Dena

25 years ago Margaret Thatcher was Prime Minister of the UK.

 

Today women seem to want to be the next Britney Spears.

 

Progress is a beautiful thing. :rolleyes:

 

jc

25 years ago, I was in engineering school. Today, a woman is running for president and more women than men are entering college, law school, and medical school. And I honestly don't know anyone who wants to be Britney Spears.

 

I cannot agree that it is a better world for women today, Women have shot themselves in the foot so many times that we now are back to square one as far as I'm concerned. .

It is undeniable that women today enjoy unprecedented educational and career choices. It is a near certainty that, had I been born 25 years earlier, I would not have earned a Ph.D. in engineering and would not be enjoying this financially rewarding and intellectually satisfying career of my choosing that matches my interests and abilities.

How anyone could argue that more choices are a bad thing for women is mind-boggling. :confused: But then again, there are those who would deny us the simple freedom of choosing when and where to dine.:(

but I remember the "good old days" when I would visit my TA in her office and we would pour over all the brochures and she would tell me her experience on different cruise lines. If I had a question, she called immediately and got an answer.

 

But I realize I'm dreaming and those days are gone forever. I was just having one of those moments;) .

I don't know if most travel agents were women in the "good old days". But if they were, times have really changed for women. Bright, talented, hard working women have so many more options today. So it is possible that the caliber of travel agents has declined because women have better options. I don't know? But if this is true, then I don't miss the "good old days".

I don't know who it was, but someone on here said she missed the "good old days" when women had to wear skirts and heels to work. I am glad that world no longer exits for most women. Why should we be forced to develop bunions and back pain.

Are you saying you didn't cruise for 18 years because you would have to eat with other people? :confused:

 

quote]

 

 

Yes. That is exactly what I'm saying. We also did not care for being told WHEN to eat. We don't like to be on a schedule when on vacation. And as I said before, we enjoy spending time with each other when on vacation; a table for 2 cannot be gauranteed on a ship that only offers traditional dining. Even if it could be, there was still the issue of dining at a set time.

 

Don't feel bad for us, we enjoyed wonderful land vacations. And now we are enjoying wonderful sea vacations.

"but don't they MAKE you eat with a bunch of other people you don't know?" Like that would stop them from going if they had to do that.

It stopped us from cruising again for 18 years.

My husband and I love Princess and one of the reasons is the anytime dining. We are considering Holland, knowing that the option may soon be available.

 

We want a table for two on our cruise. Why? Because we both have jobs where we (have to) chat and make small talk with strangers, every day. We're friendly, and good chatters, but that is NOT what we want to HAVE to do, at dinner, on vacation. It's not fun for us. We want a table for two with time for just us. Dinner is a fun part of the cruise. I don't want to do the "where are you from, how many kids, etc., etc.

 

Don't take this wrong, please. We ALWAYS meet other people on our cruises, at the bars, on shore excursions, in the casino, at the buffet, etc. Many we have stayed in touch with over the years.

 

I have cruised with my sister many times, at shared tables, and many experiences were painful, to say the least. I also wonder about couples that are not comfortable dining with just each other and need strangers to make their time enjoyable. I find it somewhat sad that some would choose strangers over quality time with their spouse.

 

Bottom line: dinner is for just us, our choice. We've been married almost 40 years and KNOW we will have a great time together, so why chance it on a short vacation? We welcome the anytime option on Holland.

Judy

We feel exactly the same way.

Sometimes I think it is the "new cruisers" who object to sharing the table with others.

.

This maybe true. DH and I cruised for the first time almost 20 years ago. We swore we'd never do so again because of fixed dining. Being told when to eat and being denied a table for 2 is not a vacation for us. Thanks to Princess we are cruising again.

Many people say they like meeting new people at dinner, but this sometimes sounds like rationalization. I don't know of a single land-based restaurant that seats people with others who are not in their party. If this really were highly desirable, I'm sure someone would have tried this concept in a land-based restaurant and, presumably, they'd be making a fortune.

DH and I cruise Princess mainly because of Anytime dining. We've considered HAL because it appears to be better in most other ways, but fixed dining is an absolute deal breaker. It is good to know that in a few months we'll have another viable option. Based on what I've read about the quality of food (and the emphasis on children) on NCL, it isn't an option for us. Also, NCL doesn't have lounge chairs on the promenade deck - I need a place in the shade where I can view the ocean - HAL offers this (Princess does too, but only on some ships). And I hear the bedding on HAL is better (Princess bedding is almost insulting). HAL also offers full menu room service (:) hot breakfast); Princess has a very limited room service menu - you better like carbs if you order Princess room service breakfast.

I hope having fixed seating available on the upper level will work out for those who want a more traditional experience. I often travel alone for business, so I understand the dining concerns of a solo traveler. I would think that as long as there is more than one solo traveler per cruise, these people could share a table.

DH and I don't vacation to meet new people. We have stressful jobs and we vacation to relax and spend quality time with each other (and dine at a table for 2). I understand that the day may come when I'm a solo traveler - that makes the time I have with DH more valuable and that is one reason why fixed seating is a deal breaker. We don't enjoy the buffet, so being forced to go there just to get a table for 2 does not seem reasonable - especially with the very limited buffet (and Bistro) hours.