Infant in GA last night

2-feign-reluctance

Are you all the same folks who are gonna be all judgemental when my 10 month old and I hop on a long haul to Australia next March? Lighten up! In the history of time, infants have been exposed to and survived much worse.

PJ_Soul

2-feign-reluctance wrote:

Are you all the same folks who are gonna be all judgemental when my 10 month old and I hop on a long haul to Australia next March? Lighten up! In the history of time, infants have been exposed to and survived much worse.

Doing what that woman did can literally severely damage the infant's hearing (and definitely exposed the baby to possible injury - you never know in a pit, and an infant is too vulnerable to be there). Nothing to lighten up about here. A baby in the pit at a rock concert and a baby on a plane are two completely different things (but I do think that people who get mad about babies on planes are assholes.... wtf do they want parents to do?! Drug their children for the flight??).

Luckytwn1

2-feign-reluctance wrote:

Are you all the same folks who are gonna be all judgemental when my 10 month old and I hop on a long haul to Australia next March? Lighten up! In the history of time, infants have been exposed to and survived much worse.

That comparison is totally silly. They endangered their child in two ways: 1) exposing him/her to the incredibly loud volume, especially since they were right in front of the speakers and 2) the conditions of the pit, which are rougher for PJ than say a Springsteen show. There were incidents in the pit both Sat (shoving incident) and Sunday (someone collapsing). Had the parent holding the baby fallen down for some reason, it would have been catastrophic. Unless you are taking some kind of very interesting special flight, taking your child on a plane is nowhere near the same.

Predaking

austin.macrae wrote:

I have a picture but not sure what the legality is on this nonsense. My friend was rail stone-side.
Last night, 9:55 pm CST:
Him: U won't believe this shit there's a woman with a baby right behind us that breast feeding it right now.
WTF??????????????
Me: Stop. Stop. Stop.
Him: (sends pic, don't wanna be graphic but woman with flannel shirt wide open, full nipple, baby on hip {no sling that I can see})
Me: (vomiting in mouth) Holy f*ck mother.

So, given the accounts and this I'd say, even though I was not there, a baby was in the pit about 2-3 back from stone. No further opinions offered on my end.

Based upon the picture, how big do you think the boobs are? Thats what is truly important here.

Predaking

I took my nine year old to Philly II. It was cool to be there with him, but the three trips to the bathroom and the "is it almost over?" after the first hour got old pretty quick. Plus, i could recoup the cost of the ticket. Still, it was a great memory to make.

PJinIL

I thought this was a joke when I first saw the topic. It's unreal. I agree with many others here. This situation, at best, borders on child endangerment if the infant wasn't wearing ear protection. Maybe, MAYBE, if they were at the back of the pit where no one is standing, safe from pushing, and ear protection present, etc, I could defend a parent's choice to subject/expose their child to such an event. I can tell you this, I'd rather see a baby at the back of a PJ GA pit in the arms of a loving parent that has taken every *reasonable precaution to protect the child, than a baby that gets popped in the back seat of a car and have mom or dad light up a cig and hit the road...(their right to do so, but we're discussing infant welfare)...I digress.

I don't see Ed, or anyone in the band taking this one on unless they see something happening at the moment. It's that parent's right, as long as they aren't breaking any rules. Is it smart? I wouldn't do it. But can you imagine the haters coming out if the band were to say "no kids under x allowed?" Hell would be a frigid place compared to the heat they'd catch from what would probably be a very vocal minority if they tried to impose such rules.

***reasonable precaution would include a babysitter, but I'm going to assume extenuating circumstances where the sitter ditched out last minute :)Might be the last dollars in someone's bank account spent to see their first, and maybe last PJ show, but this was their chance! I'm defending the cautious parent here, not one who is in the middle of the pit with a baby strapped on with no ear protection.

Happy thanksgiving everyone!

PU38569

scratched vinyl wrote:

PU38569 wrote:

Pearl Jam went from Roskilde, and swearing against general admission shows all together, to now not only doing GA, but allowing babies in GA?

Yes, because I believe, if I'm not mistaken, one member of Pearl Jam stands at each gate deciding who is allowed in and who is not. That actually acquired Boom because some venues have 6 entrances.

Let's be absolutely clear, they obviously don't stand at the gates checking who enters, because they are not stupid c*nts. but they DO have control over whether or not to permit babies in GA at their shows.

shortstack

austin.macrae wrote:

I have a picture but not sure what the legality is on this nonsense. My friend was rail stone-side.
Last night, 9:55 pm CST:
Him: U won't believe this shit there's a woman with a baby right behind us that breast feeding it right now.
WTF??????????????
Me: Stop. Stop. Stop.
Him: (sends pic, don't wanna be graphic but woman with flannel shirt wide open, full nipple, baby on hip {no sling that I can see})
Me: (vomiting in mouth) Holy f*ck mother.

So, given the accounts and this I'd say, even though I was not there, a baby was in the pit about 2-3 back from stone. No further opinions offered on my end.

why would breast feeding make you (vomit in your mouth)?

austin.macrae

shortstack wrote:

austin.macrae wrote:

I have a picture but not sure what the legality is on this nonsense. My friend was rail stone-side.
Last night, 9:55 pm CST:
Him: U won't believe this shit there's a woman with a baby right behind us that breast feeding it right now.
WTF??????????????
Me: Stop. Stop. Stop.
Him: (sends pic, don't wanna be graphic but woman with flannel shirt wide open, full nipple, baby on hip {no sling that I can see})
Me: (vomiting in mouth) Holy f*ck mother.

So, given the accounts and this I'd say, even though I was not there, a baby was in the pit about 2-3 back from stone. No further opinions offered on my end.

why would breast feeding make you (vomit in your mouth)?

That's not at all the case! It was the larger issue of the child in second row that gave me a jolt, resulting in a sudden onset of nausea. Breast feeding is awesome, and for me, the only way to go.

shortstack

austin.macrae wrote:

shortstack wrote:

austin.macrae wrote:

I have a picture but not sure what the legality is on this nonsense. My friend was rail stone-side.
Last night, 9:55 pm CST:
Him: U won't believe this shit there's a woman with a baby right behind us that breast feeding it right now.
WTF??????????????
Me: Stop. Stop. Stop.
Him: (sends pic, don't wanna be graphic but woman with flannel shirt wide open, full nipple, baby on hip {no sling that I can see})
Me: (vomiting in mouth) Holy f*ck mother.

So, given the accounts and this I'd say, even though I was not there, a baby was in the pit about 2-3 back from stone. No further opinions offered on my end.

why would breast feeding make you (vomit in your mouth)?

That's not at all the case! It was the larger issue of the child in second row that gave me a jolt, resulting in a sudden onset of nausea. Breast feeding is awesome, and for me, the only way to go.

:thumbup:

JV130312

Yep...that's good parenting there. Fucking morons. :fp:

meistereder

I am not a parent, so admittedly I am a little ignorant on some of these issues. However, I don't understand how bringing the baby is better economically. What is more expensive, a babysitter or the price of a GA admission?

And if you were to tell me that the baby got in free, then that means there was an active decision on the part of the ticket checkers to allow the baby in as a "babies get in free" policy.

As a non-parent, a lot of this does not add up. Most importantly, why don't you just leave the baby at home? If a couple's priorities are so out of whack that both parents would rather see the show than ensure the baby's safety, I really don't know what to say.

I see babies in fancy restaurants all the time lately where in the past people used to get babysitters or not go to those places. May be related somehow.

curmudgeoness

meistereder wrote:

I am not a parent, so admittedly I am a little ignorant on some of these issues. However, I don't understand how bringing the baby is better economically. What is more expensive, a babysitter or the price of a GA admission?

My kids are older now, so I've not hired a sitter in 4-5 years. On the rare occasions when we did, though, it was $10/hr. and it would be more in LA, I am sure. So figure $15/hr.

Note that I am NOT defending what this woman did, NOT AT ALL. I've been a PJ fan for a long time, but my 10C number is 419XXX. That's because affording concert tickets *plus* a sitter, assuming I even could find a sitter (special-needs child), was out of the question until 2008. Heck, both of my kids are Seattle natives, but the only PJ I experienced while living in Seattle was what I heard on KNDD, because we had no money.

dimitrispearljam

as for kids at the shows: people bring their kids at the shows cos they have kids..15 years ago they didnt..if u guys didnt noticed the fans base mostly are 35+ years old..so most of fans have kids..not ALL want a eddie give them a pick or whatever..they bring their kids cos they want to enjoy
and an 1 year old kid,id different than 14 years old kid..botrh kids,but they do different things


now the topic with the baby..itsd bad parenting..end of story..should stay home or leave it to the father,sister,grandpa,a babysitter..its crazy to bring it to the concert GA or seated,doesnt matter
i know all along the tour people searching to find anything against GA..
well its not GA problem this one..its bad parenting..

josevolution

The band should do a bunch of small club shows that would at least filter these nutty parents from doing assnine things with their infants ...

Luckytwn1

curmudgeoness wrote:

meistereder wrote:

I am not a parent, so admittedly I am a little ignorant on some of these issues. However, I don't understand how bringing the baby is better economically. What is more expensive, a babysitter or the price of a GA admission?

My kids are older now, so I've not hired a sitter in 4-5 years. On the rare occasions when we did, though, it was $10/hr. and it would be more in LA, I am sure. So figure $15/hr.

Note that I am NOT defending what this woman did, NOT AT ALL. I've been a PJ fan for a long time, but my 10C number is 419XXX. That's because affording concert tickets *plus* a sitter, assuming I even could find a sitter (special-needs child), was out of the question until 2008. Heck, both of my kids are Seattle natives, but the only PJ I experienced while living in Seattle was what I heard on KNDD, because we had no money.

Sorry but if they couldn't afford to get a babysitter, then they should have skipped the show. Beyond the safety issues involved, it is rude and obnoxious to bring an infant (hey, guess what? They cry) into an artistic performance where you are going to be bothering people when the crying happens. It's ridiculous behavior on all fronts.

curmudgeoness

Luckytwn1 wrote:

curmudgeoness wrote:

meistereder wrote:

I am not a parent, so admittedly I am a little ignorant on some of these issues. However, I don't understand how bringing the baby is better economically. What is more expensive, a babysitter or the price of a GA admission?

My kids are older now, so I've not hired a sitter in 4-5 years. On the rare occasions when we did, though, it was $10/hr. and it would be more in LA, I am sure. So figure $15/hr.

Note that I am NOT defending what this woman did, NOT AT ALL. I've been a PJ fan for a long time, but my 10C number is 419XXX. That's because affording concert tickets *plus* a sitter, assuming I even could find a sitter (special-needs child), was out of the question until 2008. Heck, both of my kids are Seattle natives, but the only PJ I experienced while living in Seattle was what I heard on KNDD, because we had no money.

Sorry but if they couldn't afford to get a babysitter, then they should have skipped the show. Beyond the safety issues involved, it is rude and obnoxious to bring an infant (hey, guess what? They cry) into an artistic performance where you are going to be bothering people when the crying happens. It's ridiculous behavior on all fronts.

Please go back and read all of what I wrote. I am NOT defending what happened. I merely was answering the question, "How much does a sitter cost?" -- and then adding that since I could not afford both childcare and tickets, I missed many years of shows.

PJ_Soul

meistereder wrote:

I am not a parent, so admittedly I am a little ignorant on some of these issues. However, I don't understand how bringing the baby is better economically. What is more expensive, a babysitter or the price of a GA admission?

And if you were to tell me that the baby got in free, then that means there was an active decision on the part of the ticket checkers to allow the baby in as a "babies get in free" policy.

As a non-parent, a lot of this does not add up. Most importantly, why don't you just leave the baby at home? If a couple's priorities are so out of whack that both parents would rather see the show than ensure the baby's safety, I really don't know what to say.

I see babies in fancy restaurants all the time lately where in the past people used to get babysitters or not go to those places. May be related somehow.

I seriously doubt a ticket was bought for the baby. Yes, it is likely that the people at the door just let her in... probably they didn't know what else to do, or it hit them so fast they didn't have time to think about it and just let it go. Mom may have feigned ignorance so they just let her in. Mistake, clearly. I wouldn't be surprised if that's what they used as a reason to make her leave though - sorry, no tickets for baby - we made a mistake letting you in, please leave. Anyway, whatever happened, i very much doubt she bought a ticket for the infant, only because it makes so little sense to do so. Then again, who knows! Maybe she got her 10c pair and just brought baby! She's obviously not that smart! Also, it may not be a matter of money. Sometimes people just can't find a sitter (yes, they should just stay home), and some new moms are not willing to leave their babies at all. I have known many mothers who would not even leave their three month old with the baby's grandparents for longer than an hour (if at all). Crazy but true.

Veddernarian

RiGodDamnDiculous. There is no justifying that act.

keelycan

I hear its déjà vu in Portland :corn: