Catcalling Flight Attendants a No-No at Alaska

BobPatterson · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:07 am

Good way to get kicked off a plane.

http://www.refinery29.com/2016/10/12609 ... -attendant

TheFlyingDisk · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:37 am

But I just have to ask, what if the roles were reversed?

BobPatterson · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:48 am

TheFlyingDisk wrote:

But I just have to ask, what if the roles were reversed?

Please help me to understand your thoughts. What was "escalated" and by whom?

Can you describe "role reversal" as you mean it?

TheFlyingDisk · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:52 am

BobPatterson wrote:
Please help me to understand your thoughts. What was "escalated" and by whom?

Can you describe "role reversal" as you mean it?

Catcalling -> booted off the flight = escalated

Woman catcalling a male attendant = role reversal.

keitherson · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:57 am

TheFlyingDisk wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
Please help me to understand your thoughts. What was "escalated" and by whom?

Can you describe "role reversal" as you mean it?

Catcalling -> booted off the flight = escalated

Woman catcalling a male attendant = role reversal.

Are you also going to start bringing up double standards when male teachers sexually assault female students, versus vice-versa? :roll:

adamblang · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:58 am

TheFlyingDisk wrote:
But I just have to ask, what if the roles were reversed?

Up to the male flight attendant in question. I'd assume Alaska's policies are gender-blind. I know my airline's are.

BobPatterson · Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:25 am

TheFlyingDisk wrote:
BobPatterson wrote:
Please help me to understand your thoughts. What was "escalated" and by whom?

Can you describe "role reversal" as you mean it?

Catcalling -> booted off the flight = escalated

Woman catcalling a male attendant = role reversal.

Well, I think many people would disagree that there was escalation. Escalation might have been increased or widespread catcalling.

What happened could be viewed as simple cause and effect. A man acted boorishly toward women and he was removed from the aircraft, restoring a modicum of civility. One might hope he will learn from his experience and not engage in such misconduct in the future.

Would a woman find anything "sexy" about a male flight attendant demonstrating the life vest procedure? If so, I doubt it would be expressed so openly. But if that did happen, and if that flight attendant was embarrassed/offended by such public ridicule, it would not be inappropriate for the female passenger to be removed from the flight. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

TheFlyingDisk · Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:49 am

BobPatterson wrote:
Well, I think many people would disagree that there was escalation. Escalation might have been increased or widespread catcalling.

What happened could be viewed as simple cause and effect. A man acted boorishly toward women and he was removed from the aircraft, restoring a modicum of civility. One might hope he will learn from his experience and not engage in such misconduct in the future.

In my opinion, kicking him off for catcalling is an escalation, and for me the punishment doesn't fit the crime. Based on what was posted, he only did one boorish act, and the flight attendant didn't give him even a single warning (I really don't think that, "You need to be respectful" is a warning) before calling someone to boot him off the plane. Unless there's clear evidence that he had acted boorishly even before that incident, I have to give him the benefit of a doubt.

I agree that women should be treated with respect, but in my opinion this is a case of overreaction. However props to AS for standing behind the flight attendant.

Revelation wrote:
She gave him a second chance to behave and he kept going, I guess he simply refused to be pussified.

Actually, I didn't think he was given a second chance. Based on the original FB post

Before we could do more than glare in his direction, the flight attendant removed her vest, purposely walked up to him and said, "You need to be respectful," and started to walk back to her task. He said, "C'mon, I'm just playing with you!"

As she walked to the front of the plane, the safety instruction was abandoned and she convened a conversation with her colleagues. Tense moments passed and we saw an affable-looking man board the plane and walk our way. The offensive man behind me started saying "I didn't do anything wrong! I didn't do anything wrong!"

The airline employee asked the man to gather his belongings and exit the plane.

Revelation · Wed Oct 12, 2016 12:51 pm

stlgph wrote:
Yes, because it totally reads he kept going with his behavior.
Oh wait, it doesn't. But yes, way to read.

My reading of the article (and yes, I can read, and thank you for the mockery) is that the FA saying "You need to be respectful," is giving the pax a second chance to act civilized. His non-pussified response was "C'mon, I'm just playing with you!" instead of "yeah, you're right" or even "sorry" so his penisified ass lost the chance to fly.

stlgph wrote:
And yes, go fly airline a) which has turned the safety demo into a fashion show (hiya, Southwest!) and then you can fly airline b) where such antics which were laughed at on airline a (hiya, Southwest!) and everyone had a good time on the flight and didn't need to cause a scene (hiya, Southwest!) got someone kicked off of airline b (good job, Alaska).

You are really reaching for straws. The AS FA needs to decide what to do based on what a WN FA would do in the same situation? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

n92r03 · Wed Oct 12, 2016 1:42 pm

Another day, another way to be a "victim". Good grief.

klakzky123 · Wed Oct 12, 2016 1:59 pm

Flight attendants have it hard enough when it comes to some of the nonsense they have to deal with from some passengers. The FA gave the passenger a chance to stop and he continued. Why are any of you defending this behavior? I wasn't aware that passengers were entitled to catcall their FAs.

And as for the "pussification" of the US? If that means, sexist behavior like this isn't tolerated anymore than sign me up for that America.

Keith2004 · Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:19 pm

Guess he thought the plane was his Locker Room :lol:

But yeah don't feel sorry for this guy.
The more there are consequences for this kind of objectification, the less it will happen in public

Just like other types of comments that are no longer welcome, which used to be common place.

This pales in comparison to the comments and even physical contact flight attendants used to have to endure in the "Golden Age"

LeCoqFrancais · Wed Oct 12, 2016 2:32 pm

Personally, I find that if the passenger only said "Ooh sexy!" and "C’mon, I’m just playing with you!" the airline/crew over-reacted. This is -in my opinion- another case of people wanting to be overly PC. Yes, people should not make sexist remarks, but people sometimes say things with sarcasm in mind which means that you should not take what that person said to the letter. And also, since when is it wrong to point to someone that you find him/her too your taste? We have come down to a world where nobody can give their opinion about religion, politics, race with out being fired at and called names. What happened to the time were you could say, with out being scared of loosing your job, that you disliked a certain nation, religion, race? People should not be racist or sexist, but people should be allowed to give their opinions about certain subjects in certain contexts with out having the fear of repercussion.

PlanesNTrains · Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:29 pm

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
Personally, I find that if the passenger only said "Ooh sexy!" and "C’mon, I’m just playing with you!" the airline/crew over-reacted. This is -in my opinion- another case of people wanting to be overly PC. Yes, people should not make sexist remarks, but people sometimes say things with sarcasm in mind which means that you should not take what that person said to the letter. And also, since when is it wrong to point to someone that you find him/her too your taste? We have come down to a world where nobody can give their opinion about religion, politics, race with out being fired at and called names. What happened to the time were you could say, with out being scared of loosing your job, that you disliked a certain nation, religion, race? People should not be racist or sexist, but people should be allowed to give their opinions about certain subjects in certain contexts with out having the fear of repercussion.

What happened to just shutting one's chew-hole in public rather than spout off about things nobody asked for?

Sexist comments --> Creates drama
Political comments --> Creates drama
Religious comments --> Creates drama

If nobody asked you to say something to them, then I'd suggest avoiding sarcasm as an opening line might be a good idea.

As for the previous comment about being too sensitive to [political] commentary, it's another example of what one person thinks is AOK is what rubs another person the wrong way. People take politics and religion very personally - we all know that - and so stirring the pot with cheap one-liners isn't always helpful in a conversation. YMMV

winginit · Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:29 pm

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
What happened to the time were you could say, with out being scared of loosing your job, that you disliked a certain nation, religion, race?

I am absolutely baffled by this statement. How disgusting.

So expressing your own view about not liking a certain religion, race, etc. should be fine but it then shouldn't be okay for your employer to terminate you because they don't like your view? What nonsense.

What possible good could come of the right to express public dislike for another especially in a workplace setting where your distaste is for something that another can't control?!

LeCoqFrancais · Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:45 pm

To simplify my previous post, I simply believe that we live in an overly PC world where people make huge drama over very minor things and where people can no longer say anything with out having to think if somebody might post what they say on Facebook or some other social media were it could affect this persons life.

Bricktop · Wed Oct 12, 2016 3:52 pm

It strikes me funny that people still need to be told not to be douchebags, and then complain when there are consequences.

winginit · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:02 pm

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
To simplify my previous post, I simply believe that we live in an overly PC world where people make huge drama over very minor things and where people can no longer say anything with out having to think if somebody might post what they say on Facebook or some other social media were it could affect this persons life.

So you do or you do not believe that people should be able to express their dislike for another ethnicity or religion to others without the fear of professional backlash? It's one or the other, and in your initial statement it came across as quite clear that you believed the former.

stlgph · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:06 pm

Revelation wrote:
stlgph wrote:
Yes, because it totally reads he kept going with his behavior.
Oh wait, it doesn't. But yes, way to read.

My reading of the article (and yes, I can read, and thank you for the mockery) is that the FA saying "You need to be respectful," is giving the pax a second chance to act civilized. His non-pussified response was "C'mon, I'm just playing with you!" instead of "yeah, you're right" or even "sorry" so his penisified ass lost the chance to fly.

stlgph wrote:
And yes, go fly airline a) which has turned the safety demo into a fashion show (hiya, Southwest!) and then you can fly airline b) where such antics which were laughed at on airline a (hiya, Southwest!) and everyone had a good time on the flight and didn't need to cause a scene (hiya, Southwest!) got someone kicked off of airline b (good job, Alaska).

You are really reaching for straws. The AS FA needs to decide what to do based on what a WN FA would do in the same situation? Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

Nah sweetie, not reaching for anything. But you just keep defending double standards and your ignorance to reality, I guess someone has to.

adamblang · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:10 pm

Bricktop wrote:
It strikes me funny that people still need to be told not to be douchebags, and then complain when there are consequences.

Ding ding ding. We have a winner.

Revelation · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:45 pm

stlgph wrote:
Nah sweetie, not reaching for anything. But you just keep defending double standards and your ignorance to reality, I guess someone has to.

And you keep defending your "reality" that different companies must have the same approaches to all problems.

By the way, some friendly advice: you really should develop some better conversational skills.

LeCoqFrancais · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:46 pm

winginit wrote:
LeCoqFrancais wrote:
To simplify my previous post, I simply believe that we live in an overly PC world where people make huge drama over very minor things and where people can no longer say anything with out having to think if somebody might post what they say on Facebook or some other social media were it could affect this persons life.

So you do or you do not believe that people should be able to express their dislike for another ethnicity or religion to others without the fear of professional backlash? It's one or the other, and in your initial statement it came across as quite clear that you believed the former.

I believe that in certain context it should be fine to voice your opinion about XYZ with out fear of any personnal or professional backlash. Our world is overly protective and overly PC.
I should point out that I'm a minority myself, and that I find that people, again in certain context, should be able to call my minority names with out being scared of a backlash.

Flighty · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:50 pm

Thread is useless without pics. We are in a new era though. New hires..

By the way it sounds like the FA did the right thing. Gave him a chance to apologize.. He failed... Game over!

LeCoqFrancais · Wed Oct 12, 2016 4:59 pm

Flighty wrote:
Thread is useless without pics. We are in a new era though. New hires..

By the way it sounds like the FA did the right thing. Gave him a chance to apologize.. He failed... Game over!

She went on a powertrip, that is far from being the right thing to do...

Rdh3e · Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:05 pm

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
I find that people, again in certain context, should be able to call my minority names with out being scared of a backlash.

And if that context is a meeting of "bigoted morons and racists USA" then they can. If that context is publicly where they are demeaning other human beings in public then they deserve everything they get. Especially when their speech has consequences for others, like their employer, their family, their friends etc. You can be a racist if you want, but the rest of us also have the right to disown and refuse to tolerate your behaviour.

spinkid · Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:11 pm

I have a feeling something might be missing from this story. Perhaps he had made comments earlier that the person sharing this story didn't hear, or he was intoxicated, or even his tone of voice in saying "I'm just playing with you"

was he indignant? "I'm just PLAYIN with you" can have a much different meaning. People have been kicked off for less.

Amiga500 · Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:16 pm

So does anyone know what actually happened?

1. Was there multiple instances of bad behaviour from the passenger?
2. Were they given a warning (which preceded more bad behaviour), prior to their removal from the flight?
3. What exactly did the bad behaviour consist of?

Flighty · Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:21 pm

It is a workplace, at a major corporation. She doesn't have to take it.

There is a line between paying someone a compliment and abusing them - particularly after a warning. It sounds clear cut here. You can pay someone a compliment, or even ask them out on a date or whatever. But not openly harass them, certainly not after a warning. Not really that hard to figure out.

P3Orion · Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:23 pm

A boorish oaf was being dispectful towards a woman and she defended her honor. Good for her. Nothing PC or "power trip" about her actions. He is a Neanderthal and she put him in his place. Bravo.

Revelation · Wed Oct 12, 2016 5:38 pm

PHLapproach wrote:
I understand what he was joking about. Seeing the life jacket as a "sexy" piece of apparel as a joke cause clearly it's not.... It wasn't so much about her as it was the life jacket. If he said "you look good in that" he still would have been kicked off without muttering the word "Sexy".

Her job isn't to be sexually appealing, or even non-sexually appealing, her job is to doing what she can to save your ass in an emergency.

Why should her appearance enter into it?

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
She went on a powertrip, that is far from being the right thing to do...

Another way of looking at it was that he was on a power trip, asserting his right to only have sexually appealing women in his view. He was asked to be respectful, he deflected that request, and his ass ended up back in the airport. Seems like the correct outcome to me.

reasonable · Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:34 pm

catcalling anybody is never okay anywhere

ikramerica · Wed Oct 12, 2016 6:47 pm

Maybe he thought he was on WN? The FA would have called the vest stylish, he would have said it was sexy, she would have said thank you, I'm married, and life would have gone on...

BTW - he wasn't catcalling if you look at the context. he called out when the ugly as heck vest was put on and called it sexy. He was making fun of the freaking VEST! Are we so sensitive now that we equate making a joke about an ugly safety item to sexual assault with a minor? (see ridiculous posts above).

aerolimani · Wed Oct 12, 2016 7:07 pm

ikramerica wrote:
BTW - he wasn't catcalling if you look at the context. he called out when the ugly as heck vest was put on and called it sexy. He was making fun of the freaking VEST! Are we so sensitive now that we equate making a joke about an ugly safety item to sexual assault with a minor? (see ridiculous posts above).

Let's put aside the sexist nature of this comment for just a moment. Even ignoring that, the passenger was disrupting the safety demonstration. When the FA called him on it, and told him to be respectful, instead of complying, he talked back to her. One could say he was disobeying a direct order from a member of a flight crew.

Most of us on a.net have flown MANY times, and could probably repeat our favourite airline's safety demo word for word. However, I think most of us would agree that even if you don't personally pay attention, you most definitely should not interrupt the demo for anything but the most serious of reasons.

Sometimes, the FA's may even try to make the demo more amusing by making a few jokes. Depending on their company's policy, that is their prerogative. It is NOT appropriate for any passenger.

bennett123 · Wed Oct 12, 2016 7:32 pm

No doubt the first comment was wrong.

Perhaps if she had responded to his second comment with, "this is no game, and if you do not behave properly, then you will be offloaded", he would have grasped the situation, which I do not think he did.

Still he will not make that mistake again.

b6sea · Wed Oct 12, 2016 7:33 pm

My understanding is that in the state of Washington, all businesses have the right to refuse service to anyone at any time for any reason or no reason at all (the don't be an asshole law). The flight attendant also has a right to safe and respectful work environment under federal law. She felt as though that had been compromised and her company agreed with the call she made.

