THE travel writer Simon Calder has an amusing piece about the former seven-sector flight from Gatwick to Sydney.
"Before it was banned from Europe's skies, Garuda Indonesia provided a pleasingly slow-track to Australia." It went Gatwick to Zurich, on to Abu Dhabi where the "plane refuelled on the apron and the passengers refuelled in the duty-free".
Next was a sling in Singapore, on to Jakarta, Bali next, a stop in Melbourne and finally Sydney. Some flights have a +1 or +2 next to them - this had a +3.
"Jet lag was irrelevant: you had no idea what day, or indeed planet, you were on."
For my mum and I, who did this journey several times, it was an eight-sector flight because we had to get from Glasgow to Gatwick. I know this because I recently showed Ma Stewart Mr Calder's piece, thinking it would entertain her.
She went upstairs to her bedroom and was able to immediately lay her hands on a menu from just this flight. I'd known we travelled a lot when I was small - and I have memories of various flights and various layovers - but I hadn't ever imagined we were regulars on the Garuda extravaganza.
I mention this because I would have been flying this route from the age of six months and doubt I was well behaved all of the time. I vividly remember the horrendous travel sickness I used to suffer as a child and I cannot imagine how many passengers would have had to endure my relentless vomiting.
Apologies to you all.
My mum, however, speaks of nothing but kindness from her fellow travellers and the air stewards. Is this good luck or have people become less tolerant of children in public spaces?
Last week I boarded a 13 hour flight and, full transparency, my heart sank when I saw my nearest seat mates. In the immediate rows around were seven young children and two babes in arms.
It doesn't gladden the spirit, young kids on long haul journeys. But if I, an adult on a fun adventure, am knackered and in need of peace, imagine how those parents must feel? A bit of empathy is vital.
Yet not so for everyone. Two incidents on planes have recently gone viral.
One was video footage of cabin crew asking a pregnant woman to clear up after her child. The other, the more volcanic of the two, was a disgruntled man baby who chucked a tanty over a crying baby on his flight.
This went viral due to his screamed retort in response to complaints of him shouting: "So is the baby! Did that mother****er pay extra to yell?"
Those who either had angel children, no children or are just unsympathetic grouches make the case that babies should be neither seen nor heard in certain spaces. But I was really struck by the increasing hostility towards kids when I saw a post on social media from a local mother.
🔴 Save on a full year of digital access with our lowest EVER offer.
Subscribe for a whole year to The Herald for only £24 for unlimited website access or £30 for our digital pack.
This is only available for a limited time so don't miss out.
Her little boy has autism and she has found people in our community so difficult and unhelpful she felt the need to share a photo of her son with an explanation for his behaviour. The post came with a plea for tolerance and for the child to be treated compassionately.
Particularly, in a time of increased awareness of learning disabilities, what a a damning indictment. I hope her post has the desired outcome and those it's aimed at feel a decent amount of shame.
Children belong in museums and libraries, pubs and restaurants. The desire to remove them from these spaces should be a minority position and yet this intolerance is becoming increasingly normalised.
Hostility towards children is a failure to accept that you are part of society and children are part of society. No matter whether you're a parent or not, children are the collective responsibility of everyone they come into contact with - even if that's just a stranger modelling decent behaviour in public.
If you can't keep a lid on your temper because of the mild irritation caused by a noisy child perhaps you ought to stay home. Maybe spend some time on the naughty step and think about what you've done.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules here