Stupid Guest Tricks

disneyfav4ever wrote:Those guests should have been kicked out of the park.

Kicking's too good for them. I say Disney should build themselves a ginormous catapault and fling 'em into the next state over. :twisted:

felinefan wrote:Kicking's too good for them. I say Disney should build themselves a ginormous catapault and fling 'em into the next state over. :twisted:

If you used a trebuchet you could launch them AND their car.

felinefan wrote:Kicking's too good for them. I say Disney should build themselves a ginormous catapault and fling 'em into the next state over. :twisted:

Nahhh.... The Atlantic and the Gulf are closer than the next state... :twisted:

-Rob

Sarah Magdalene wrote:Was at work the other day when I had heard this very upsetting incident. Donald Duck just recently had gotten punched by two children during Safari Breakfast at AK. According to the duck good friend, both children were at first laughing cause they thought it was funny that they made Donald "act" hurt. When confronted by both an attendant and Donald himself, the family had insisted, "No, our children would never do such a thing! How DARE you accuse us of that." The one little girl in the family had started crying cause she knew she was caught. The boy apparently was still snickering.

After much argument between the parents and the management, the guilty family was given their entire meal free, fast pass for Kilimanjaro, and got to be in the Mickey's Jammin' Jungle Parade as honored guests.

It's all about context: no ages given, the conclusion that the children were being beligerent without any real information about what exactly happened and then the strange reproach after Donald essentially "baited" the children by acting out (at first read, I assumed that Donald was being attacked by some teenagers, but careful reading implies that it was actually one little boy who probably punched him once accompanied by a girl probably of the age of 5). I'm just saying this account could be better-written because it skimps on facts and presumes there was an injustice (although if the parent actually said "How DARE you accuse them of doing that" then I'll believe that the kids were jerks and the parents SGs. Parents are totally responsible for their children's behavior and if an official employee of Disney says my kids were doing something wrong, I'd tend to believe them.). I mean it's possible the little girl would have remembered this moment as a bad event for the rest of her life even though "my brother punches me all the time, what's the big deal?". I know my kids - no matter how amazingly wonderful they are (and they are) - can fight like cats and dogs when we're not keeping an eye on them. The best way to deal with simple - and probably unintentional mean - aggression is to ignore it. Besides, you know how little kids can be with stuffed animals, and those characters are essentially giant, walking stuffed animals to a kid.

Imagine if this story had been written for consumerist.com, however:

Was at work the other day when I had heard this incident. During Safari Breakfast at AK, two children under the age of 7 found Donald's fat belly to be too much temptation and the little boy punched Donald playfully in the gut. According to Donald's attendant, both children laughed because they thought it was funny that Donald "acted" hurt in an exaggerated manner.

The attendant and Donald approached the parents to warn them that the children should NOT punch the characters, and the parents (who had not witnessed the punch) insisted, "No, our children would never do such a thing!"

This caused the little girl to start crying because she was scared that they would get kicked out of the park. The boy - who didn't know any better because he thought Donald couldn't feel anything under the costume was still giggling at the time.

After a heated discussion with the parents and the management, the family's meal was comped, they were given a fast pass for Kilimanjaro, and got to be in the Mickey's Jammin' Jungle Parade as guests.

I've witnessed Donald in the past getting punched by little kids and I remember the character acting in an exagerated manner. I found it actually innappropriate and the character should have killed the act right there and then, turned tail and left. I'll say it again: the best way to deal with simple - and probably unintentional - aggression is to ignore it and those characters are essentially giant, walking stuffed animals to a kid. Especially when the parents point them to the characters and say "look! There's Goofy!" rather than "look! There's a guy in a Goofy costume!".

Teenagers and older acting out and attacking characters should be punished in relation to the severity of the act. Punching Chip (or was it Dale?) in the head is something severe enought that the police should be brought in to get involved with.

Still, I agree with a lot of the respondents that Disney is lacking cojones lately. Remember that arrest at DW of a much sought-after central american drug dealer because he and his girlfriend were stupid enough to shopliftthere? Like Mickey said "sometimes if you take care of the little things, the big things take care of themselves."

thomaskr wrote:I've witnessed Donald in the past getting punched by little kids and I remember the character acting in an exagerated manner. I found it actually innappropriate and the character should have killed the act right there and then, turned tail and left. I'll say it again: the best way to deal with simple - and probably unintentional - aggression is to ignore it and those characters are essentially giant, walking stuffed animals to a kid. Especially when the parents point them to the characters and say "look! There's Goofy!" rather than "look! There's a guy in a Goofy costume!".

Teenagers and older acting out and attacking characters should be punished in relation to the severity of the act. Punching Chip (or was it Dale?) in the head is something severe enought that the police should be brought in to get involved with.

Still, I agree with a lot of the respondents that Disney is lacking cojones lately. Remember that arrest at DW of a much sought-after central american drug dealer because he and his girlfriend were stupid enough to shopliftthere? Like Mickey said "sometimes if you take care of the little things, the big things take care of themselves."

WOW! Just wow!

With all due respect, it all comes down to the parents teaching the kids respect and how to behave at Disney. For the two children that did punch Donald, look at the thousands of kids who did not. The parents are responsible for their kids actions and they should not have been rewarded. Why can thousands of children go through the day at Disney and not punch a character? Because their parents taught them it was wrong! The ones who do punch characters have been the result of poor parenting.

As far as the description of the characters as "giant stuffed animals"? No, I don't buy it. There are enough kids that are polite and do NOT kick and hit the characters. They do not see the characters as "giant stuffed animals". They see the characters as living breathing characters. Tigger is REAL. He IS Tigger, not a stuffed animal version of him. He walks and plays and poses. He is Tigger. And there is no need to tell a child it is a person dressed as Tigger so the child won't punch. Teach them NOT to punch!

Donald is REAL, NOT a giant stuffed animal that does not react. He IS Donald, walking and posing. NOT a stuffed animal. Same with ALL the characters!

Characters play around all the time with kids. They pose and hug and sometimes play/tussle with them. But Donald *baiting* the kids? That is a bit of an extreme statement. The characters do NOT bait the guests to fight. The characters are there to entertain and meet the guests, not to be pummeled by them. Anytime a guest hits or kicks or otherwise attacks a character, it is out of line. There is no excuse in the world for it. It is wrong. And the guest who does this should be escorted away.

And to ignore this behavior? What does that do? It tells the kid that it is okay to punch the character. (Unless I am reading your statement entirely wrong. It sounds like you are saying it is better for the parents to ignore the kids punching the character and fighting each other as it will run itself out?) One should NEVER ignore aggression in a child. It says something about the child's perception and if it is ignored, the child will continue to do it and it may lead to worse things down the line. Then how do you stop it after you have *ignored* it for so long?

If the parent does nothing but ignore the behavior, the child gets the message it is okay. Wow! I cannot believe I just read a parent saying that a parent should ignore aggressive behavior in a child! This is why we see parents NOT taking responsibility for their kids behavior in the Parks. They ignore the child and hope the behavior will stop, while someone else is getting the brunt of the childs behavior. Sorry, I completely disagree with you, tho I respect your right to believe how you want.


And of course the characters act in an exxagerated manner. That is how they communicate! It is part of their *act*. But it is not part of their act to be baeten, kicked, bitten and have the parent ignore the child that is doing that! It is up to the parents to STOP the aggressive behavior, be it with a character or a sibling.

The two children were brats and allowed to act like brats in public and the parents are responsible for their brattiness. They need to teach them respect. Period. AND the little kids need to be punished for their behavior as much as the teens. Or else the little kids will grow up to be the asinine teens!
Good behavior is taught. And a parent who thinks it is okay to watch their kid punch a character and ignore it as a *little* thing, completely boggles my mind.


The Princess

Sorry Princess Susi, but you have totally missunderstood what I've tried to say:

Princess Susi wrote:With all due respect, it all comes down to the parents teaching the kids respect and how to behave at Disney. For the two children that did punch Donald, look at the thousands of kids who did not. The parents are responsible for their kids actions and they should not have been rewarded. Why can thousands of children go through the day at Disney and not punch a character? Because their parents taught them it was wrong! The ones who do punch characters have been the result of poor parenting.

Well, that's obvious, but I'll bet the majority of children who don't hit Donald don't do it because their parents taught them otherwise. We don't need constant parenting to teach a child not to hit. Teachers, peers, general interactions in life teach us that. Conversely, there are plenty of parents who are shocked to discover that their children are actually bullies.

Princess Susi wrote:As far as the description of the characters as "giant stuffed animals"? No, I don't buy it. There are enough kids that are polite and do NOT kick and hit the characters. They do not see the characters as "giant stuffed animals". They see the characters as living breathing characters. Tigger is REAL. He IS Tigger, not a stuffed animal version of him. He walks and plays and poses. He is Tigger. And there is no need to tell a child it is a person dressed as Tigger so the child won't punch. Teach them NOT to punch!

Donald is REAL, NOT a giant stuffed animal that does not react. He IS Donald, walking and posing. NOT a stuffed animal. Same with ALL the characters!

Well, you don't have to buy that argument, but I'll stand by it. That's the way I felt when I saw those characters when I was 4 - I sort of knew that there were people in there but I imagined they were somehow animated versions of the real thing. Their method of propulsion is orthodox, but the concept that they are extensions of their cartoon/plush/animatronic image is hard to break. They are constantly beating on each other in the cartoons - especially poor Donald ("who's gets stuck, with all the bad luck? No one, but Donald Duck" etc.) If you can't imagine why a normally well-behaved child with probably decent parenting wouldn't do something misguided to a giant fluffy costumed character in a situation where they are over-excited to begin with (come on, working at WDW can't be nearly as exciting as being a young kid visiting there) then you've got to become more open to the concept. Put yourself in the kids' shoes. Frankly, we have no evidence to suggest (from the OP's item) that BOTH kids were involved and that there was any more than ONE punch. You see? You're making the same leap in judgement I was railing against: you automatically assume it was a beat-down, even though the OP SAID it was a "little girl". I take that to mean 5 years old or less. Very impressionable and silly at that age, you know!

Princess Susi wrote:Characters play around all the time with kids. They pose and hug and sometimes play/tussle with them. But Donald *baiting* the kids? That is a bit of an extreme statement. The characters do NOT bait the guests to fight. The characters are there to entertain and meet the guests, not to be pummeled by them. Anytime a guest hits or kicks or otherwise attacks a character, it is out of line. There is no excuse in the world for it. It is wrong. And the guest who does this should be escorted away.

Sorry, I'm talking from personal experience. I've been to WDW at least once a year since the year it was opened and I've seen PLENTY. 15 years ago I witnessed Donald "holding up his dukes" and getting punched in the arm by the kid he was "boxing with". I distinctly remember Donald holding his arm and "wincing" acting. It was exagerrated and stupid and I definitely didn't find it amusing. The kids in question were early teens and of course boys. Anyone watching that would think it was OK to box with Donald and I didn't see any attendant interfering. So maybe the rules have changed since then, but Donald was definitely "baiting" in this case. Because (as I said twice but apaprently it wasn't clear) the CHARACTER should walk away.

...continued (argh, 5k character limit and 150s between posts?!)

Princess Susi wrote:And to ignore this behavior? What does that do? It tells the kid that it is okay to punch the character. (Unless I am reading your statement entirely wrong. It sounds like you are saying it is better for the parents to ignore the kids punching the character and fighting each other as it will run itself out?) One should NEVER ignore aggression in a child. It says something about the child's perception and if it is ignored, the child will continue to do it and it may lead to worse things down the line. Then how do you stop it after you have *ignored* it for so long?

If the parent does nothing but ignore the behavior, the child gets the message it is okay. Wow! I cannot believe I just read a parent saying that a parent should ignore aggressive behavior in a child! This is why we see parents NOT taking responsibility for their kids behavior in the Parks. They ignore the child and hope the behavior will stop, while someone else is getting the brunt of the childs behavior. Sorry, I completely disagree with you, tho I respect your right to believe how you want.

OK, let's stop that line of discussion right now. I'm going to re-read my reply and it's possible that the help of a pronoun would reduce confusion, but my assertion (written twice) was that CHARACTERS - when faced with simple and unmalevolent physical attention by a small child - should react by turning their back and leaving. This should be a clear sign to the attendant that it's time to warn the child that "Donald doesn't like that" and move on to someone more worthy. Trying to educate the parents on their children's possible bad behaviour (see my previous arguments) only causes the employee to have to concede to the "customer is always right" mantra which means shit like freebies and "honored guest" in parades. Erase from your mind what you said about parents ignoring bad behaviour because that was an entirely wrong assertion.

Princess Susi wrote:And of course the characters act in an exxagerated manner. That is how they communicate! It is part of their *act*. But it is not part of their act to be baeten, kicked, bitten and have the parent ignore the child that is doing that! It is up to the parents to STOP the aggressive behavior, be it with a character or a sibling.

The two children were brats and allowed to act like brats in public and the parents are responsible for their brattiness. They need to teach them respect. Period. AND the little kids need to be punished for their behavior as much as the teens. Or else the little kids will grow up to be the asinine teens!
Good behavior is taught. And a parent who thinks it is okay to watch their kid punch a character and ignore it as a *little* thing, completely boggles my mind.

Well, you could have fooled me, the way Donald was acting the time I witnessed it. Regardless, there is no evidence (saying it again) that both children were involved and that there was more than one punch thrown and that the kids were even old enough to cause injury or even insult. The parents should have been watching, but it's entirely possible the kid was behind Donald when he threw the punch, and when Donald hams it up pretending he's "hurt" the kids might be forgiven for feeling it's all part of the act. Yup, it's up to the parents to educate and push but often they do a half-assed job.

Again: the character should have turned tail and left in a huff. That's more than enough to get the kids to sit up and take notice this isn't funny stuff. I'd argue that Donald gave a VERY mixed message when he acted hurt. That's not a good idea with young children. When you were very young, didn't your dad ever have pretend battles with your stuffed animals? My kids LOVE when their stuffed animals "leap up and attack me" just like that deadly rabbit in Monty Python's Holy Grail. Should be innocent fun, but perhaps you feel that would motivate attacks on Donald?

My original assertion that the OP did not give enough information to bring out some of the lynching replies I've been reading still stands.

The first time I said it, it was confusing because I mixed parents up with the characters, but the second time, it was clear:

and the character should have killed the act right there and then, turned tail and left. I'll say it again: the best way to deal with simple - and probably unintentional - aggression is to ignore it and those characters are essentially giant, walking stuffed animals to a kid

One thing that used to drive me nuts as a character's friend: Kids (usually boys aged 8 - 12) who thought that "high-five" meant "haul back and smack the character's hand as hard as they possibly can." You know what? That HURTS. And sometimes the parents would encourage it. Eventually we learn to see it coming and move our hands out of the way, leaving the kid to just smack air, but sometimes it's hard to see.

(Once, a friend of mine successfully evaded the dreaded hand-smack, and the kid's hand had so much momentum that he, um, smacked himself in the nuts. We had a REALLY HARD TIME not laughing out loud at that one. Kids: not coordinated.)

Amphigorey wrote:One thing that used to drive me nuts as a character's friend: Kids (usually boys aged 8 - 12) who thought that "high-five" meant "haul back and smack the character's hand as hard as they possibly can." You know what? That HURTS. And sometimes the parents would encourage it. Eventually we learn to see it coming and move our hands out of the way, leaving the kid to just smack air, but sometimes it's hard to see.

(Once, a friend of mine successfully evaded the dreaded hand-smack, and the kid's hand had so much momentum that he, um, smacked himself in the nuts. We had a REALLY HARD TIME not laughing out loud at that one. Kids: not coordinated.)

Well, one could argue that "high-fiving" isn't really a Disney character trait in the first place... ;)