Things that new parents do that annoys us

syklops

westies4ever wrote: »

i dont like children - when I call to your house will you put the kids outside???:rolleyes:

I love you. I don't suppose you have a newsletter of some kind?

OldNotWIse

Knight who says Meh wrote: »

Alternate thread title:
Some people are silly
Some people are not silly.
Some of the silly ones have kids
Some of the silly ones start threads about the silly ones.

Some of the silly ones that the thread is intended to be about come onto the thread anyway even though they are clearly not here to offer examples of how silly their silly kind can be...

OldNotWIse

Irishcrx wrote: »

Oh I dunno , having a friend for life , they make you laugh , they pick you up when your down , you can teach them tricks , play football with them , go camping/hiking with them , go running with them , when your lonely they'll always be around to lie on the couch and watch TV with you and what not...it's fairly obvious why people value their dogs , you sir are oblivious to it!

Dont try to convince him. It's better for dogs in general not to inflict someone like that as an owner on them.

Biggins

Tommy Dillon wrote: »

Drive their kids to school even thought its only down the road. Why can't they walk ?

...Because considering there is other lunatics on the road, at least a metal frame/shell of a car, offers some protection than none at all, walking the same stretch of road!

http://imageshack.us/a/img94/8402/21799244669485538284947.jpg

iguana

Irishcrx wrote: »

Oh I dunno , having a friend for life , they make you laugh , they pick you up when your down , you can teach them tricks , play football with them , go camping/hiking with them , go running with them , when your lonely they'll always be around to lie on the couch and watch TV with you and what not...it's fairly obvious why people value their dogs , you sir are oblivious to it!

Never mind any of that (not that it's not all true and wonderful). Dog owners live 3 years longer on average, are healthier, are less likely to suffer from heart problems or stroke and recover significantly faster if they do. And they are great to have around babies, as kids who spend their first year living in a house with dogs are up to 6 times less likely to suffer from common childhood infections as well as far less likely to suffer from allergies which are currently on the rise in the general population.

As for whether or not they love you. Well that's not up for debate any more. Neuro-chemical studies have shown that when a human strokes a dog the human and dog both release significant amounts of the bonding hormone, oxytocin, especially the dog. It's the same hormone that infants and mothers release while breastfeeding and that adults do during sex, it's what lets us build love. So dogs most certainly do bond to their owners and come to love them intensely. It's not an opinion just a basic neurological fact.

AeoNGriM

Sappa wrote: »

So folks we all know the types,new over possessive parents who constantly boast about their little crying machine and they presume we should all change our lives to accommodate them.
Examples having to remove the dog from the house when baby visits.
Not allowed swear around a new born baby like they are taking it all in.
Having to keep music to a minimal in case the noise interrupts the child upstairs.
Being clipped on the heels by a buggy being pushed by a possessed parent on a crowded street and a sharp mind the baby look from them.
Incessant screaming by the child and the patents doing nothing about it when you suggest a solution you get shot down straight away and told you wouldn't understand as your not a parent.
The fear they have when you ask to hold the new baby as if your going to deliberately drop it.
Anyone else know some of these new parents who hover over the child like a fly on **** and only see there space and presume you should change everything to accommodate them,ohh forgot to mention the baby on board signs as if we need to be extra careful not to rearend the vehicle in front because a baby sits in the car as opposed to an adult.

Thinly veiled "I hate my in-laws kid" thread

Shivers26

My child lies on the couch watching Top Gear with his hand down his pants and looks for a drink every so often.

He's 5.

I feel like I'm doing something wrong maybe........

Timothy Bryce

Mentioned already, but girls who bring their newborn to work to show the little fcuker off for all the other women in the office to fawn over for the entire afternoon. Almost always, the little cnut ends up screaming for the duration - it's an office not a God damn creche you dopey bint.

Congratulations - you managed to pro-create. As have hundreds of millions of people around the globe for many years. Don't expect me to give one single flying fcuk because you let some chap blow his beans up your muff.

Oh look, he's just been sick in your purse whereas, my wallet is only full of disposable income.

MaxSteele

Biggins wrote: »

Cats are worse!

I can't even remember my cat's name, doesn't respond to anything other than a dangling piece of denney's ham. It responds to shut up better than anything else.

MaxSteele

OP I think you over exaggerate these parents. They are new to parenthood after all, give 'em a break. Just hold the dog beside you and let the buggy past.

But I have to agree on the swearing. They're ****ing words, most parents will end up effing and blinding the swear word barrier down at some stage. A child will pick up on swearing by the time they're off to junior infants. Swearing children are a lot funnier too.

Take my 3 year old cousin. Her first word's to my uncle were "AH F*CK IT". I cherish her.

ejmaztec

Irishcrx wrote: »

Oh I dunno , having a friend for life , they make you laugh , they pick you up when your down , you can teach them tricks , play football with them , go camping/hiking with them , go running with them , when your lonely they'll always be around to lie on the couch and watch TV with you and what not...it's fairly obvious why people value their dogs , you sir are oblivious to it!

Post reported to the ISPCA :mad::mad:

nbar12

summerskin wrote: »

Have never ever understood why anyone would want a dog. Filthy smelly animals who lick their own shít and then lick the "loving" owners. Disgusting.

And all this cráp about them being great "companions", bóllocks. They love you for your Pedigree Chum and fúck all else.

this is the most ridiculous post I have ever read in my life you joker

Peanut2011

Sappa wrote: »

,ohh forgot to mention the baby on board signs as if we need to be extra careful not to rearend the vehicle in front because a baby sits in the car as opposed to an adult.

Considering you obviously don't know what that sign is for. The "baby on board" sign is not for any drivers following but rather for the emergency services in case or serious accident so they are aware there is a baby in the car as well.


In relation to the other things you mention, have you ever stopped and considered that this might be their first child and that they are dealing with the unknown and are just in constant state of panic just to make sure they are doing the best they can?

Or would it be too much to consider others?

summerskin

nbar12 wrote: »

this is the most ridiculous post I have ever read in my life you joker

You need to read more.

kincsem

"He is so advanced for his age."

I've never heard a parent say their child is dim.

Mully_2011

Peanut2011 wrote: »

Considering you obviously don't know what that sign is for. The "baby on board" sign is not for any drivers following but rather for the emergency services in case or serious accident so they are aware there is a baby in the car as well.

Hence why they take up half the rear window do you see disabled people going round with a wheelchair sticker the size of those Baby on Board yokes.

Peanut2011

Mully_2011 wrote: »

Hence why they take up half the rear window do you see disabled people going round with a wheelchair sticker the size of those Baby on Board yokes.

What??? What has the disabled sticker got to do with the baby on board sticker??

Would you suggest the sticker than be placed on the front windshield?

kincsem

Peanut2011 wrote: »

What??? What has the disabled sticker got to do with the baby on board sticker??

Would you suggest the sticker than be placed on the front windshield?

Baby on board stickers should be placed in the bin.

granturismo

Peanut2011 wrote: »

Considering you obviously don't know what that sign is for. The "baby on board" sign is not for any drivers following but rather for the emergency services in case or serious accident so they are aware there is a baby in the car as well.

And these should be removed from the car window when there is no baby on board so the emergency services dont waste time looking for a baby in a crashed car, crashed car on fire or checking the scene in case the child was thrown from the car - when the baby is safe at home with parent #2.

gobnaitolunacy

Wouldn't the presence of a baby-seat be a bit of a clue?

You must think the emergency services are right goms altogether.

_feedback_

Ah Jaysus, I want a dog now.

Peanut2011

granturismo wrote: »

And these should be removed from the car window when there is no baby on board so the emergency services dont waste time looking for a baby in a crashed car, crashed car on fire or checking the scene in case the child was thrown from the car - when the baby is safe at home with parent #2.

Fully agree with you on that!

gobnaitolunacy wrote: »

Wouldn't the presence of a baby-seat be a bit of a clue?

You must think the emergency services are right goms altogether.

Oh sweet Jesus where do I even start here? Is there even a point in trying to reply to you?

Sappa

Peanut2011 wrote: »

Sappa wrote: »

,ohh forgot to mention the baby on board signs as if we need to be extra careful not to rearend the vehicle in front because a baby sits in the car as opposed to an adult.

Considering you obviously don't know what that sign is for. The "baby on board" sign is not for any drivers following but rather for the emergency services in case or serious accident so they are aware there is a baby in the car as well.


In relation to the other things you mention, have you ever stopped and considered that this might be their first child and that they are dealing with the unknown and are just in constant state of panic just to make sure they are doing the best they can?

Or would it be too much to consider others?

Baby on board sign is for emergency services,pull another one ya chancer.
Do you honestly think the rearview window is going to be intact after a serious impact and the emergency service personnel are gonna do a quick check to look for a sign.
In this case the car is mostly a right off and they can have a peak inside what's left or the Childs seat may also be a give away.
Those signs are bought as a novelty.

seamus

"Yes, that's right Saoirse, that's a beep-beep".

No, Saoirse, it's not a beep-beep, it a fncking car, you're wrong. No wonder literacy rates and language skills are so poor among our children when so many parents spend their child's formative language years teaching them the wrong fncking words for everything.

Peanut2011

Sappa wrote: »

Baby on board sign is for emergency services,pull another one ya chancer.
Do you honestly think the rearview window is going to be intact after a serious impact and the emergency service personnel are gonna do a quick check to look for a sign.
In this case the car is mostly a right off and they can have a peak inside what's left or the Childs seat may also be a give away.
Those signs are bought as a novelty.

If you don't know they were introduced for the purpose of safety and after along time it is hardly surprising that so may different ones have been created and marketed.

Again, you missed the point of the whole thing. And what is wrong with you knowing that they have a child in the car in front of you.

How many inpatient drivers are out there that when green light comes on they expect you to be doing 60kmph from 0 in 2 seconds. Maybe seeing that sigh they might be bit more understanding, something that is obviously lost on you.

Peanut2011

Peanut2011 wrote: »

If you don't know they were introduced for the purpose of safety and after along time it is hardly surprising that so may different ones have been created and marketed.

Again, you missed the point of the whole thing. And what is wrong with you knowing that they have a child in the car in front of you.

How many inpatient drivers are out there that when green light comes on they expect you to be doing 60kmph from 0 in 2 seconds. Maybe seeing that sigh they might be bit more understanding, something that is obviously lost on you.

Maybe he doesn't like to be reminded that the car he is tailgaiting has a child on board.
If that annoys him, i'd hate to see what type of driver he is.

Sappa

Peanut2011 wrote: »

Sappa wrote: »

Baby on board sign is for emergency services,pull another one ya chancer.
Do you honestly think the rearview window is going to be intact after a serious impact and the emergency service personnel are gonna do a quick check to look for a sign.
In this case the car is mostly a right off and they can have a peak inside what's left or the Childs seat may also be a give away.
Those signs are bought as a novelty.

If you don't know they were introduced for the purpose of safety and after along time it is hardly surprising that so may different ones have been created and marketed.

Again, you missed the point of the whole thing. And what is wrong with you knowing that they have a child in the car in front of you.

How many inpatient drivers are out there that when green light comes on they expect you to be doing 60kmph from 0 in 2 seconds. Maybe seeing that sigh they might be bit more understanding, something that is obviously lost on you.

Ohhh I see now you have one on your car,hence the defence of these silly signs.
What about an elderly person should they have a sign Senior Citizen behind the wheel of this vehicle please do not beep at me when the lights turn green.
Everyone should be alert and follow the rules of the road.

seamus

Peanut2011 wrote: »

If you don't know they were introduced for the purpose of safety and after along time it is hardly surprising that so may different ones have been created and marketed.

Again, you missed the point of the whole thing. And what is wrong with you knowing that they have a child in the car in front of you.

A quick google could have prevented you from making yourself look kind of silly.

The signs were introduced in the US with the intention of asking following drivers to keep their distance.
It's an urban myth that the signs were developed to alert emergency services to the presence of a child in the car.

Mully_2011

Peanut2011 wrote: »

How many inpatient drivers are out there that when green light comes on they expect you to be doing 60kmph from 0 in 2 seconds. Maybe seeing that sigh they might be bit more understanding, something that is obviously lost on you.

Yes I expect you to be paying attention to the road

ejmaztec

"Chronic alcoholic crack-head at the wheel" signs should be mandatory, I don't know about the others.

Biggins

seamus wrote: »

A quick google could have prevented you from making yourself look kind of silly.

The signs were introduced in the US with the intention of asking following drivers to keep their distance.
It's an urban myth that the signs were developed to alert emergency services to the presence of a child in the car.

I think the point is that its a small picture in a car window which hints a reminder that others should dive safely.

Its not a picture of Mohammed or something!
Why people get enraged over such a small thing is daftness.
What sad lives they lead!

Bam Bam Mickey

Bam Bam Mickey wrote: »

I wouldn't have a problem with that except if you're the type to treat your dog like a human and expect visitors to do the same.
Have you ever watched the Dog Whisperer?

the dog whisperer is a load of sh!te and yer man is an aggressive git who chokes dogs

bluewolf

bluewolf wrote: »

the dog whisperer is a load of sh!te and yer man is an aggressive git who chokes dogs

:pac:
I don't know if i should take that post seriously or not.

OldNotWIse

iguana wrote: »

Never mind any of that (not that it's not all true and wonderful). Dog owners live 3 years longer on average, are healthier, are less likely to suffer from heart problems or stroke and recover significantly faster if they do. And they are great to have around babies, as kids who spend their first year living in a house with dogs are up to 6 times less likely to suffer from common childhood infections as well as far less likely to suffer from allergies which are currently on the rise in the general population.

As for whether or not they love you. Well that's not up for debate any more. Neuro-chemical studies have shown that when a human strokes a dog the human and dog both release significant amounts of the bonding hormone, oxytocin, especially the dog. It's the same hormone that infants and mothers release while breastfeeding and that adults do during sex, it's what lets us build love. So dogs most certainly do bond to their owners and come to love them intensely. It's not an opinion just a basic neurological fact.

Love this post, but anyone else sniggering childishly at the thought of releasing the same hormone petting your dog as you do during sex? Love my dog and all but like...eh? Ah no, only joking sorry. Makes sense though. Always thought I was a bit weird the way I'm so super protective over my little one and love her soooooo much, and would basically kill anyone who tried to hurt her - now I can say, "its not me, its the oxytocin!" lol

Bam Bam Mickey

Bam Bam Mickey wrote: »

:pac:
I don't know if i should take that post seriously or not.

Oh, take it seriously
go to the animals&pets forum to see how well loved he is... or isn't, rather

OldNotWIse

Peanut2011 wrote: »

Considering you obviously don't know what that sign is for. The "baby on board" sign is not for any drivers following but rather for the emergency services in case or serious accident so they are aware there is a baby in the car as well.


In relation to the other things you mention, have you ever stopped and considered that this might be their first child and that they are dealing with the unknown and are just in constant state of panic just to make sure they are doing the best they can?

Or would it be too much to consider others?

Never knew that!

What about the ones that say "little princess on board"? I can imagine some poor paramedic desperately scouring the accident scene for Aurora or Belle...

bluewolf

bluewolf wrote: »

Oh, take it seriously
go to the animals&pets forum to see how well loved he is... or isn't, rather

Why? because he treats dogs as they should be treated?
Is this forum full of people who would kill someone for pushing their dog off them?;)

homemadecider

kincsem wrote: »

"He is so advanced for his age."

I've never heard a parent say their child is dim.

You never see stickers that say "It's statistically likely my child is of average intelligence". Pity that.

Bam Bam Mickey

Bam Bam Mickey wrote: »

Why? because he treats dogs as they should be?
Is this forum full of people who would kill someone for pushing their dog off them?;)

Using a choke collar and kicking your dog is not "as they should be"
http://www.dogspelledforward.com/real-mans-guide-to-dog-training-dominance-is-not-leadership-part-1/

anyway, this is about parents, not dogs, so let's leave it there

Jimoslimos

Peanut2011 wrote: »

How many inpatient drivers are out there that when green light comes on they expect you to be doing 60kmph from 0 in 2 seconds. Maybe seeing that sigh they might be bit more understanding, something that is obviously lost on you.

Listen, I couldn't give a flying fcuk whether they had a sign saying "Dead body in trunk" or "Getting a blowjob", as long as their driving wasn't adversely affected.

