That's right, but certainly not everything I wrote.

That's right, a world where kids don't kick is indeed an unrealistic, utopian ideal. I present as exhibit A the real world. Every kid has had a meltdown in a public place at least once. For some kids, that public place happens to be on an airplane. For some kids, that kicking meltdown will include screaming, crying, punching, seat grabbing, and lying on the ground having forgotten how to walk.

BTW, I believe you said it's unacceptable for any kicking to occur, interim or not, but you were gracious enough to ignore the interim kind, as judged by yourself.

Since when was I making excuses. You're talking about your rights, I'm talking about reality. I already agreed that it's wrong for children to kick the seat in front of them, even a single time. I'm just pointing out that it's still going to happen, and there are things you can do to help minimize it. Standing on your perceived rights might make you a martyr in your mind, but cooperating with others will actually get the results you desire.

Didn't I say that in my previous post? If the FA think's it's excessive, they can stop the behavior, and in extreme cases, call the police. If not, you will need to live with being annoyed. You don't get to act as judge, jury, and executioner here, and the standard of conduct is not "does it annoy PTravel".

I was willing to work with you and reduce your annoyance factor even more, but since you're more interested in complaining than getting anything done, I'm out of this thread. Enjoy your pyrrhic victory, rest assured you have done nothing to change the world.

Of course I am serious. First you reject out of hand, in a fit of rodomontade, Webster's definition of "assault" ("I know exactly what assault means (and it doesn't mean what you've quoted)") then you state that the very same definition is "rigidly literal". How can can it be both the literal definition and not at all the definition at the same time?

Words have meanings. In order to engage in substantive debate we have to have agree on the definitions of our terms otherwise it is not debate but logomachy. If indeed the colloquial meaning of assault is "well understood" to be "annoying" then you should be able to show a source. If we asked 100 people to describe what it is like to have your seat kicked by a two year old how many do you think would answer "assault"? Is having your seat kicked by a child annoying? Of course! Is it an awful nuisance? Absolutely! Is it assault? No. Clearly you are using this hyperbole to achieve maximum dramatic effect, much to the delight of your partisans.

Believe it or not even though I went to a state school I do know what a simile is. Saying that you are as aggressive as a pit bull is a simile. When I pose the question "So having your seat kicked by a child is a form of "assault"?" and you answer "Yep" that's not a simile (unless you have another "well understood colloquial meaning" ready to spring on me).

I do think that it is very unlikely that my child will seat kick. In the event that he does it appears that it is a big problem as I will have you and your ilk screaming assault. It's like the Sword of Damocles, it's not that it falls all the time but that it could fall at any time without warning despite your best efforts to stop it. And when it does fall it's a big deal.

I still feel that parents are on your side regarding this issue and that we are not entitlement demanders as we do not board with with the intent for our children to seat kick. A bully (who I will assume is a fully enfranchised adult in total control of his actions) has intent to punch you in the nose. Only after repeated "I don't care" and "not my problem" beat downs did we parents lose patience (which is tough to do to a parent - kudos!). While your sentiments are perhaps legitimate I'm not sure they are productive which you should care about but probably don't. I hate to tell you but a world with 100% guaranteed zero seat kicking is a utopian fantasy. If, however, as a result of this debate I can invent a solution that would guarantee such a world I will cut you in for 50% and you can retire the next day!

You misunderstand me. I'm well aware that kids melt down from time to time. That's the point. I flew when I was a kid (though not until I was 8 or so), and I also had my occasional melt downs. They never occurred on a plane, however -- it was never the slightest possibility because I was well aware of the consequences if I did. I don't pretend to be an expert on parenting and, frankly, I don't know what my parents did, but I know that the prospect of melting down in an airplane, a restaurant, a theater, etc., was completely unthinkable and beyond the realm of possibility. And it wasn't just me -- kids melting down in those venue simply didn't happen. I don't know what's changed, but parents inflicting ill-behaved kids on strangers is a relatively recent development -- within the last 20 or 30 years.

The fact that a lot of parents these days think it is acceptable doesn't make it so.

Let me be clear: by "seat kicking" I mean the kind of repetitive contact that occurs when a child swings his or her feet. Everyone contacts the seat in front from time to time. It's unavoidable and the result of simple physics.

If I understand you, you're saying, "the reality is I can't control my kid all the time and there will be times when he will kick your seat." If that's true, then your kid shouldn't fly until he is old enough to understand that he cannot kick the seat in front of him and, in fact, won't. The reality may be that kids aren't controllable (though see above -- my parents and the parents of their generation managed to do it), but that doesn't mean that everyone else has to endure the conduct of uncontrollable kids in every venue.

Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that having your seat kicked isn't annoying? Can you honestly say, with a straight face, that it wouldn't annoy you if someone, kid or adult, did it to you?

Please tell me what "willing to work with me" means. All I've heard from you is, essentially, "kids will do it some time -- live with it." Sorry. Seat kicking is never acceptable and no one has the right to tell someone else, "live with it."

I'm not going to get into a debate over literary style. If you like, we can match graduate degrees some time.

Notwithstanding, what you wrote above does, indeed, get to the heart of the matter. If you know there is a potential that your kid is going to kick seats, then book bulkheads, F, or don't fly with your kid. Because I don't care whether your kid is a perfect angel 99% of the time if, the 1% of the time he is not, I'm on long haul trying to sleep, or a transcon trying to relax myself enough to get through a difficult job interview, etc. Seat kicking is never acceptable. Period. Your best efforts mean nothing, if the result of them is that my seat is kicked. Your child's otherwise angelic behavior means nothing, if your child kicks my seat.

That kind of imposition on strangers is completely unacceptable. Ever. Under any circumstances.

And that is difference between you (and parents who think as you do) and me (and people who think as I do). A society in which parents do not inflict intrusive behavior on strangers is not utopian -- it's the society in which I grew up. I am well aware that the prevalent philosophy among many parents is, "I can bring my child anywhere as long as I do my best," but it's one that is, at it's core, an entitlement demand. It is wrong to expect people to tolerate intrusive impositions in any context because they originate from a child. The fact that the parent may have done their best to curtail the imposition doesn't discharge their responsibility to strangers. There are venues in which childish behavior doesn't bother anyone or is, in fact, privileged. Aircraft, however, are not one of them. That's not utopian idealism in my book. THAT is simple reality. It was the reality that I grew up in and spent a good part of my adult life in.

I don't blame you for not wanting to continue to defend your wildly inconsistent statements and definitions common only to you. Does assuming you have a more prestigious graduate degree than I (and I'm sure you do) really make you feel better about that? Boy, I bet your alma mater is proud.

Let me echo your sentiment with which I totally agree "Seat kicking is never acceptable". I never said it was and I never will. If I could guarantee 100% zero seat kicking I would. Frankly though, your habit of playing fast and loose with the english language is probably going to be a much bigger problem at that difficult job interview than the 1% chance that my kid will kick your seat. Make sure to mention all the degrees you have, that ought to help.

I am extremely anxious about taking my child on the plane. I am hoping against hope that that 1% chance doesn't come up. I am even considering drugging my child (legally) which makes me feel like a horrible parent but that's the impact you are having. In the end I don't really agree that we are that different. We both abhor seat kicking and never want it to happen. I also agree with you that I am putting my grandmother's desire to see my son once over the 1% chance that he might kick your seat. Let me know when you find a parent who would choose differently in that "context".

Do you have anything of substance to say, or is your insulting behavior merely supportive of my belief that you're rude and inconsiderate of other passengers? Start a thread in OMNI called "Hyperbole and Simile" and we can discuss your apparent unfamiliarity with either. I have accumulated a sufficient quantity of graduate degrees, as well as university teaching experience, to be quite secure with my use and understanding of the English lanugage.

You can. I already told you how: If your child is going to kick seats, book bulkheads, buy F, or don't fly with your child. You, however, have decided that, as long as you are "doing your best," strangers will have to tolerate your child's seat-kicking.

I find it fascinating that, whenever I get into one of these discussions with a parent from the, "planes are public transportation so deal with it" crowd, they almost always resort to insult. That consistency alone is enough to validate my observation that parents who inflict the intrusive and imposing behavior of their children on others are simply rude.

Yes, indeed we are. I don't impose on anyone when I fly, but you do. I don't insult strangers, but you do. I don't digress into trivialities, but you do.

You keep casting this in terms of whether you are a "good parent" or a "horrible parent." It's none of my business how you parent -- I simply couldn't care less. I only care about whether you are a good passenger or a bad passenger. If you are responsible for some stranger's seat being kicked, you are a bad passenger irrespective of what kind of parent you may or may not be. This isn't about parenting, it's about courtesy and regard for others when in public.

Indeed. And another difference between us is that I am never the cause of someone's seat being kicked, whereas you are.

My participation in this conversation started with the observation that seat kicking by children is a rare and infrequent phenomenon, at least in my experience. Apparently, there are many parents whose children are capable of flying without terrorizing strangers around them (I'll anticipate your digression into the meaning of the word "terrorize"). However, thank you for finally getting to the bottom line: You believe that your desire to have your grandmother see your son trumps the interests of whoever may have the misfortune of sitting in front of your son. How does that square with your agreement that seat kicking is never acceptable?

As I said, the very definition of entitlement. It's unfortunate that you don't recognize it as such.

Here's my bottom line: I don't care why you're flying. I don't care with whom you are flying. Don't kick my seat. Period.