Men's Group
Related: About this forumDiscrimination? Australian men can’t sit next to unaccompanied minors
Discrimination? Australian men cant sit next to unaccompanied minors
Australian men are up in arms over airline policies that prevent male passengers from sitting in the seat next to unaccompanied minors.
A male nurse, Daniel McCluskie, 31, said last week he was humiliated after Qantas made him switch seats with a woman to get him away from a 10-year-old girl, The Age reports.
After the plane had taken off, the air hostess thanked the woman that had moved but not me, which kind of hurt me or pissed me off a bit more because it appeared I was in the wrong, because it seemed I had this sign I couldnt see above my head that said child molester or kiddie fiddler whereas she did the gracious thing and moved to protect the greater good of the child.
A similar incident occurred at Virgin Australia, where fireman Johnny McGirr, 33, sitting next to two boys, ages 8 and 10, was forced to move as part of company policy, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.
is we respect you but as soon as you board a Virgin airline you are a potential pedophile, and that strips away all the good that any male does regardless of his standing in society, his profession or his moral attitudes, he said.
Virgin Australia has announced it was rethinking its policy. British Airways changed a similar policy in 2010 after a lawsuit, agreeing to seat unaccompanied minors in a safe but non-discriminatory manner.
http://blog.sfgate.com/hottopics/2012/08/13/discrimination-australian-men-can%E2%80%99t-sit-next-to-unaccompanied-minors/
X-post from General Discussion: http://www.democraticunderground.com/10021130802
Behind the Aegis
(54,857 posts)It is sexist on two accounts. But, I am sure some will be able to justify this type of discrimination because it's just men. If they were really interested in stopping the kid from being molested, then they wouldn't allow the kid to sit next to a male relative, as they are the ones more likely to molest a child as opposed to a stranger.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)opiate69
(10,129 posts)And, of course, one of the resident radfem leaders has checked in and declared it to be not that worrisome of a policy (and oh by the way, scary patriarchy blah blah blah). Quelle surprise.
ZenLefty
(20,924 posts)That was my prediction.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)with a dash of "being asked to change seats isn`t a huge deal" and a side of extra crispy "rape culture!"
ZenLefty
(20,924 posts)In all honesty, being asked to change seats isn't really a big deal, if there's a valid reason for it.
If you ask a woman to change seats because she's dressed too provocatively and the men sitting next to her might have indecent thoughts, that would be the outrage of the day for sure. That's about the closest analogy I can think of.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)it's not discrimination. And really it's a minor inconvenience.
But it's just, well there have been cases of women becoming hysterical (due to their women-brains of course) and being unable to operate the door in an emergency. It's a safety thing you see. Sure such cases are exceedingly rare. And there are examples of men doing it also.
But it's just we have to put the perceived safety and comfort of the passengers first. Surely you'll understand Miss, and take your rightful place in the back. Getting up and moving surely isn't that big of a deal. And while we are kind of denigrating your entire gender unfairly just take it like a (wo)man and acquiesce without a fight.
/
Nope. No discrimination there. I couldn't imagine a single person becoming upset if that were made official policy.
Not-a-one.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)the other passengers know that it is policy... I can`t imagine how humiliating it would be if I had to sit there for hours while the other people around me were wondering just why I had to move.... I`m guessing many of them would think I was just a prick who didn`t want to sit next to a kid, and others would be convinced I was on some sex offender list.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)But the woman who moved there was. You know, those pig men....have to keep them in check.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)And apologize to the world for being male, and be thankful we're not outside tethered to the wing, where we belong.
opiate69
(10,129 posts)Hmm. Choices... Tumblr or porntube?
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)opiate69
(10,129 posts)Upton
(9,709 posts)at least that poster is consistent..
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)that denying you're a rapist too much is proof that you are a rapist.
"Too much" being of course defined by the person deciding you are a rapist.
Upton
(9,709 posts)and you see it reflected here at DU by the usual suspects, is the radfems apparent dislike for an entire gender..They're willing to blame just about anything on the "patriarchy" ..while assuming every male has a propensity for committing sex crimes..
Sometimes I wonder...at what point does this cross over into misandry?
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Back in the 1980s. Before that if you count the psycho who shot Warhol, whose name I mercifully cannot remember.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)Radfems are openly misandrists.
I was banned from the HoF for pointing out that one of their anti-porn sources had written, published, and appeared to be quite proud of a series of articles she had written entitled "Why I hate men"
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)Like Warren, they banned me for something I said elsewhere, here to be precise. The hypocrisy stinks so badly it would, as Carlin once put it, knock a buzzard off a shit wagon.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)I thought considering the lip service she pays to both genders being under the shackles of the patriarchy....but wow....I guess I'm naive. And all unaccompanied minors are potential victims for all men apparently too. Fucking unreal.
hifiguy
(33,688 posts)from one of the usual suspects about "rape culture" and how this is simply a means of combating it.
Anyone who knows ANYTHING about child abuse knows that most kids who are molested are victimized by someone they know - most likely a family member.
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)on the offchance they'll be seated next to an unaccompanied minor which they can molest . . . while in a sealed room with literally dozens - hundreds of witnesses and all their contact information on record.
Yes that is why planes are rampant with child-molestation.
Thank you Qantas for saving the children from such a real and in no way hysterically overblown made-up problem.
And hey, even if it's pointless it's only men who are inconvenienced and humiliated. Suck it up men, this is part of the great privilege you enjoy.
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)I don't want to sit next to some whining crying booger flinger who will get upset if I don't spend all hours of the plane flight focused on them and their nonsense.
Still bigotry.
Behind the Aegis
(54,857 posts)Apparently though, to say so is equivalent to hurling around talking points of MRA.
Broken_Hero
(59,305 posts)just another reason to avoid the Airport. I'd rather go Oregon Trail than fly....I'll gladly take the bear attacks, and Cholera. (sorry for the Oregon Trail stuff, been playing it all day on my phone).
4th law of robotics
(6,801 posts)/I swear 99% of people on their way to Oregon died of dysentery. It must be a wonderful state to be worth it.
ZenLefty
(20,924 posts)I-70's kind of a challenge once you get past Denver, but other than that it's not so bad.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Hell, I even used to do it in winter in a tiny hatchback with bald tires, but i was young and stupid.
Major Nikon
(36,900 posts)Major Nikon
(36,900 posts)Just not with the airlines.
Iggo
(48,271 posts)Last edited Wed Aug 15, 2012, 01:59 PM - Edit history (1)
I didn't realize there was one in GD and one in Men's.
Carry on...lol.