would this have annoyed you?

[MomtoAlexnWilliam]

I would be beyond annoyed! The adults should have split up and at least had a few at the table with the children.

What would the responses to a thread be if I wrote that I was annoyed that as a middle-aged woman I was seated at Teppan with a group of ninety year-olds and it made me uncomfortable? The majority of posters would probably say that that's my problem and to deal with it (as well as a few other nasty things).

I find this to be an inherently falliable argument. You can't compare a situation of different aged adults to the instant situation involving adults and children.

 

[cymbaldiva]

In a setting like Teppan Edo, though, no one can really be assured of being able to have adult conversation. That group of adults was as likely as not to be seated with a family with children making up the rest of their table, and had the group of unattended kids not filled the remainder of your table odds are pretty good that it'd have been parents with children seated there too. If adult conversation is something one wants out of a meal, a restaurant with communal seating isn't the place to book.

(Disclaimer - none of this should be construed as agreeing with what the parents did. I just think the "what if we didn't want to keep our conversations G-rated" angle doesn't fly.)

I'm iffy on most of this and disagree with the bolded flat out. Hopefully you're just reading more into the G-rated conversation phrasing than what was intended.

I don't think you're looking at this situation. In this case a large party went to a restaurant with communal seating and seated themselves with all the adults in their party at one table and putting their children at another; thus assuring themselves the luxury of an adult evening while saddling other adults - complete strangers - with being seated with their underage children.

I can easily see where 4 grown men would be uncomfortable being seated with 4 kids and frankly feel that it was pretty rude of the adults in the larger party to have seated them that way.

Once again, if you - meaning the party in question of course- don't want to be stuck with your kids for dinner, what in the world would make you think that I want to be?

 

[aubriee]

I think the op was lucky the children were well behaved. I have no problem with a child/teen only table if the children are mature in manner and the table is properly supervised.

Unfortunately,what I usually see happen is that the parents become so involved in their conversation that they "zone out" and have no idea what is really going on at the kids table. The parents think everything is OK just because they have not been disturbed. Just think, those two guys could have ended up with a kid who asked 20000000 questions during the dinner.

I still maintain that once the "kid table" changed to include adults, then 2 of the parents should have offered to switch seats with the men or, if available, the men should have been relocated to another table. Now days an unrelated adult has a hard time correcting the behaviour of a child or teen, nor should they have to... and they should not have to get up and go to another table to find the parent!



As a side note, on my last outing with a teen/kid table placed next to me, I witnessed the youngest child sucking on the salt shaker. The young teen took it away and put it back on the table, but it never occurred to her that the shaker needed to be washed before others used it. I reported it to the wait staff after the table left. Even though I was not at that table, my proximity placed me in the position of "Adult by Default".

If I am not having dinner with my children, why would I want to have dinner with yours?

I agree! Plus there's the simple safety aspect of it. Everytime we've gone to Teppan Edo the chef asks everyone to keep an eye on the little ones and to try to keep them away from that long side of the table as that's the part of the grill that gets the hottest. If those kids were there first, then at least three of them were sitting on that long side. I don't care if there was a teenager there or not, as a mother and grandmother, my mommy cap would automatically go on and I'd spend the meal watching to make sure no little fingers and hands got burned. Sorry, but if I'm at WDW solo or with adults only, I don't want to wear my mommy cap and be responsible for someone else's kids.

 

[Nancyg56]

In a setting like Teppan Edo, though, no one can really be assured of being able to have adult conversation. That group of adults was as likely as not to be seated with a family with children making up the rest of their table, and had the group of unattended kids not filled the remainder of your table odds are pretty good that it'd have been parents with children seated there too. If adult conversation is something one wants out of a meal, a restaurant with communal seating isn't the place to book.

(Disclaimer - none of this should be construed as agreeing with what the parents did. I just think the "what if we didn't want to keep our conversations G-rated" angle doesn't fly.)

There is a world of difference between a group of adults sitting with a group of someone elses children and a group of adults sitting with a family that includes an adult. I understand the odds of sitting alone in a communal setting are dim I would never have thought that my party would be seated with a group of minor children. While 14 may be old enough to babysit I still would not consider that teen an adult.

In response to G rated not flying.............I get that and honestly I would not ever make kids uncomfortable with my conversation but ther eis absolutely no guarantee that a group of adults who have absolutely no responsibiliity to those kids would feel the same way.

I wanted to bold text the points made by TDC Nala and Friendly Frog because they both seem to get at the heart of the matter: If you're sitting at a communal table with minor children and they are not part of your party, you should not have to tolerate being put into the "default adult" position.

Bingo

I'm iffy on most of this and disagree with the bolded flat out. Hopefully you're just reading more into the G-rated conversation phrasing than what was intended.

I don't think you're looking at this situation. In this case a large party went to a restaurant with communal seating and seated themselves with all the adults in their party at one table and putting their children at another; thus assuring themselves the luxury of an adult evening while saddling other adults - complete strangers - with being seated with their underage children.

I can easily see where 4 grown men would be uncomfortable being seated with 4 kids and frankly feel that it was pretty rude of the adults in the larger party to have seated them that way.

Once again, if you - meaning the party in question of course- don't want to be stuck with your kids for dinner, what in the world would make you think that I want to be?

This is exactly what I have been trying to say but you say it so well.

 

[CathieArms]

To the poster who asked the question regarding "what if the adult men had wanted to share an off-color joke." Ummmm...well...kids or not, *I* probably wouldn't be thrilled - as a 40 year old woman - to be sharing a table with a bunch of golfing buddies who find sharing an off-color joke in any mixed company appropriate.

C'mon people...this was Disney and not a signature restaurant. If they kids were well-behaved, then there really is no problem. I'd much rather sit next to a well-behaved child than a 40 or 50 year old man who failed to shower the last 2 or 3 days in the hot Florida weather. Or the chain-smoking woman that, while she's not lighting up currently, I can smell the stench of her cigarette smoke on her clothing. Or the group of mid-20 year olds who have decided to make this their last stop in "Drinking around the world."

They were kids. They were apparently well-behaved. Their parents were nearby. That's all there is to it.

 

[roomthreeseventeen]

To the poster who asked the question regarding "what if the adult men had wanted to share an off-color joke." Ummmm...well...kids or not, *I* probably wouldn't be thrilled - as a 40 year old woman - to be sharing a table with a bunch of golfing buddies who find sharing an off-color joke in any mixed company appropriate.

C'mon people...this was Disney and not a signature restaurant. If they kids were well-behaved, then there really is no problem. I'd much rather sit next to a well-behaved child than a 40 or 50 year old man who failed to shower the last 2 or 3 days in the hot Florida weather. Or the chain-smoking woman that, while she's not lighting up currently, I can smell the stench of her cigarette smoke on her clothing. Or the group of mid-20 year olds who have decided to make this their last stop in "Drinking around the world."

They were kids. They were apparently well-behaved. Their parents were nearby. That's all there is to it.

They were unattended children; it shouldn't have happened in the first place.

 

[jdisnut]

They were kids. They were apparently well-behaved. Their parents were nearby. That's all there is to it.

Exactly.

 

[NJEeyore]

I'm just shocked at the life of this tread. Look how many people want to comment on this. Op had simple question, "is this situation uncomfortable?" Simple answer, "Of course it is." There was no question about parentng skills, ages(that info came later), behavior, off-color jokes, hygiene, etc., etc. One young teenager with 4 (5-8yr) kids is odd to be seated with 4 adult men. The men certainly would not be completely comfortable. The parents did nothing wrong, they just didn't think. Hope the guys went to R&C after dinner