The only "sign" I take heed of on a vehicle is the only legal one, the L plate. I'll afford these drivers the time and space they need.

bluewolf

bluewolf wrote: »

Using a choke collar and kicking your dog is not "as they should be"
http://www.dogspelledforward.com/real-mans-guide-to-dog-training-dominance-is-not-leadership-part-1/

anyway, this is about parents, not dogs, so let's leave it there

The cases he deals with are usually people who treat their dogs like humans and they are quite close to being euthanised (after attacks or bites)because the owner is an idiot.;)
Quite right.

dark crystal

OP, would you prefer that parents took no interest at all in their newborn offspring?

Or is it merely the whole procreation thing that bothers you?

The whole AH anti-child vibe puzzles me sometimes. We all started off as babies ourselves y'know - even you OP! Sure, some new parents are a tad overprotective, but so what....doesn't put me out in any major way.

OldNotWIse

Bam Bam Mickey wrote: »

Why? because he treats dogs as they should be treated?
Is this forum full of people who would kill someone for pushing their dog off them?

There must be some kind of technical glitch on Boards at the moment, I can't seem to find any posts to substantiate your suggestion

OldNotWIse

OldNotWIse wrote: »

There must be some kind of technical glitch on Boards at the moment, I can't seem to find any posts to substantiate your suggestion

There must be some sort of technical glitch in your brain, as i asked a question, didn't make a suggestion.
But you are old, so i forgive you.

swimming in a sea

connundrum wrote: »

These type parents don't annoy me, they provide new lol material.

I was in Tayto park at the weekend with the nephew and saw a mother running over to her kid who was eating the sand/sawdust mix in the play area, she was shouting:

'No Oisin, no' whilst shouting back over her shoulder to the hubby:

'Quick Richard, grab the Yakult!!!'

Funny if I heard a child was called Oisin then that's exactly the kind of parents I'd expect.

Madam_X

Sappa wrote: »

Anyone else know some of these new parents who hover over the child like a fly on **** and only see there space and presume you should change everything to accommodate them

No.

And keeping the music down, in their own house, so the baby doesn't wake up and start crying (for the benefit of everyone, not only the baby) seems pretty reasonable to me.

Your post makes me confident you'd be as bad, if not worse, should you become a parent.

swimming in a sea

Peanut2011 wrote: »

How many inpatient drivers are out there that when green light comes on they expect you to be doing 60kmph from 0 in 2 seconds. Maybe seeing that sigh they might be bit more understanding, something that is obviously lost on you.

My biggest annoyance of drivers, when it goes green bloody go and keep up with the car in front, if I'm behind anybody slow to go I'll give them the full blow of the horn, as another poster said I'll make allowances for L drivers but not for retards with baby on board signs.

Madam_X

westies4ever wrote: »

i dont like children - when I call to your house will you put the kids outside???:rolleyes:

Well dogs are (should be) ok with being put outside - especially if the weather is ok; they can go into their kennel. Babies don't have kennels, fur coats or the ability to walk.

callaway92 wrote: »

The parents who push their child's buggy onto the road blindly to test and see if there are cars coming are the worst.

I don't know if it's consciously to test, but yes, I've seen people do this and they're arseholes.

donalg1 wrote: »

And putting everything the child does up on Facebook is a no no. Who the hell cares if your child rolled over today or sat up or said its first word

their friends/relatives. Remove them from your news feed shur.

Timothy Bryce wrote: »

girls who bring their newborn to work to show the little fcuker off for all the other women in the office to fawn over for the entire afternoon. Almost always, the little cnut ends up screaming for the duration - it's an office not a God damn creche you dopey bint.

Congratulations - you managed to pro-create. As have hundreds of millions of people around the globe for many years. Don't expect me to give one single flying fcuk because you let some chap blow his beans up your muff.

lol such hatred. Can't be healthy.
Women bring in the baby because their workmates want to see them. I hate when a huge swarm of them go over to the baby and scare the life out of the poor thing though.

Bam Bam Mickey wrote: »

:pac:
I don't know if i should take that post seriously or not.

Nah I agree with you re the silly way some people carry on re their pets, but that man uses too much physical force on the animals. The woman from It's Me Or The Dog does a brilliant job, and she doesn't resort to heavy-handed force.

kingtiger

ah OP the innocence of youth

bless

OldNotWIse

Bam Bam Mickey wrote: »

There must be some sort of technical glitch in your brain, as i asked a question, didn't make a suggestion.
But you are old, so i forgive you.

Cheer up, its Friday!