Search

Passenger sparks debate over travellers sleeping in aisle seats

A heated debate has erupted online after a passenger suggested those sitting in an aisle seat should remain alert and awake for the entire flight, with the only exception being if it's a long-flight of seven hours or more. “A person sitting in an aisle seat on a plane should not be allowed to sleep," they wrote on Reddit. The reason behind it, according to the passenger, is to ensure that middle and window seat passengers can access the toilet, get served by flight attendants, and evacuate quickly in an emergency. “There are some exceptions and those would probably be on any flight longer than seven hours. “But anything shorter than that, you should not be sleeping. What if the middle or window passenger needs the bathroom, or if the flight attendant needs to hand them something – You’ll be in the way.” They added that a snoozing aisle seat passenger could potentially slow down evacuation during an emergency and put everyone at risk. “Now you would be risking people’s lives because you fell asleep,” they wrote. Social media users flocked to the Reddit thread to share their thoughts. “Nah, just poke me and wake me up if you need me to get up or do something," one wrote. “I’m well aware that I’m in the way, believe me. I’m certainly not there because I wanted to be in the aisle seat.” “If you sleep in an aisle seat, you deal with people getting up. That’s the unwritten rule," another added. A few others supported the idea, but shared their own take on plane etiquette. “My take on this: if you sleep in the aisle seat, you must be okay with being woken up multiple times to let the folks in your row get up. “Other flight rules: middle seat gets the armrest, and window seat must raise the window shade during taxi, takeoff, and landing so the rest of us in the row can watch.” Image: Shutterstock

Travel Tips

Restaurant sparks debate over “age discrimination”

A US restaurant has gone viral for their "age policy" after they decided to ban young people in a bid to create a “grown and sexy” vibe. Bliss Restaurant opened its doors in St. Louis, Missouri last month and have already caused an uproar for their unique policy where men under 35 and women under 30 are not allowed in. Owners Marvin Pate and his wife, said that they created the rule to help them “maintain a sophisticated environment, uphold our standards, and support the sustainability of our unique ambience”. Despite getting some backlash over the policy, they insist that they will stick to their code. “I think Bliss is a home away from home,” he told local news station KSDK. “You can come here and actually feel like you’re at a resort. People will feel like they’re on a vacation. “Of course, we have been getting a little backlash because of our policy, but that’s OK. We’re sticking to our code.” Pate is so committed to providing a space for older people, that if anyone looks younger than 30, they will get their ID's checked. “The restaurant is just something for the older people to come do, have a happy hour, come get some good food and not have to worry about some of the young folks who bring some of that drama,” assistant manager Erica Rhodes added. A few people have slammed the restaurant, suggesting that the rule was “age discrimination”. “The owner barely makes his own age requirement. Come on,” one vented online. “I’ve never seen a bar fight that wasn’t started by some drunk over 30,” another added. “I feel like it’s usually older people acting out nowadays," and another person replied: “Y’all ever seen a Karen under 30?” However, in the age of young influencers, many thought the restriction “makes sense". “Ah, Bliss, no influencers with those bright lights and filming while everyone else is trying to have a nice meal,” one said. “I like the concept, it’s time we mature adults can dine in a relaxing atmosphere without kids screaming, parents screaming, aggressive behaviours,” another added. “I love the age requirements. Please keep it like this. Don’t change it a lot of places back in the day had age requirements I’m glad that somebody finally taking it back protect your business I support,” a third wrote. “I love this idea!!!! Perfect!!!! And for all those gripping and complaining about it…..or have some smartelic comment….. just wait. One day your day is coming," another mused. Images: Instagram

Travel Trouble

Debate erupts over groom's unconventional footwear choice

In what seems to be a picture perfect wedding, eagle-eyed social media users spotted one odd detail. The couple were snapped standing at the altar, and while everything else about their outfit seemed flawless, one Reddit user called the groom out for wearing black Crocs and black socks to his wedding. “Imagine you get ready for three hours and your groom shows up in Crocs,” the user said. “Crocs would be a legit reason to say no at the altar,” another wrote, before adding: “Crocs are a valid reason to not date someone. They are horrible.” “He’s wearing a suit, maybe he has a problem with his feet that he can’t wear proper footwear,” a third commented “Surely no one, no matter how casual in style, voluntarily leaves the house in Crocs?” However many other social media users were quick to defend the wedding faux pas, with some saying that they wish they had done the same thing at their own weeding. “He probably has an injured foot or broken toe. He’s perfectly groomed (a pun) otherwise and obviously tried to camouflage his socks and crocs with his attire," one sympathised. “Ya I have really severe diabetic neuropathy in my feet, especially my toes. Doctor actually suggested Crocs as they have extra space and don’t restrict movement," another added. “I wore flip flops under my dress. I hate heels with a passion,” a third wrote. "He's wearing a nice suit, matching dark socks so I'm not seeing an issue here as he probably has some kind of foot or back injury or pain. If I were marrying him this wouldn't bother me," added a fourth. “Let the man get married in something comfortable. My wife could have shown up in a potato sack barefoot for all I cared, she is there to marry me, not for a fashion show," a fifth defended. Image: Reddit

Relationships

Obese woman sparks debate for not giving up extra seat for toddler

An obese woman has sparked debate online after refusing to give up the second seat she paid for to a fussy toddler. The 34-year-old booked the two seats for her cross-country flight to visit her family for Christmas because she was previously unable to comfortably fit in one seat. All was well until the young woman next to her demanded that she "squeeze into one seat" so her son could sit on the other. "I am obese," she admitted on the Reddit thread. "I'm actively working toward losing weight and I've made progress - but I booked an extra seat because I'm fat." She added that she insisted on keeping her seat because she paid for it, but the mum "made a big fuss over it, and she told the flight attendant I was stealing the seat from her son." "Then I showed her my boarding passes, proving that I paid for the extra seat. The flight attendant asked me if I could try to squeeze in, but I said no, that I wanted the extra seat I paid for." The woman claimed that the toddler was only 18 months old, so he didn't need his own seat and could've sat on his mum's lap for the duration of the flight. "I got dirty looks and passive-aggressive remarks from her for the entire flight and I do feel a little bad because the boy looked hard to control - but am I in the wrong?" she asked other social media users. Many shared their overwhelming support for the woman and slammed the mum and flight attendant for their "horrific" behaviour. "The mum is an a**hole for not buying a seat for her son and assuming someone else would give up a seat they paid for. Odds are she was hoping there'd be extra seats on the flight so she didn't have to pay and used the lap thing as a loophole," one commented. "What's even the point of the extra seat if the flight attendants are going to let entitled people bully others into giving it up?" another added. "People buy entire seats for high-end musical equipment. Not even people. Their lack of planning does not constitute an emergency on your part," a third wrote. However, there were a few others that said the woman was in the wrong for causing an inconvenience. "If you are so fat that you have to have more than one seat on an airplane then you are selfish," one said. "Flights overbook all the time especially during the holidays - how can you justify having two seats to yourself?" "How much room does a kid take up, seriously? Yeah the mum should've bought a seat but that doesn't mean you have to be selfish and cause two people discomfort," another commented. Image: Getty

Travel Trouble

Debate sparked over list of top 100 cities on the planet

The best 100 cities on the planet have been revealed, with one New Zealand city making the final list. The list was compiled by as part of an annual report by <a href="https://www.worldsbestcities.com" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Resonance Consultancy</a>, who rated major capital cities on three main factors: liveability, lovability and prosperity, with dozens of factors taken into account. These include educational attainment, GDP per capita, poverty rate, the number of quality restaurants, shops and nightclubs, walkability, the number of mapped bike routes, quality parks and museums, as well as ratings from TripAdvisor and Google. The top ten chart features four cities on the Asian continent, four in Europe and two in the U.S, while Auckland was also featured in the list, coming in at number 64. Taking out the number one spot this year is London, dubbed the "capital of capitals" that "reigns over all global cities" as the best metropolis in the world. The study proclaims it as the most liveable and the most lovable mecca, solidified by its winning culture and education attainment. The report concludes, "Despite crippling Covid lockdowns and economic devastation. Despite Brexit. Despite a war in Europe. The city is more indomitable and part of the global discourse than ever. From the Queen's death, to last autumn's chaotic drama at 10 Downing Street that finally calmed down with Rishi Sunak becoming prime minister, only to take heavy local election losses this spring, London is rarely quiet these days." Here's the full list of top 100 cities in the world. 1 - London, England 2 - Paris, France 3 - New York, USA 4 - Tokyo, Japan 5 - Singapore 6 - Dubai, United Arab Emirates 7 - San Francisco, USA 8 - Barcelona, Spain 9 - Amsterdam, Netherlands 10 - Seoul, South Korea 11 - Rome, Italy 12 - Prague, Czechia 13 - Madrid, Spain 14 - Berlin, Germany 15 - Los Angeles, USA 16 - Chicago, USA 17 - Washington, D.C., USA 18 - Beijing, China 19 - Istanbul, Turkey 20 - Dublin, Ireland 21 - Vienna, Austria 22 - Milan, Italy 23 - Toronto, Canada 24 - Boston, USA 25 - Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates 26 - Budapest, Hungary 27 - São Paulo, Brazil 28 - Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 29 - Stockholm, Sweden 30 - Munich, Germany 31 - Melbourne, Australia 32 - Lisbon, Portugal 33 - Zürich, Switzerland 34 - Seattle, USA 35 - Sydney, Australia 36 - Doha, Qatar 37 - Brussels, Belgium 38 - San Jose, USA 39 - Bangkok, Thailand 40 - Warsaw, Poland 41 - Copenhagen, Denmark 42 - Taipei, Taiwan 43 - Austin, USA 44 - Oslo, Norway 45 - Osaka, Japan 46 - Hong Kong, China 47 - Tel Aviv, Israel 48 - Athens, Greece 49 - Frankfurt, Germany 50 - Vancouver, Canada 51 - San Diego, USA 52 - Orlando, USA 53 - Helsinki, Finland 54 - Miami, USA 55 - Buenos Aires, Argentina 56 - Hamburg, Germany 57 - Brisbane, Australia 58 - Kuwait, Kuwait 59 - Las Vegas, USA 60 - Montreal, Canada 61 - Glasgow, Scotland 62 - Shanghai, China 63 - Rio de Janeiro, USA 64 - Auckland, New Zealand 65 - Atlanta, USA 66 - Houston, USA 67 - Busan, South Korea 68 - Philadelphia, USA 69 - Naples, Italy 70 - Denver, USA 71 - Nashville, USA 72 - Manchester, England 73 - Dallas, USA 74 - Liverpool, England 75 - Minneapolis, USA 76 - Mexico City, Mexico 77 - Minsk, Belarus 78 - Lyon, France 79 - Portland, USA 80 - Rotterdam, Netherlands 81 - Bogotá, Colombia 82 - Kraków, Poland 83 - Valencia, Spain 84 - Santiago, Chile 85 - Birmingham, England 86 - New Orleans, USA 87 - Bucharest, Romania 88 - Leeds, England 89 - Muscat, Oman 90 - Ottawa, Canada 91 - Cologne, Germany 92 - Charlotte, USA 93 - Calgary, Canada 94 - Nagoya, Japan 95 - Düsseldorf, Germany 96 - Hanoi, Vietnam 97 - Gothenburg, Sweden 98 - Sapporo, Japan 99 - Bilbao, Spain 100 - Baltimore, USA Image credits: Getty Images

International Travel

The debate: Should kids over 18 pay rent if they’re still living at home?

Parents have shared their thoughts on letting their children live at home rent free, as the age old debate of paying board stirred up some strong opinions. A <a href="https://honey.nine.com.au/money/should-children-over-the-age-of-18-pay-board-if-they-still-live-at-home-reader-poll-exclusive/77876711-2950-4bf3-bb30-716442a6fd74" target="_blank" rel="noopener">nine.com.au</a> reader survey asked the question: Should children over the age of 18 pay board if they still live at home? The responses were many and varied, as a whopping 72 percent of respondents said grown up kids should be contributing financially to the household. One person commented, "If children have employment, it's important that they clearly understand that life is not free and they need to budget, show accountability and responsibility." Another wrote, "If the children over 18 are working, then yes, they should contribute or give money to the parents to bank for them." Others said children shouldn't be expected to pay board, and would rather their kids save money for bigger financial commitments. "My parents did not charge me board even though I was working because they did not need the money and told me to save for my first car, which I did," one person shared. Another wrote their parenting tactic, writing, "I let my children not pay board. So they could save for a deposit on a house. They did and they all (3) have a house." Despite many people sharing their strong opinions on the matter, most respondents said it was not a black and white question, as many households have individual circumstances that affect their decision. "Depends on if they are working or not and what income the parents have. My son is 22 but unemployed due to health problem, we just pool our unemployment payment so it differs for each family situation, not a YES or No answer," one reader wrote. Another said it depends on their employment and study status, writing, "Yes if they're working almost full time, not if they're studying and just working part time to cover living expenses." The poll comes as Aussies have struggled with a rise in basic living costs, with <a href="https://www.finder.com.au/australian-household-spending-statistics" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ABS</a> data showing that Australian households spent a total of $1.2 trillion on what was classed as general living costs in 2022. This sum is close to $100 billion more than in 2021. The average household spent $130,353 in 2022, which is the equivalent of $2507 per week. This is a 20.4 per cent jump on the previous year. Image credits: Getty Images

Money & Banking

Heated argument between economy passengers reignites plane etiquette debate

A 12-second clip of two passengers arguing on a plane has reignited the age-old debate of whether it is acceptable to recline your seat on a plane. The viral video which was originally posted on TikTok and then re-shared on X, has racked up over 8 million views since Thursday. In the video, a frustrated woman was calling out another female passenger for pushing her seat the entire flight, right after they landed. “The whole trip she pushed my seat,” the woman said to a male passenger seated next to the female passenger accused of kicking her seat. “You seen it. You know she did.” “I’m allowed to put my seat back," she yelled repeatedly. Ian Miles Cheong, the user who posted the video on X, defended the woman saying: “She’s allowed to put her seat back. You don’t get to kick it repeatedly just because you want more space.” A few were on the woman's side and praised her for standing up for herself. “You are allowed! Period! You want space in front of you instead of pushing the seat, buy a seat with extra space or get your a** to business class. Reclining was put there for a reason,” one person wrote. “She was patient enough to wait till flight landed," they added. “If the seat is reclinable, recline it,” another commented. "What she’s saying is right. The woman has a right to put her seat back without someone kicking it," a third agreed. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> She’s allowed to put her seat back. You don’t get to kick it repeatedly just because you want more space. <a href="https://t.co/WELD7Qh4Re">pic.twitter.com/WELD7Qh4Re</a> — Ian Miles Cheong (@stillgray) <a href="https://twitter.com/stillgray/status/1719881310351863952?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 2, 2023</a></blockquote> However, others claimed that there was an unwritten rule that you shouldn't recline your seat, especially on a short-haul flight, adding that the recline feature should be scrapped from airplanes. “Putting your seat back in coach is an unspoken thing most people don’t do. It’s really the airline’s fault because they’ve made coach so cramped and tight that putting the seat back shouldn’t even be an option,” one commented. “Airline seats simply shouldn’t be able to recline. It intrudes on the already very little space a person has on the plane for the person behind them,” another added. “Really it’s the airline’s fault for cramming so many people in such a small space. They don’t call it cattle class for nothing,” a third wrote. One user understood both sides of the argument, and blamed the airlines for making the seats so cramped. "It can be annoying sometimes to be behind someone with their seat all the way, but if the airlines didn't want to allow that, it wouldn't happen," they wrote. "You don't kick the seat like a baby. Blame the airline, not the person doing what the airline says is fine." Images: Twitter

Travel Trouble

Forcing people to repay welfare ‘loans’ traps them in a poverty cycle – where is the policy debate about that?

<a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hanna-wilberg-1466649">Hanna Wilberg</a>, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-auckland-1305">University of Auckland</a> The National Party’s <a href="https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/09/26/more-sanctions-for-unemployed-beneficiaries-under-national/">pledge to apply sanctions</a> to unemployed people receiving a welfare payment, if they are “persistently” failing to meet the criteria for receiving the benefit, has attracted plenty of comment and <a href="https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/09/26/nationals-benefit-sanctions-plan-cruel-dehumanising-greens/">criticism</a>. Less talked about has been the party’s promise to index benefits to inflation to keep pace with the cost of living. This might at least provide some relief to those struggling to make ends meet on welfare, though is not clear how much difference it would make to the current system of indexing benefits to wages. In any case, this alone it is unlikely to break the cycle of poverty many find themselves in. One of the major drivers of this is the way the welfare system pushes some of the most vulnerable people into debt with loans for things such as school uniforms, power bills and car repairs. The government provides one-off grants to cover benefit shortfalls. But most of these grants are essentially loans. People receiving benefits are required to repay the government through weekly deductions from their normal benefits – which leaves them with even less money to survive on each week. With <a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/pou-tiaki/132980318/auckland-mother-serves-up-cereal-for-dinner-due-to-rising-food-costs">rising costs</a>, the situation is only getting worse for many of the 351,756 New Zealanders <a href="https://figure.nz/chart/TtiUrpceJruy058e-ITw010dHsM6bvA2a">accessing one of the main benefits</a>. <h2>Our whittled down welfare state</h2> Broadly, there are three levels of government benefits in our current system. The main benefits (such as jobseeker, sole parent and supported living payment) <a href="https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/products/benefit-rates/benefit-rates-april-2023.html">pay a fixed weekly amount</a>. The jobseeker benefit rate is set at NZ$337.74 and sole parents receive $472.79 a week. Those on benefits have access to a second level of benefits – weekly supplementary benefits such as an <a href="https://www.workandincome.govt.nz/products/a-z-benefits/accommodation-supplement.html">accommodation supplement</a> and other allowances or tax credits. The third level of support is one-off discretionary payments for specific essential needs. Those on benefits cannot realistically make ends meet without repeated use of these one-off payments, unless they use assistance from elsewhere – such as family, charity or borrowing from loan sharks. This problem has been building for decades. <h2>Benefits have been too low for too long</h2> In the 1970s, the <a href="https://mro.massey.ac.nz/handle/10179/12967">Royal Commission on Social Security</a> declared the system should provide “a standard of living consistent with human dignity and approaching that enjoyed by the majority”. But Ruth Richardson’s “<a href="https://www.stuff.co.nz/the-press/christchurch-life/124978983/1991-the-mother-of-all-budgets">mother of all budgets</a>” in 1991 slashed benefits. Rates never recovered and today’s <a href="https://www.1news.co.nz/2022/03/29/benefit-increases-will-still-leave-families-locked-in-poverty/">benefits are not enough to live on</a>. In 2018, the <a href="https://www.weag.govt.nz/">Welfare Expert Advisory Group</a> looked at how much money households need in two lifestyle scenarios: bare essentials and a minimum level of participation in the community, such as playing a sport and taking public transport. The main benefits plus supplementary allowances did not meet the cost of the bare essentials, let alone minimal participation. The Labour government has since <a href="https://www.beehive.govt.nz/release/government-delivers-income-increases-over-14-million-new-zealanders">increased benefit rates</a>, meaning they are now slightly above those recommended by the advisory group. But those recommendations were made in 2019 and don’t take into account the <a href="https://www.stats.govt.nz/news/annual-inflation-at-6-0-percent">sharp rise in inflation</a> since then. Advocacy group <a href="https://fairerfuture.org.nz/">Fairer Future</a> published an updated assessment in 2022 – nine out of 13 types of households still can’t meet their core costs with the current benefit rates. <h2>How ‘advances’ create debt traps</h2> When they don’t have money for an essential need, people on benefits can receive a “special needs grant”, which doesn’t have to be repaid. But in practice, Work and Income virtually never makes this type of grant for anything except food and some other specific items, such as some health travel costs or emergency dental treatment. For <a href="https://www.1news.co.nz/2023/02/27/very-stressful-beneficiary-says-he-cant-afford-msd-debt/">all other essential needs</a> – such as school uniforms, car repairs, replacing essential appliances, overdue rent, power bills and tenancy bonds – a one-off payment called an “advance” is used. Advances are loans and have to be paid back. There are several issues with these types of loans. First, people on benefits are racking up thousands of dollars worth of debts to cover their essential needs. It serves to trap them in financial difficulties for the foreseeable future. As long as they remain on benefits or low incomes, it’s difficult to repay these debts. And the <a href="https://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2018/0032/latest/whole.html">Social Security Act 2018</a> doesn’t allow the Ministry of Social Development (MSD) to waive debts. <h2>Contradictory policies</h2> Another problem is that people on benefits have to start repaying their debt straight away, with weekly deductions coming out of their already limited benefit. Each new advance results in a further weekly deduction. Often these add up to $50 a week or more. MSD policy says repayments should not add up to more than $40 a week, but that is often ignored. This happens because the law stipulates that each individual debt should be repaid in no more than two years, unless there are exceptional circumstances. Paying this debt off in two years often requires total deductions to be much higher than $40. The third issue is that one-off payments can be refused regardless of the need. That is because there are two provisions pulling in opposite directions. On the one hand the law says a payment should be made if not making it would cause serious hardship. But on the other hand, the law also says payments should not be made if the person already has too much debt. People receiving benefits and their case managers face the choice between more debt and higher repayments, or failing to meet an essential need. <h2>Ways to start easing the burden</h2> So what is the fix? A great deal could be achieved by just changing the policies and practices followed by Work and Income. Case managers have the discretion to make non-recoverable grants for non-food essential needs. These could and should be used when someone has an essential need, particularly when they already have significant debt. Weekly deductions for debts could also be automatically made very low. When it comes to changing the law, the best solution would be to make weekly benefit rates adequate to live on. The government could also make these benefit debts similar to student loans, with no repayments required until the person is off the benefit and their income is above a certain threshold. However we do it, surely it must be time to do something to fix this poverty trap.<img style="border: none !important; box-shadow: none !important; margin: 0 !important; max-height: 1px !important; max-width: 1px !important; min-height: 1px !important; min-width: 1px !important; opacity: 0 !important; outline: none !important; padding: 0 !important;" src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/212528/count.gif?distributor=republish-lightbox-basic" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" /> <a href="https://theconversation.com/profiles/hanna-wilberg-1466649">Hanna Wilberg</a>, Associate professor - Law, <a href="https://theconversation.com/institutions/university-of-auckland-1305">University of Auckland</a> Image credits: Getty Images This article is republished from <a href="https://theconversation.com">The Conversation</a> under a Creative Commons license. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/forcing-people-to-repay-welfare-loans-traps-them-in-a-poverty-cycle-where-is-the-policy-debate-about-that-212528">original article</a>.

Money & Banking

Gen X dad’s odd punishment for four-year-old son sparks debate

A self-proclaimed Gen X dad has sparked a furious debate after a video clip of him punishing his four-year-old son went viral on TikTok. Wisconsin-based dad Derek Longstreth said he had no other choice but to make his young son, Truman, heave massive jugs of water across the yard because he hit his mum. “All right little man, let's go, you've got all these jugs to carry,” he told his son, as he showed five water jugs. “He hit his mom today, so, spanking is out of the question because you liberals made it so we can’t spank our children any more,” he explained. The father-of-one recorded his son struggling to carry the water jugs, but offered him words of encouragement as the boy tried to carry it across the yard. “Let's go, young man. I love you just so you know, but you're not going to hit your mom,” he said. “You can do it. I love you son but we don't hit women in this family.” Longstreth then explained why he chose to punish his son this way, and said that spanking your child is not allowed in Wisconsin. “He's four. We're not allowed to spank in the state of Wisconsin because some liberals are saying there are better ways.” “'Well liberals, what's the better way?” <div><iframe title="tiktok embed" src="https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2Fembed%2Fv2%2F7256440921728863530&display_name=tiktok&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2F%40hamburgerjones23%2Fvideo%2F7256440921728863530&image=https%3A%2F%2Fp19-sign.tiktokcdn-us.com%2Fobj%2Ftos-useast5-p-0068-tx%2Fc29492b9251f41139161e469b64b4d0e%3Fx-expires%3D1689789600%26x-signature%3DRnuVqM3A6bo1miOskT3JdYiBlWA%253D&key=5b465a7e134d4f09b4e6901220de11f0&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=tiktok" width="340" height="700" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div> After the father complained about the liberals, he continued to try and teach Truman a lesson, despite the child complaining that he “can’t do it” multiple times throughout the video. At the end of the clip, Longstreth asks his son: “Are you going to hit your mom again?” “No,” the four-year-old responded. Longstreth also made his son apologise for hitting his mum. The nine-minute clip has racked up over 1.9 million views, while many applauded the father for his “gentle” ways of parenting and disciplining his son, others slammed him for “abuse”. “Big respect to this dad. He gave the kid a hard job with encouragement and reassurance that he loves him as well as why the kid had to do it,” wrote one person. “This is honestly probably the best and most effective way to discipline your child. Every moment they do this they are thinking about what they did,” commented another. “Good dad, raising his son right, teaching him to never lay his hands on any women especially his momma. Very good,” agreed a third. “This is like so gentle yet so disciplining in all the good ways,” wrote a fourth. However, other viewers disagreed with the father’s method. “This is abuse.... I said what I said. I'm sorry he hit his mom though, talking it out is fine. He's too little for this,” commented one person. “Lol. When people ask what the next traumas will be, it’ll be every moment being a phone in their face. Did you need to post this? Pathetic,” wrote another. “You don't want him to associate work as punishment. how about no tv, no sweets, something that is usually a privilege. work is something that is good,” added another user. Images: TikTok

Family & Pets

Plane “crime” reignites long standing debate

A travel influencer has reignited the age-old debate over what personal items truly belong in a plane’s overhead lockers, after they called out passengers for filling the compartments with their jackets. Snapping a photo on the on-board “crime”, online observers were quick to chime in with their thoughts on the matter. Given the online discourse around the controversial jacket storage, a poll conducted by nine.com.au found that most people agreed that there was nothing wrong with the action. While most people agreed that filling up the lockers with jackets is a frustrating move, an overwhelming 90% agreed that it was fine to do. "I thought that was exactly what an overhead locker was for???" one reader commented. However, according to globetrotters Matt and Hillary, who posted the original video on TikTok, doing so is a "crime". "If you plan to fly in 2023, please don't be the people who fill up an entire overhead cabinet with your jackets. It's an absolute waste of space. They could sit on your lap or most airlines have hooks." Instead, a more common gripe for travellers, according to the online poll, was the size of some people's 'carry on' luggage. "I think it's time the airlines stamped out some of the sizes of cases that get taken on as hand luggage," one person said. "Jackets and small bags should be the only items in the overhead locker. Too many people bring way too much carry-on luggage and take up the space of others, I might add this is my pet peeve when flying anywhere," another agreed. "It amazes me that folks get on aeroplanes with suitcases or sacks they expect to squeeze into the overhead lockers without any thought or consideration for their fellow travellers," was another frustrated reply. Image credits: TikTok

Travel Tips

Influencer’s extensive list of plane etiquette rules reignites age-old debate

A travel influencer has shared an extensive list of what you should and shouldn’t do on a plane, reigniting an age-old debate about in-flight etiquette. Ben Keenan, a frequent traveller from Seattle in the US, posted his list of dos and don’ts in a now-viral TikTok, saying it is “disgusting” for a passenger to take off their shoes and you should always check behind before reclining your seat. Keenan begins his list with his least controversial point, saying travellers should always greet their flight attendants when boarding the plane, pointing out that it costs nothing to be friendly and polite. He then broaches the topic of taking off your shoes on a plane, which was met with mixed responses. “Do not take off your shoes or socks when you’re sitting in your seat, you disgusting people,” he said. He went on to urge people not to pick an aisle seat if you plan on sleeping through your journey. “When selecting your seat before the flight, go ahead and determine what type of flyer you are. Are you someone that sleeps or are you someone that’s awake?” he said. “Because if you’re on an aisle seat, you need to be prepared to stand up and move out of the way multiple times during the flight – and I know this sucks but that truly means that you should not be a sleeper.” He continued, “Speaking of sleeping on the plane, if you’re going to recline your seat to do that, go ahead and make sure the people behind you aren’t resting their head on your seat or using that tray table because do you know how many times I’ve been smashed in the head by somebody who just aggressively leans back.” Keenan’s list of etiquette rules was met with a mixed response, with people both praising and criticising certain unspoken rules. “Nope … definitely taking my shoes off! And I’m not turning back to check … I will recline gently though,” one traveller said. “If it is a long flight, shoes are allowed to come off (8+ hours),” another wrote. One flyer agreed with Keenan’s rules, admitting, “I approach every flight like I'm being graded, and the flight attendants will give me an A+ for my flight etiquette.” Another bemused viewer put it simply, writing, “I’ve never flown but this all seems like common sense?” Image credits: TikTok

Travel Tips

"Too busy marching": Debate rages over fiery Anzac Day post

A man has shared a controversial claim on Twitter about Australia’s relationship to Anzac Day, sparking a fiery debate. Australians and New Zealanders gathered to commemorate the 108th anniversary of the landing of Anzac troops at Gallipoli in World War I on April 25th. Services were held all over both countries to mark the day of remembrance. On May 34th, Brad Turner, who says he is a former Navy submariner and AFP officer, took to Twitter to argue that the values of the annual celebration were “no longer reflected” by Australia. He notably called out Australia’s confrontation with China on behalf of the US. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> Australia is a society that dutifully gets up early every April 25 to gather, Mach & remember our Dead. Speeches are made, politicians speak of sacrifice & honour whilst possessing or embodying neither. That same society that holds paramount ideals of egalitarianism, mateship &… <a href="https://t.co/sbHHbRiYAF">pic.twitter.com/sbHHbRiYAF</a> — Brad Turner (@tur14865416) <a href="https://twitter.com/tur14865416/status/1650394428841037826?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 24, 2023</a></blockquote> “Australia is a society that dutifully gets up early every April 25 to gather, march and remember our dead,” he wrote in the post, which has been viewed more than 20,000 times. “Speeches are made, politicians speak of sacrifice and honour whilst possessing or embodying neither. That same society that holds paramount ideals of egalitarianism, mateship and sacrifice is forgotten on the other 364 days of the year. “On those days Australia marches right past veteran suicides, war crimes, illegal wars and widespread inequality and corruption. Is it really a day of remembrance? Or is it theatrics so society can pretend they care about victims of war or our conduct as a country with an aim to feel better about apathy and inaction as a nation towards these things. “We don’t notice any of these things because we are too busy marching. But this time it’s headlong into another pointless American war with China. The things we celebrate about our nation on Anzac Day are sadly no longer reflected in Australia’s actions. They have not been in some time.” Several people online took the same stance as Mr Turner. “I don’t like Anzac Day. It overlooks our follies in joining Britain and US wars. WWII was noble. The rest were con jobs to enrich the industrialists. Our people have all these solemn events only to assuage their ‘je ne c’est quoi’ because they don’t feel any guilt but should,” one wrote. “Our politicians spend more on memorial monuments and museums that they can put their name on a plaque on the wall than they do for the actual veterans who are suffering from PTSD or other ‘souvenirs’ they have brought back from their tours,” another said. “Flag waving patriotism has taken over Anzac Day. We are one step away from parades of military hardware while the populace salute. What should be a reflection on the horrors of war has become it‘s celebration. John Howard did this,” a third added. “Listening to the Labor government yesterday follow in the footsteps of the Coalition, justifying spending billions antagonising China at America’s request is not the ‘lest we forget’ I think about,” a fourth wrote. Others fired back and said Anzac Day was still important. “Mate … it’s about remembering the sacrifice and loss of our mates … lest we forget,” one wrote, adding, “I don’t worry about [politicians] anymore grandstanding on the day. It’s our day not theirs to remember our mates.” Another wrote, “It is tradition. It separates the fluff of ordinary living to reflect on sacrifice not only of the dead, of lives unlived, of the unfathomable grief but also of the living dealing with the trauma and moral injury of tooth and claw war. It is not a celebration which distracts.” “I understand this perspective, but at the same time I ask myself — is there any harm in this form national reflection? I agree there have been some military follies following the absolute necessity of WWII, but would add that there is no guarantee that the next engagement is such,” a third wrote. Image credit: Shutterstock

News

Pregnant woman’s plane dilemma sparks debate

In a tale as old as modern time, the internet has erupted over a tweet. When professional American baseball player Anthony Bass shared his wife Sydney Rae Bass’s in-flight trouble to Twitter, he was expecting an outpouring of support, and perhaps an answer from the airline. Instead, he generated a heated debate over plane etiquette, entitlement, and the responsibilities of parenting - namely, cleaning up after your own kids. In the viral tweet, Anthony - who was not with his family at the time of the incident - wrote that a flight attendant had made the 22-week pregnant Sydney “get on her hands and knees” to clean up the mess their 2-year-old daughter had made with her popcorn. <blockquote class="twitter-tweet"> The flight attendant <a href="https://twitter.com/united?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@united</a> just made my 22 week pregnant wife traveling with a 5 year old and 2 year old get on her hands and knees to pick up the popcorn mess by my youngest daughter. Are you kidding me?!?! <a href="https://t.co/vLYyLyJC54">pic.twitter.com/vLYyLyJC54</a> — Anthony Bass (@AnthonyBass52) <a href="https://twitter.com/AnthonyBass52/status/1647632911720390664?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 16, 2023</a></blockquote> The airline was quick to ask Anthony for more information in the comment section, but with over 70 million views - and counting - and 10,000 likes, many had questions. And because it was the internet, where filters tend to fall to the wayside, people had no qualms about sharing their opinion with the irate father. “Genuinely curious who should clean up the mess your 2 year old made?” one asked him. “As a parent of three kids I am the one responsible for them.” Anthony, who was having none of it, fired back, “The cleaning crew they hire!” “It's called being considerate,” someone else pointed out, “and we all know planes don't get thoroughly cleaned during a day of flying.” In one popular response, one user reminded the sports star that “just because you’re rich doesn’t mean everyone is your servant. I hope this helps.” One former flight attendant chimed in as well, telling Anthony that “a flight attendant is there for safety, not to pick up after you or your children.” “Shouldn't have even had to ask, TBH [to be honest],” another said. “I have three kids, just flew coach 12 hours, and was able to clean up after them - for every mess. It’s called parenting,” one shared. “Do you expect park janitors to clean up after your pet? No; Your child, your responsibility.” Although the majority were in agreement that it was “the most pretentious, arrogant, self-absorbed tweet of all time”, there were still those in Anthony’s corner. As one such supporter wrote, “I think it’s disgusting that the stewardess made a pregnant woman clean up a mess if they’re going to supply popcorn on the aeroplane. Be ready for messes to clean up if you don’t like it, don’t serve popcorn.” Perhaps the loudest - and most passionate - on their team was Sydney Rae’s sister, Jessie James Decker. The country singer and reality TV star took to Instagram to share her thoughts in a now expired story, where she wrote that she had just received a text from Sydney from her flight, and “as you know, she is five months pregnant, high-risk, and also travelling alone with her two small children. “Blaire [their 2-year-old] accidentally spilled some popcorn in the aisle, and the flight attendant came up to Sydney with a trash bag and a wet wipe, telling her the captain wants Syd to clean up every drop. "My poor sister is on her hands and knees, crying in the aisle, completely humiliated and exhausted, with her children while everyone else watched.” Images: Twitter

Travel Trouble

"The '80s were the best!": Michael Bublé wins debate with adorable throwback pics

Michael Bublé has taken a stand on which decade is the best, sharing some adorable childhood photos to prove his point. The Canadian crooner declared that the "80's were the best!" while posting a series of sweet photos of himself as a kid. "The 80’s were the best! Change my mind," Bublé said in the caption of his post. The photos showed Bublé in front of a Christmas tree, on top of a playground, and two other pictures of him posing on an armchair in his family's lounge room. The post has racked up over 32,000 likes, with many of his fans agreeing that the 1980s was the best decade. One person shared their experience of the 80s, commenting, "We lived in the moment. Children knocked on doors when we wanted to play with our friends. Happy days, & rode our bikes until the street lights turned on. Drive in's, rollerblades, & mixed cassette tapes. It was simple. So easy. And so much fun. Absolutely the best!" Another fan said, "The 80s were great, but then you weren’t touring live in the 80s so weren’t the best, just good enough." Image credits: Instagram / Getty Images

Family & Pets

"You heard it here for the first time": Kate Winslet settles 25-year Titanic debate

Kate Winslet has finally weighed in on what is arguably the biggest debate in cinematic history: was there room for Jack on the floating door at the end of Titanic? The actress, who plays Rose in the film and got prime position on the famous piece of debris, has given her take on if there was space for Jack, played by Leo DiCaprio before his demise. Speaking on the <a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/au/podcast/happy-sad-confused/id827905050">Happy Sad Confused Podcast</a>, the 47-year-old actress said, "I don’t f**king know. That’s the answer. I don’t f**king know.” "Look, all I can tell you is, I do have a decent understanding of water and how it behaves." Drawing on her experiences with water sports like paddle boarding, scuba diving and kitesurfing, she says she has a decent understanding of how the ocean behaves. "If you put two adults on a stand-up paddle board, it becomes immediately, extremely unstable. That is for sure," she said. "I have to be honest. I actually don’t believe that we would have survived if we had both gotten on that door. I think he would have fit, but it would have tipped and it would not have been a sustainable idea." "So, you heard it here for the first time," she exclaimed. "Yes, he could have fit on that door. But it would not have stayed afloat. It wouldn’t." The debate resurfaced in recent weeks after Titanic director James Cameron commissioned a forensic analysis on the famous scene. Speaking to the <a href="https://torontosun.com/">Toronto Sun</a>, Cameron said he got experts to replicate the scene in order to "put this whole thing to rest and drive a stake through its heart once and for all." He said, "We took two stunt people who were the same body mass as Kate and Leo and we put sensors all over them and inside them and we put them in ice water and we tested to see whether they could have survived through a variety of methods and the answer was - there was no way they both could have survived. Only one could survive." Image credits: Paramount Pictures / Getty Images

Movies

"There's no joy": Madonna's unusual family pics spark debate

Legendary pop icon Madonna has shared a rare family photo, as she and her six children gathered to celebrate Thanksgiving in New York. Madonna posed with children Lourdes Leon, 26, Rocco Ritchie, 22, David Banda, 17, Mercy James, 16 and 10-year-old twins Stelle and Estere Ciccone. The collection of photos was shared to Instagram, where fans have commented on the children’s choice of fashion and neutral expressions. Among the almost 9000 comments, one follower wrote: “Y’all the Addams Family?” while another wrote: “There’s no joy in these photos.” Many fans were simply thrilled to see these rare photos of the music legend and all her children together on the special American holiday. “It’s a picture, you can’t tell in a photo what’s real,” wrote one fan while another believed the family’s blank expressions were “... on purpose lol.” In 2019 Madonna revealed to Vogue what life is really like for her being a solo-mother to six: “Nobody does what I do. And that’s kind of scary.” Images: Instagram

AI may have solved a debate on whether a dinoprint was from a herbivore or meat eater

An international team of researchers has, for the first time, used AI to analyse the tracks of dinosaurs, and the AI has come out on top – beating trained palaeontologists at their own game. “In extreme examples of theropod and ornithopod footprints, their footprint shapes are easy to tell apart -theropod with long, narrow toes and ornithopods with short, dumpy toes. But it is the tracks that are in-between these shapes that are not so clear cut in terms of who made them,” one of the researchers, University of Queensland palaeontologist Dr Anthony Romilio, told Cosmos. “We wanted to see if AI could learn these differences and, if so, then could be tested in distinguishing more challenging three-toed footprints.” Theropods are meat eating dinosaurs, while ornithopods are plant eating, and getting this analysis wrong can alter the data which shows diversity and abundance of dinosaurs in the area, or could even change what we think are the behaviours of certain dinos. One set of dinosaur prints in particular had been a struggle for the researchers to analyse. Large footprints at the Dinosaur Stampede National monument in Queensland had divided Romilio and his colleagues. The mysterious tracks were thought to be left during the mid-Cretaceous Period, around 93 million years ago, and could have been from either a meat eating theropod or a plant eating ornithopod. “I consider them footprints of a plant-eater while my colleagues share the much wider consensus that they are theropod tracks.” So, an AI called a Convolutional Neutral Network, was brought in to be a deciding factor. “We were pretty stuck, so thank god for modern technology,” says <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jens-Lallensack" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dr Jens Lallensack</a>, lead author from Liverpool John Moores University in the UK. “In our research team of three, one person was pro-meat-eater, one person was undecided, and one was pro-plant-eater. <div class="newsletter-box"> <div id="wpcf7-f6-p224866-o1" class="wpcf7" dir="ltr" lang="en-US" role="form"> </div> </div> “So – to really check our science – we decided to go to five experts for clarification, plus use AI.” The AI was given nearly 1,500 already known tracks to learn which dinosaurs were which. The tracks were simple line drawings to make it easier for the AI to analyse. Then they began testing. Firstly, 36 new tracks were given to a team of experts, the AI and the researchers. “Each of us had to sort these into the categories of footprints left by meat-eaters and those by plant-eaters,” says Romilio. “In this the ai was the clear winner with 90% correctly identified. Me and one of my colleagues came next with ~75% correct.” Then, they went for the crown jewel – the Dinosaur Stampede National monument tracks. When the AI analysed this it came back with a pretty strong result that they’re plant eating ornithopod tracks. It’s not entirely sure though, the data suggests that there’s a 1 in 5,000,000 chance it could be a theropod instead. This is still early days for using AI in this way. In the future. the researchers are hoping for funding for a FrogID style app which anyone could use to analyse dinosaur tracks. “Our hope is to develop an app so anyone can take a photo on their smartphone, use the app and it will tell you what type of dinosaur track it is,” says Romilio. “It will also be useful for drone work survey for dinosaur tracksites, collecting and analysing image data and identifying fossil footprints remotely.” The paper has been published in the <a href="https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2022.0588" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Royal Society Interface</a>. <img id="cosmos-post-tracker" style="opacity: 0; height: 1px!important; width: 1px!important; border: 0!important; position: absolute!important; z-index: -1!important;" src="https://syndication.cosmosmagazine.com/?id=224866&title=AI+may+have+solved+a+debate+on+whether+a+dinoprint+was+from+a+herbivore+or+meat+eater" width="1" height="1" /> <div id="contributors"> <a href="https://cosmosmagazine.com/history/dinosaur-ai-theropod-ornithopods/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">This article</a> was originally published on Cosmos Magazine and was written by Jacinta Bowler. Image: Getty Images </div>

Technology

Mum's list of insane babysitter requirements sparks debate

A man on TikTok has clapped back at a very strange babysitter's list of requirements, posted by a mother in a local bulletin. In a video shared to social media, Collins O aka @thatboycollins revealed the list and pointed out how extreme and unrealistic the requirements really are. * "Babysitter needed ASAP," the ad read. "I need someone to look after my four kids (aged two, three, five and seven) from noon to 6 pm Monday to Friday.” The prerequisites laid out by the mother require applicants to "be a great cook and avid cleaner", "be over 25-years-old" and have a minimum education of a "master's degree”. <blockquote class="tiktok-embed" style="max-width: 605px; min-width: 325px;" cite="https://www.tiktok.com/@thatboycollins/video/7154155085965495598" data-video-id="7154155085965495598"> <section><a title="@thatboycollins" href="https://www.tiktok.com/@thatboycollins?refer=embed" target="_blank" rel="noopener">@thatboycollins</a> Why did Tiktok take this down..😂 <a title="♬ original sound - Collins O" href="https://www.tiktok.com/music/original-sound-7154155088645212971?refer=embed" target="_blank" rel="noopener">♬ original sound - Collins O</a></section> </blockquote> The requirements became more restrictive as the list went on, saying that applicants couldn't have "social media accounts", adding "I don't need my kids seeing that". It also stated "no drinking, no smoking, not even vaping!" and "no tattoos or piercings.” In order to get the job, applicants needed to have "five professional references" and stated that a "background check and drug test [would] be carried out." Collins was blown away by the audacity of the mum, and so were viewers. It was then revealed that the job only pays a shocking $200 per WEEK. At the bottom of the page, a sentence prompted applicants to contact 'Tammy' to apply for the job. "Tammy, with all due disrespect, go to hell," Collins joked. Amassing a huge 300,000 views, it seems the audience agreed with him too. Images: TikTok

Family & Pets

How should your cutlery drawer be arranged? Huge debate sparks online

A New Zealander has unwittingly set off a furious debate about how one should arrange their cutlery drawer, in a post on social media platform <a href="https://www.reddit.com/r/newzealand/comments/9of3ee/how_does_nz_arrange_the_cutlery_drawer/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Reddit</a>. Should it be a left-right configuration of fork, knife, spoon? Or knife, fork, spoon? And which direction do you place the head of the cutlery? The post was headlined: “How does NZ arrange the cutlery drawer?” “How is the cutlery drawer arranged in your kitchen?” they wrote. “My whole life I’ve gone with the (L-R) fork, knife, spoon configuration (teaspoons below) but have stayed places where knives are on the far left.” “What’s the setup at your place?” As it turns out, people are very passionate when it comes to their cutlery configuration of choice, with hundreds giving their opinion. Some became quite angry about the issue voicing some very cutting commentary. “I actually get so irate over this,” said one Reddit user. One person spoke of a familiar cutlery situation many of us will be familiar with – both order and chaos. “Large knives, knives, forks, spoons, teaspoons at the bottom,” they said of their ordered drawer. “And then other two drawers a mess of utensils until you have a clean out every three years, because you just can’t find the f***ing quarter cup.” Another user agreed, saying, “This is the standard my household follows.” And one person praised the owner of the cutlery drawer as a “cultured individual with a fine taste in cutlery organisation”. But the debate was far from over. The utensil talk became even more controversial with the issue of which direction you should place the head of your knives, spoons and forks. Should it be towards the drawer handle or to the back of the drawer? “What sort of animal would arrange the handles towards the back of the drawer?” wrote one person. But as another Reddit user pointed out, “If all the handles are at the front then all forks, knives and spoons look the same.” However, another commenter admitted their cutlery drawer was “pure chaos”. “I just throw them all in the drawer together, no organisation, pure chaos,” they wrote. When someone branded the disrupter a “monster” they replied, “Survival of the fittest.” Image: Getty Images

Home & Garden

Debate rages over "most reclined seat in the history of aviation"

Frustrated travellers have called out a passenger for reclining his seat all the way on a short flight. The Pointer Brothers shared a video to TikTok saying it’s the “easiest red card of all time” when someone reclines their seat when there’s not enough room to begin with. “5 hour flight home…is this the most reclined seat in the history of aviation,” their caption read. The video shows one of the brothers annoyed at being squished in his seat because of the person in front of him being reclined. At one point he moves really close to the passenger's head to show his frustration. <div><iframe title="tiktok embed" src="https://cdn.embedly.com/widgets/media.html?src=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2Fembed%2Fv2%2F7156382025732132142&display_name=tiktok&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.tiktok.com%2F%40thepointerbrothers_%2Fvideo%2F7156382025732132142%3Fis_copy_url%3D1%26is_from_webapp%3Dv1%26lang%3Den&image=https%3A%2F%2Fp16-sign.tiktokcdn-us.com%2Fobj%2Ftos-useast5-p-0068-tx%2F0f73e1499904406bb843f4d28028f3d4_1666225042%3Fx-expires%3D1667966400%26x-signature%3DK1evkklXcSTqSnlVDK5VeUqWwl4%253D&key=59e3ae3acaa649a5a98672932445e203&type=text%2Fhtml&schema=tiktok" width="340" height="700" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div> Viewers said the brothers have a point in calling the issue out as planes are already cramped enough. “Those seats should just not recline, it’s cramped enough and I already don’t have leg room,” someone wrote. “That's when passive-aggressive tray adjustments commence,” another commented. “I’m 6’3” and I have never reclined my seat. I can’t bring myself to push into others' space, the dang planes are small the way it is,” someone else pointed out. Others however said the brothers were in the wrong and everyone is entitled to recline their seat. “So many people in this comments section don't understand how legroom works... reclining your seat doesn't keep your knees from being smashed,” someone said. “Wah people are using the seats for what they're for. Want more room, get first class,” another wrote. Images: TikTok

Travel Trouble

Over 60

News

Shop

Catalogues

Travel

Health

Lifestyle

Finance

Entertainment

Property

Information

Keep up to date

Search

Passenger sparks debate over travellers sleeping in aisle seats

Restaurant sparks debate over “age discrimination”

Debate erupts over groom's unconventional footwear choice

Obese woman sparks debate for not giving up extra seat for toddler

Debate sparked over list of top 100 cities on the planet

The debate: Should kids over 18 pay rent if they’re still living at home?

Heated argument between economy passengers reignites plane etiquette debate

Forcing people to repay welfare ‘loans’ traps them in a poverty cycle – where is the policy debate about that?

Gen X dad’s odd punishment for four-year-old son sparks debate

Plane “crime” reignites long standing debate

Influencer’s extensive list of plane etiquette rules reignites age-old debate

"Too busy marching": Debate rages over fiery Anzac Day post

Pregnant woman’s plane dilemma sparks debate

"The '80s were the best!": Michael Bublé wins debate with adorable throwback pics

"You heard it here for the first time": Kate Winslet settles 25-year Titanic debate

"There's no joy": Madonna's unusual family pics spark debate

AI may have solved a debate on whether a dinoprint was from a herbivore or meat eater

Mum's list of insane babysitter requirements sparks debate

How should your cutlery drawer be arranged? Huge debate sparks online

Debate rages over "most reclined seat in the history of aviation"