I didn't think that Weatherspoons had banned smoking. I just thought they had no smoking areas (which are generally the only area of the pub where children are allowed as well) and a no snoking by the bar policy (which more and more pubs are implementing these days). And in terms of being a 'Family Pub' its not like Children have a free run like they do in some pubs (It drives me up the bend when Children are allowed to run amok while their parents get slowly more sozzled) In our local Weatherspoons children are only allowed in if they are having food from the menu.

I do think the swearing issue is a little extreme especially as it appears to have been started off by the objections of a very small minority, but it certainly won't stop me frequenting the chains pubs, in fact it could be nice to be able to sit and know that you're don't have to put up with people who can't utter two word without swearing very loudly

---

by Incandenza
Where is it written that restaurants are for families but pubs are for louts?

---

Well, one - that's not what she said, and two - I do think it is reasonable to expect a family atmosphere in a restaurant and an adult atmosphere in a pub or bar. Eating is not the sole preserve of adults, drinking alcohol is.

I would agree with Nemesis that I'll happily accept a quieter atmosphere in a restaurant, but if I'm out drinking with mates on an evening I do not expect to tone it down because there are some kids at the next table. There are already pubs that truly cater for families, like the Spirit Pub Group, that have play areas for children and large areas set aside for family eating. That's fine. But a city centre pub that has no children area really isn't somewhere you should be taking children to in the first place.

And I make a difference here between the local pub and city centre pubs. Local pubs, by their nature and location, are going to have a more family friendly atmosphere.

---

by Jayjay
I do think it is reasonable to expect a family atmosphere in a restaurant and an adult atmosphere in a pub or bar. Eating is not the sole preserve of adults, drinking alcohol is.

I would agree with Nemesis that I'll happily accept a quieter atmosphere in a restaurant, but if I'm out drinking with mates on an evening I do not expect to tone it down because there are some kids at the next table.

---

Expectations are absolutely critical here. Behaviour is only understandable in a social context of expectation.

A pub is often more permissive than a restaurant however there are variations within each context. If I go to a Harvester then I expect families, if I go for a late dinner at (for the sake of argument) Bluebird or The Ivy (as if!) then I do not expect to have children running around my table.

What I can't see is wrong is for Wetherspoons to say publically that if you want to come and spend time in our establishments then this is how you are expected to behave. That way, if you want to be loud and sweary, then you know to go somewhere else and if you want a quiet drink or to socialise with other parents perhaps then you know that it may be a good place to go to. Ronnie Scott's is a licensed establishment but anyone swearing (or indeed talking) loudly isn't likely to last long.

It is unreasonable I think to simply assume that once you are in a pub that any kind of boorish behaviour becomes acceptable, and that anyone objecting is in the wrong.

Depends on what you consider boorish. I see nothing wrong in the use of swearing. I don't consider have a laugh with friends and possibly some crude jokes (well, it is me, after all) loutish. Those are my standards, and the standards of most of the people I know. Boorish and loutish I would consider to be violent behaviour, or undesired behaviour that is directed at people not in your group. These are grounds I would think ejection would be reasonable for. Laughing and swearing I would not.

But you're quite right. All licencees have the right to refuse entry. No reason need be given. If a Weatherspoon pub wants to remove me or a friend for swearing then I'll just boycot them all, just as I do with pubs with a dress code.

Personally as long as someone else's behaviour is not directly involving me, then I don't care what they do. They can swear, be racist, be homophobic, sexist or strip to their undies for all I care. It's none of my business. I just wish people would return me the same curtesy.

---

by Jayjay
Depends on what you consider boorish. I see nothing wrong in the use of swearing. I don't consider have a laugh with friends and possibly some crude jokes (well, it is me, after all) loutish.

---

And neither do I.

---

or undesired behaviour that is directed at people not in your group. These are grounds I would think ejection would be reasonable for. Laughing and swearing I would not.

---

A question of definition, I'd simply take boorish to mean ill-mannered. Behaviour does not have to be directed at someone for it to be offensive. England fans chanting 'I'd rather be a paki than a Turk' wasn't aimed at me but I still think it was objectionable.

---

Personally as long as someone else's behaviour is not directly involving me, then I don't care what they do. They can swear, be racist, be homophobic, sexist or strip to their undies for all I care. It's none of my business. I just wish people would return me the same curtesy.

---

Live and let live, and again I agree. However, flip that on its head... whilst you may not find swearing loudly (or any of the other behaviours above) offensive, other people do. By engaging in such behaviour in such a manner that it cannot be easily avoided, you impose your values for acceptable behaviour on them just as you ask that they not impose their values on you.

The second quote you use, Inc, isn't directed at defining boorish behaviour. It is meant to give a guide to what I think would be reasonable grounds for being removed from a public house.

Regarding the final quote, you misunderstand me. I find all forms of bigotry offensive. And have well documented reasons for taking offence to homophobia in particular. And that's my point, my being offended is my problem, not anyone else’s, and as such I would not ask that their behaviour be changed (or removed) for my benefit.

Now, you use a familiar argument against my liberal stance that is as old as the values I espouse. That by asking that we do not concern ourselves with the behaviour of others that harms no one is in itself authoritarian in that I am forcing my views on those who disagree. It's old and nothing more than slight of hand. I do not ask that they not be offended, merely that as long as the behaviour does not physically stop you from enjoying yourself then you should show the same consideration to others as we would ask of them. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you. That kind of thing. Your values are your own business but your actions can affect others. Someone who is swearing a lot or making offensive comments of any kind in no way inhibits your own behaviour. You then insisting that they stop or leave affects there's. You have just forced them to accept your value system, not the other way round.

And let's, just for good measure, use a bit of reductio ad adsurdum, to show the flaw in using offence as a grounds for removal or censure. Personally, I find anoraks, pedal pushers, S Club T-shirts and small children running around unmonitored in pubs offensive. If it is reasonable to remove someone because their swearing is found offensive then so is my demanding that the above be barred from my favourite hostelries. Also crying babies from long distance flights. And all Tories from any public place or office.

---

by Jayjay
Personally, I find anoraks, pedal pushers, S Club T-shirts and small children running around unmonitored in pubs offensive.

---

Or small children runing around in anoraks and S-Club T-shirts.

I have no problem with people swearing in pubs as long as they arent doing it too loudly. I have no problem with people bringing children into pubs(as long as they control them) but there are pubs and times designed for these occasions. Unmonitiored children do annoy me however, I have lost a few pints to these beasts.

---

by Jayjay
Now, you use a familiar argument against my liberal stance that is as old as the values I espouse. That by asking that we do not concern ourselves with the behaviour of others that harms no one is in itself authoritarian in that I am forcing my views on those who disagree.

---

That wasn't what I was trying to get at. Your doctrine of tolerance is exactly that, yours and you have perfect liberty to adopt it. More than that, it reflects an empathic regard for the rights of other people which I agree with wholeheartedly.

However, in exercising one's personal freedom to (for example) be homophobic in as loud a voice as possible in a public place, you impinge on someone else's personal freedom not to be offended by the foisting upon them of bigotry.

---

It's old and nothing more than slight of hand. I do not ask that they not be offended, merely that as long as the behaviour does not physically stop you from enjoying yourself then you should show the same consideration to others as we would ask of them.

---

That only works if you restrict your sense of 'harm' to the purely physical.

---

Someone who is swearing a lot or making offensive comments of any kind in no way inhibits your own behaviour.

---

No but it inhibits my ability to avoid insult and/or offense.

We all sacrifice certain freedoms for the benefits afforded us by society. As a result, daily life is a constant give and take between exercising personal freedom and sacrificing it for the benefit of others.

The line regarding public behaviour is a pretty flexible one, and what goes in one environment doesn't (necessarily) in another. Wetherspoon's have a right to define that line in their pubs.

Yes, Inc, but you miss my point. Offense cannot be the basis for social control.

Many people are offended by many things. Many are offended by my sexuality, my taste in music, and my taste in shirts. Should I modify my behaviour (or dress sense) so as to avoid offending someone else? Where do you draw the line? Who's offense takes precedence over everyone else's? Someone being loudly homophobic is only an issue if the volume is such that you are unable to hold your own conversation, not the content of a conversation you are not part of.

---

by Jayjay
Someone being loudly homophobic is only an issue if the volume is such that you are unable to hold your own conversation, not the content of a conversation you are not part of.

---

I think the offensive content issue is a bit of a red herring. I don't dispute the right to express any opinion you might wish to. It's a case of volume and the consequent impact on third parties. You believe that people should be free to be as loud and (potentially) obnoxious as they choose and that everyone within earshot should put up or leave.

I believe that everyone else should have the right not to have to put up, not to be required to make that choice. My neighbour playing his stereo at top volume may not cause me physical harm but it is still an invasive and selfish way to behave. It's an issue of manners and civil behaviour.

---

by Incandenza
You believe that people should be free to be as loud and (potentially) obnoxious as they choose and that everyone within earshot should put up or leave.

---

---

by Jayjay
Someone being loudly homophobic is only an issue if the volume is such that you are unable to hold your own conversation, not the content of a conversation you are not part of.

---

Clearly I do not believe volume is irrelevant. Sound is physical. Vibrating molecules, and all that. If someone else's volume makes it impossible to converse without being heard over them, then that is a physical impediment. And as such can (and should) be an issue for social control.

---

by JtB
(quotes)I have no problem with people swearing in pubs as long as they arent doing it too loudly.

---

ditto. There are moments when I personally don't notice when people are using "swear words" Now if its in the middle of a very loud arguement that's out of context with what people are doing around them, then you would notice it.

And I guess half the problem would come down to different people's definition of "swearing". As in previous debates its obvious that different people have different definitions about what words they can and cannot tolerate listening to. I for one don't like to hear kids swear when they know that they are doing it to offend (if they really don't understand the concept of the word then its not the same)

Excessive swearing for no reason is definitely offputting (think Hugh in Four Weddings at the beginning - just on and on and on )

---

I have no problem with people bringing children into pubs(as long as they control them) but there are pubs and times designed for these occasions. Unmonitiored children do annoy me however, I have lost a few pints to these beasts.

---

To some extent children attending pubs should have times put on them, but is this a joke in the same way as so called tv watersheds? Supposedly there was a recent newspaper poll that found out 8-14 year olds watch more progs declared adult (soap operas, dramas) than Blue Peter. At what time should kids be watershed and tucked up in bed

There must be more towns that have pubs catering for adults and separate pubs catering for children surely? Do parents on here take their children to general pubs? I know there's one place near hear classed as family restuarant/pub with their own facilities for children - my only complaint is they won't allow adults equal rights to the ballpit

---

by Incandenza
(quotes)

Where is it written that restaurants are for families but pubs are for louts? That seems rather a personal opinion than a reflection of some general principle.

Anyway, looks like you have found the solution which is rather than expecting that children be banned from wherever you don't want them, go somewhere else. It's not like there are a shortage of pubs sans family atmosphere.

---

This is a forum where personal oppinions are raised, of course its my personal oppinion!but it is my general principle that children should not be allowed in pubs in the evening.i would never let kids into a pub after certain times, its not the right place for them
pubs are for selling alcohol, which is a adult thing.and i am not a lout, i am an adult and as such have the right to speak my own way. i try not be offensive and just because i like to laugh and joke with my friends does not mean i am a lout.i do not behave loutishly but i do like to enjoy myself in an adult way and i am respectful to other patrons

there isnt a shortage of pubs sans family atmosphere, but there is a shortage of pubs with cheap food and drinks, thats the only reason ill go to wetherspoons, but i know many of my friends will choose tomgo else wher and i think that will be the case with many people.

Hmmm wetherspoons at the moment equals no music, no fruit machines and no pool tables which means not alot of punters aprt from those who like a cheap drink (about the only thing it has going for it) and as for this no swering in the pub joke!!! i mean whats next in wetherspoons no peeing in the toilet unless accompined by a sensible adult and the moon is in its third cycle on a tuesday afternoon and the tides high at clacton!!!! Grrrrrrrrrrr bloody idiots

My 2 cents.

I don't take my children to pubs. We go quite regularly to "child friendly" places like Brewers Fayre and places like that. The childrens area is seperate and there are signs saying that children aren't allowed in the bar area. My children don't go past those signs. They know they're not allowed and I will enforce that fact to them. It annoys me when parents don't do this 'cos pubs aren't for children. When I go out to the pub it's to get away from the kids so I don't want other peoples running all over the place.

Anyway, back to the topic.

All I have to say is that I can't see me going into a Whetherspoons anymore if I have Yvonne with me Our closest Whetherspoons (Cambridge) has a sign on the door saying no under 18s. I assume from this thread that this is unusual.....

From reading this thread back it seems that many weatherspoons have differing policy's. My local one has fruit machines and lets children in a seperate area, Teresa's doesn't allow children full stop, Some allow smoking, some don't. The only consistant one seems to be the Music thing... So I'd imagine that this Swearing ban won't make any difference to the individual running of most Weatherspoon pubs.