We can argue about semantics or PC culture all we want, but the flight attendant and the airline were well within their rights doing what they did.

An airline does not have to allow you to travel on their aircraft if they don't like your behavior. This is not a new idea.

Revelation · Wed Oct 12, 2016 7:36 pm

ikramerica wrote:
Maybe he thought he was on WN? The FA would have called the vest stylish, he would have said it was sexy, she would have said thank you, I'm married, and life would have gone on....

And yet he wasn't on WN, and when he was asked/told to be respectful he didn't apologize, he tried to blow things off.

ikramerica wrote:
BTW - he wasn't catcalling if you look at the context. he called out when the ugly as heck vest was put on and called it sexy. He was making fun of the freaking VEST! Are we so sensitive now that we equate making a joke about an ugly safety item to sexual assault with a minor? (see ridiculous posts above).

Just did a search and found no other mention of sexual assault with a minor, you are exaggerating in a pretty non-constructive way, IMHO.

Just wondering, do you make comments to women you don't know and who are trying to do a job about whether the equipment they're wearing makes them look sexy or not? If so, what's your next move after they ask/tell you to be respectful?

Some women just don't put up with sexual innuendo. Get used to it, women have rights these days.

Bald1983 · Wed Oct 12, 2016 8:01 pm

Right call to throw the lout off the plane. If he cannot even act like an adult for the safety briefing, then no sense taking a risk in flight. Out of curiosity, was alcohol involved?

KentB27 · Wed Oct 12, 2016 8:20 pm

People have gotten kicked off of planes for a lot less. I see no problem with what happened.

As a man I know that there is a time and a place for telling a woman you find her attractive. An airplane with a flight attendant on duty is not such a place, and catcalling is not a good way to do it. Why some men think that being douchebags and treating women like they are a fresh piece of meat in a butcher's shop is charming is beyond me. It's 2016. Like it or not that's generally not considered acceptable behavior anymore.

Maybe if he would have said "sorry" and acknowledged he was in the wrong things would have turned out fine. But he did not, and therein lies the problem here.

I'm sick of guys like him being douchebags like this and getting away with it, so I welcome him getting punished for it. Guys like him make other men who are gentlemen look bad and jade women's perception of men as a gender. Guys, when you're a dick to women not only are you shooting yourself in the foot, you're shooting your entire gender in the foot.

LeCoqFrancais · Wed Oct 12, 2016 8:41 pm

Revelation wrote:
And yet he wasn't on WN, and when he was asked/told to be respectful he didn't apologize, he tried to blow things off.

Maybe because there was nothing sexist in his remark? You guys are all crazy when defending the airline and F/A.

Turbofanfan · Wed Oct 12, 2016 8:46 pm

bennett123 wrote:
Perhaps if she had responded to his second comment with, "this is no game, and if you do not behave properly, then you will be offloaded", he would have grasped the situation, which I do not think he did.

Exactly. I think this was an asshole of the ignorant kind, instead of the malevolent.

Personally I think it's a little overkill to kick somebody off a flight over a grand total of two remarks. Especially because I feel it's unfair that the man was not reminded of how thin the ice he was standing on really was.

Now you could argue that it's the man's own responsibility to gauge his ice, and you'd be right I suppose. I am just saying that I think that this whole situation could've so easily been resolved much more elegantly. Something like: "Get your ass into line or I *will* kick it off this here plane mister".

b747400erf · Wed Oct 12, 2016 8:55 pm

PHLapproach wrote:
Third Wave Feminism will be the end of anyone's ability to just speak their mind including saying off the cuff jokes when long ago people would just not care and move along with their lives. They don't want Men to have any enjoyable things. Not to long ago, Anita Sarkeesian went to the UN to speak about what the gaming industry is doing against Women. Yup, Feminists don't want men to enjoy their alone time anymore. They'll probably begin to attack professional sports before long. