Least Kid Friendly

[keishashadow]

I agree about the risk. I also think it is unnecessary to ban children outright. Rather, restaurants should instead simply make clear their expectations with regard to patronage: No child menu, every guest must order something (or pay a plate charge), dress code (the same code applied to all regardless of age), etc. V&As and Bistro de Paris pretty much follows this path (though not all of it). I do think there is room at WDW for about four restaurants with these types of rules, vigorously applied in full, rather than just two, haphazardly applied in part.

what!!!! no kids, crocs or mickey mouse ear beanies...how un-disneylike...wwwd (what would walt do)

If you want to experience an adult disney, go to vegas; or try DCL, adult only restaurant, pool & beach; otherwise you'll run into the little darlings everywhere...hopefully, while they're on good behaviour.

 

[momomonster]

Oooo... now you're in trouble!

There is always animosity when there is something which someone feels they could enjoy if they weren't precluded from it. Even if there are dozens of other alternatives, being blocked from one is enough to raise some folks' ire. Legimitate? No. Human? Perhaps.

I agree with you, but we all must realize there are places we are precluded from, depending on our age, gender, nationality, etc. I cannot go into a men's locker room. I cannot buy a house in a retirement community. I cannot compete as a member of the Hungarian soccer team. I just deal with these realities and go about my life.

For those arguing "It can't be done", then why has Disney created an adults-only restaurant on their ships? If it can be done on a floating resort, then why not the resort of WDW? Are there people throwing fits all over the cruise ships because they can't take their kids? I've never cruised Disney, but I suspect the childfree restaurants are quite popular.

 

[DVC Sadie]

Just to clarify, the real problem for you is ill-behaved children, or at the least children who aren't old enough to know better, right?

I mean, its not that we need to have a restaurant for those who wish to dine senior citizen free as well, is it?

I didn't realize I was a senior citizen as of yet. I am 51 but would enjoy one restaurant (V&A) to be childfree.

I have no problem dining with well behaved children especially when we choose to spend 300.00 for a meal. Unfortunately, some parents feel if they choose to spend 100.00 for their child/children to eat at V&A's then no one else should feel anything but honored to be in their presence.

 

[raidermatt]

That didn't mean YOU were a senior citizen, just that somebody not wanting to see a well-behaved child in a restaurant would be no different than somebody not wanting to see a well-behaved senior citizen in a restaurant.

Still not clear what you meant by this:

Unfortunately, some parents feel if they choose to spend 100.00 for their child/children to eat at V&A's then no one else should feel anything but honored to be in their presence.

I assume that means they don't deal with their children when they don't behave. If that's the case, I agree.

However, the dicey part is that for every parent who does a poor job in this area, many others do a good job, and banning them all might not be a great decision for business.

 

[Mackey Mouse]

"I cannot go into a men's locker room. I cannot buy a house in a retirement community. I cannot compete as a member of the Hungarian soccer team. I just deal with these realities and go about my life."

But you are comparing two different things. We are talking Walt Disney World.....my first experience with Walt Disney was as a child watching the Mickey Mouse Club and those specials on Sunday nights....Spin and Marty, Annette Funicello....it was for the kids. We are the adults now who grew up with Disney and now bring our children and grandchildren to experience what we felt....the magic of Disney.

You cannot compare not being allowed into a men's locker room or buying a house in a retirement community to a vacation at WDW...I do not see it at all. Keep in mind here that I am saying that every family has the right to experience whatever Disney has to offer....hopefully everyone will behave and other visitors can enjoy Disney right along side the families even at upscale restaurants. I have seen adults misbehave in restaurants too after one too many, but that is another story for another time..

Ending with some quotes from Walt Disney:

The important thing is the family. If you can keep the family together–and that’s the backbone of our whole business, catering to families–that’s what we hope to do."

"We believed in our idea - a family park where parents and children could have fun- together. "

"You're dead if you aim only for kids. Adults are only kids grown up, anyway."

 

[bicker]

None of that pre-empt having a few, isolated places of exception. As others have pointed out, Disney did it on their cruise ships, and if there is profit in it, they should do it at their theme parks as well.

 

[Mackey Mouse]

They certainly can do it if they so choose but up to this point they have not. Maybe we will see it in our future if the public wants adult only restaurants, and if it is that important to you, then I suggest writing letters to WDW suggesting an adult themed restaurant...

I am sure if it will make money for them they will do it. In the meantime, I still feel that children can go to all the restaurants at WDW if they are going with their family for lunch or dinner.....JMO Also, if they misbehave and disrupt other patron's eating experiences, then that is a whole different thing, that becomes a parenting issue and hopefuly the parent steps up to the plate and handles it appropriately.....I would never deny a child the right to eat with his family at WDW.

 

[LuluLovesDisney]

None of that pre-empt having a few, isolated places of exception. As others have pointed out, Disney did it on their cruise ships, and if there is profit in it, they should do it at their theme parks as well.

I totally agree. I would love a Palo equivalent at WDW.

 

[MiknMinMouse]

WOW I'm feeling a bit like an instigator of a mini war . I've enjoyed all of the feedback about least child friendly and I'm very comfortable with taking the kiddos to Le Cellier now.

That being said as a mommy of 3 adorable children (well two little ones and a teenager) I'm all for a child free place at WDW. As has been said, it's done on the ships and from what I understand ressies at Paolo's are incredibly hard to come by so it must be profitable. There are places at PI that kiddies can't get into. Maybe a restaurant there would be the choice. Since CG has changed from the Broadway thing (although I never went to that) I've never considered taking my kids to eat there. I don't think they'd like it very much. Well my 15 year old would but he's not a small child. I don't think CG is what Mr. D was talking about with the family park thing. The park is completely kid friendly, but a resort restaurant doesn't have to be as long as there are plenty of options for families, which at CR there are. If we lived in a world where parents actually handled misbehavers, then there probably wouldn't be a need. But there are plenty of adults who go to WDW and might like a little down time . Also, do kids truly want to have to sit through a CG meal at DISNEY?????? I mean come on- my kids are there for FUN. For them a meal like that is not fun.

 

[crisi]

But you are comparing two different things. We are talking Walt Disney World.....my first experience with Walt Disney was as a child watching the Mickey Mouse Club and those specials on Sunday nights....Spin and Marty, Annette Funicello....it was for the kids. We are the adults now who grew up with Disney and now bring our children and grandchildren to experience what we felt....the magic of Disney.

Cool for you. My husband had only minor exposure to Walt Disney as a kid - he saw a few movies. His first big exposure to WDW was as an adult on a honeymoon. His second big exposure was on a golf trip. He most recent big exposure was a guy's trip with his brother. He's also been to business conferences there. We've taken our kids three times, he's been four times with no kids and never went as a kid himself.

My kids can experience the Magic of Disney in four parks and hundreds of restaurants. They don't need admittence to every venue. 99.9% of Disney is kid friendly. Some of us would like .01% to be actually kid free.

I'm a little tired of the threads around here for a boy character meal. I've been around here five (?) years or so and during that time have seen petitions and email campaigns and letter writing campaigns for a boy character meal - sometimes fueled by rumors that the meal is right around the corner. And while I pop into those threads to point out that the only "traditional" character that shows up regularly who is a girl is Minnie (barring the barrage of Princess meals), that a lot of little boys enjoy Donald's Breakfastasaurus and that older boys enjoy the Sci-Fi - no characters but an "all-boy" atmosphere, and that the past letter writing and emailing has been fruitless, I understand what they want and why the threads pop up over and over and over again.

I'd like THREE adult only restaurants on property. V&As and one lower priced option in the MK resort area and another in the Epcot resort area. DCL has one for 3000 guests, and its booked constantly. Yeah, there are a few people who complain that they can't take their kids, but most people really enjoy the great job Disney does on providing the opportunity for adult/child seperation on the ship.

Finally, I am very uncomfortable with you making what in your experience you must have known to be an inflammatory comment, and then trying to shut down discussion of it with "I'm a mod and I know where this is going and I don't want to go there." If you didn't want to go here, don't make the comment to start with. Once you made the comment, it isn't fair to try to shut down the discussion.

 

[erikthewise]

I totally agree. I would love a Palo equivalent at WDW.

Especially if it's $15pp!

I neither personally want an adults-only restaurant nor object to having one. But if you're going to have one, where are you going to put it?

In any resort there are going to be a zillion kids, and only GF and Swan-Dolphin have enough TS locations that you could make one of them adults-only without seriously inconveniencing the guests. Shula's is probably the most obnoxious about not wanting kids, so I say go adults-only and get the chip off your shoulder! I don't want to eat there anyway.

Among the parks, only Epcot has enough TS restaurants to consider making one of them adults-only, and it certainly isn't going to be Garden Grill or Coral Reef. So which country is going to ban kids? Obviously none of them, so it would have to be a country with two TS locations, which I think narrows it down to France and Japan. IMO Bistro de Paris is the only place in the parks where it would be sensible to go adults-only.

DTD would be a good location for an adults-only restaurant, but which existing restaurant is going to risk reducing their customer base by doing so? Maybe Wolfgang Puck "upstairs", or Fulton's.

Crisi, sometimes I wish we we COULD bar the barrage of Princess meals! But your point about the lack of female characters at other character meals is interesting. All I can think of is Mary Poppins and Alice at the Park Fare breakfast.

 

[melomouse]

Some excellent, well thought out points on this thread - I know every so often this topic rears its often not-no-Disney-like head and uncivility sets in...

crisi, sadie - I so liked your comments..

The problem is the few who do NOT remove their kids in the pricier or Signature restaurants and fail to realize that not every other guests enjoys your tired toddler. Grade schoolers are different - by then, many children can begin developmentally to appreciate the experience on a "special occasion" basis.

Disney has done its best to suggest adult-only but of course cannot state it as a policy. Dress codes, prices and menu options as but a few of the discouraging tools. Yet some guests don't pick up on those broad hints and bring tired junior along to disturb everyone else's pricey, relaxing meal.

I'll never forget the poster a few years ago who was going to bring her nursing infant to V&A.

When you decide to have children, there are certain experiences that need to be relinquished for awhile. Fine dining is one of them - til the child can happily sit thru the experience and hopefully derive some enjoyment.

 

[momomonster]

DTD would be a good location for an adults-only restaurant, but which existing restaurant is going to risk reducing their customer base by doing so?

I still think you're incorrectly assuming any childfree restaurant would be "reducing their customer base" without being able to attract additional diners who would be patronizing the restaurant *because* it's a childfree place. I've been reading these boards a fairly long time and always see questions about romantic and quiet restaurant suggestions. The customer base is healthy, I think.

The point about DCL having a childfree restaurant on board has me thinking maybe there is an American law preventing the establishment of kids-free dining. Ships aren't subject to a lot of our laws. Since kids cannot be legally barred from apartments or properties other than retirement communities, maybe there is a law preventing restaurants from barring them?

I know in my state (Georgia), some taverns/bars/restaurants have been allowed to go childfree because they've changed the smoking laws and if they allow smoking, then they can't allow children. I *love* this new law because I can sit in the no-smoking section and have a nice relaxing meal kid-free and smoke-free. Heaven!!!

P.S.- Crisi, I was also very uncomfortable with Mackey's suggestion that we could not discuss this topic. Different subjects get rehashed and readdressed all the time here because we have different thoughts or opinions or ideas.

 

[jwfla422]

I would think one of the only places would V&A as I have taken my dd to almost every restaurant in WDW since she was 3. She was well behaved when she was younger (and still it). I won't go to a restaurant where the service is not friendly (especially in WDW!!)

I took dd to Blue Zoo back in May (which was awesome BTW), they do have a kids menu and dd loved it (she was 7 then). We were probably seated in "the family section" (LOL!) because we noticed a few families with "little ones" around us but they were all well behaved. I think for the more "upscale" restaurants, they should try to seat families in certain sections. AND BELIEVE me I'm not "anti-kid" as I have one and take her to these places...but there have been times when my dd looks at some of the mannerless kids we've seen and wonders why they're behaving so badly in a nice restaurant. Quite frankly, from experience, some of the adults can be louder than the children when they've had one too many!!

I wouldn't hesitate to have a "date" night with DH in any of the places I have taken dd to in WDW. Our favs being Blue Zoo, Jiko, FF, AP and Palio (which is no more, ).

 

[NMW]

I would say that V&A and Shula's are the only two really unfriednly to children. I have not eaten at V&A-always have my kids with me! I have not eaten at Blue Zoo but know two families with young children that have and loved it. They made no comments about it being unfriendly to their children. I know they have a children's menu too. I know people who ate at Shula's and claimed the wait staff was unfriendly, period.

I would also think that Bistro would be fine for most kids too. It's pretty loud and it's in a theme park. Even with out the children's menu, there will probably always be kids.

As for DTD not allowing children in some areas...I didn't see it in Dec. Kids were everywhere at PI. This was at 10 PM too. We asked about future construction near Raglan Road and a CM told us that Disney wants less bars and more family oriented "themed" restaurants like Rainforest Cafe. Later I found out about the Dino themed one coming and I guess he was right! I remember in 1995 on our honeymoon we really didn't see children at PI. Now it's like the rest of DTD.

 

[Nancyg56]

I would not have a problem with several Disney restaurants that were child free. If I wanted to include my DGD, and I would not take her to Disney and leave her behind at dinnertime, I would reserve another restaurant. We include her in all of our meals, and she is well behaved for the duration of the meal. When she was a toddler her Mom or her Pa took her out if she was getting impatient. Her ability to stay quiet was our issue, not our fellow diners.
Now, I remember the first time I went to Disney. My DH took me to the Broadway show. It was wonderful, and an experience that I will never forget. The occasion gave us the opportunity to dress up for dinner and enjoy a very romantic setting. I wonder if the ambiance would have been that same if children occupied the dining room. I would never feel that my desire to include a child on my trip should be extended to others who have their own expectations for their well deserved vacation. An adults only setting does not detract from families who choose to include their kids in fine dining experiences. Jiko, CG, Yachtsman Steakhouse, and the Blue Zoo all welcome children. There are price points for all incomes, why not experiences for people who prefer to dine child free?

 

[erikthewise]

I still think you're incorrectly assuming any childfree restaurant would be "reducing their customer base" without being able to attract additional diners who would be patronizing the restaurant *because* it's a childfree place. I've been reading these boards a fairly long time and always see questions about romantic and quiet restaurant suggestions. The customer base is healthy, I think.

A fair criticism, but actually I was not assuming, just thinking out loud about why no DTD restaurants have gone adults-only. Either Disney won't let them, or (in their judgement) it would cost them customers, or they just don't want to. I suppose in view of another recent post, it may be the that Disney won't let them.

 

[LuluLovesDisney]

I would not have a problem with several Disney restaurants that were child free. If I wanted to include my DGD, and I would not take her to Disney and leave her behind at dinnertime, I would reserve another restaurant. We include her in all of our meals, and she is well behaved for the duration of the meal. When she was a toddler her Mom or her Pa took her out if she was getting impatient. Her ability to stay quiet was our issue, not our fellow diners.
Now, I remember the first time I went to Disney. My DH took me to the Broadway show. It was wonderful, and an experience that I will never forget. The occasion gave us the opportunity to dress up for dinner and enjoy a very romantic setting. I wonder if the ambiance would have been that same if children occupied the dining room. I would never feel that my desire to include a child on my trip should be extended to others who have their own expectations for their well deserved vacation. An adults only setting does not detract from families who choose to include their kids in fine dining experiences. Jiko, CG, Yachtsman Steakhouse, and the Blue Zoo all welcome children. There are price points for all incomes, why not experiences for people who prefer to dine child free?

Very well said.

 

[raidermatt]

When you decide to have children, there are certain experiences that need to be relinquished for awhile. Fine dining is one of them - til the child can happily sit thru the experience and hopefully derive some enjoyment.

No arguments. However, if you ban all children you ban those that can happily sit thru the experience and derive some enjoyment. That's risky, as you are banning people that would have been paying customers and would not have bothered anyone else.

Again, there must be a reason Disney has not done this, and in fact, its extremely rare anywhere in the outside world.

Cruises, even Disney cruises, are viewed as an adult experience by people more often than theme parks are. What may work on a cruise ship won't necessarily work elsewhere.

 

[momomonster]

No arguments. However, if you ban all children you ban those that can happily sit thru the experience and derive some enjoyment. That's risky, as you are banning people that would have been paying customers and would not have bothered anyone else.

How could a two-year-old possibly derive enjoyment from white tablecloths, good wine, complex conversation, sitting still for two hours, steak, sushi, pate, etc? Everything about fine dining was created for the enjoyment of adults, although I can imagine certain older children gaining some appreciation for it. If they can stay in their seats, use inside voices, and refrain from crying or whining- great! I would love to have kids like that dine with me. We both know, however, that some parents do not consider the maturity level or noise level or anything before deciding to bring their kids whereever they want.

I have said this before in this thread, but it bears repeating. *I strongly believe there is NO financial risk in providing adult-only dining.* Think about it for a minute. Every single thread you've seen on this board asking about romantic, honeymoon, anniversary, etc. dining has been a couple looking for a quiet, lingering meal in a calm environment without the chance of "cranky" kids, exhausted and woundup from a day at an amusement park ruining their experience. Pair those people with the growing number of folks who have chosen not to have children and actively seek out adults-only activities and the restaurant would be *packed* like LeCellier on a Saturday night.

Again, there must be a reason Disney has not done this, and in fact, its extremely rare anywhere in the outside world.

I can only think of two reasons- 1) It's illegal. There are all kinds of pro-natalist laws out there most people have no idea exist. You cannot bar children from most properties unless sex or alcohol are involved. I will research this at my law library when I have the chance and figure out why there are not more child-free establishments, but I have a stong feeling the could be legal reasons.

2) There are enough people who believe it's *shameful* to even consider the idea of their precious children being barred from anyplace they go and those people can be very, er, squeaky, to get their way. Our society is extremely pro-natalist right now in case you haven't noticed. You can't pick up a magazine without reading about who's got a "bump", who's biological clock is ticking, who's trying in-vitro, etc. 20 years ago it was career and education being shoved down women's throats at the expense of stay at home moms, so neither is better or worse than the other. I'm just saying this is where the pedullum is right now and that might be the only reason there are not more childfree options.

It's not because of financial risk or lack of paying customers. That, I'm nearly certain of.