case.

Just today, a flight from Dubai to Schiphol made an emergency landing in Vienna because some passengers got into a fight with a passenger who refused to stop passing gas.

Fight over man's flatulence forces flight to make emergency landing | Fox News

Thairetired2016

I have experienced many mothers who just ignore the kid and get immersed in their Ipad while sunny jim screams his head off. Never mind the pax who have to put up with it. If they don't want to take care of the prats, why have them.

weasel decentral

Not calling anyone a fatty but I remember one time somewhere in the US, I think perhaps Houston, this large gentleman rocked up to check in and the girl at the check in desk got him to sit in a seat that was set up nearby to see if he would fit.
It seemed that they had it set up purely for this reason, and the guy had to try squeeze into it otherwise pay for two seats. He was pretty tall as well as overweight so it just wasn't going to happen. He got pretty aggro with the airline staff, as it was a fairly humiliating event but in the end had to pay.

Bahtatboy

And if you try that with someone who has the risk of anaphylactic shock from "nuts" (many of whom have that risk from peanuts, even though technically they're not nuts), and you'd be at risk of a manslaughter or even murder charge if you did it knowingly.

DXBtoDOH

I know what I don't like either. Being sat next to someone who's just downed half a dozen beers and smoked half a pack at the airport bar prior to boarding the plane

DaveLovesDee

The kid's probably never been told no.

scrubbedexpat141

I get bored of having to justify my slight nut allergy to people.
No, I won't die and nothing happens immediately but if I eat more than a couple it causes my tummy all sorts of problems.

Or men in vests (in case I haven't mentioned it already).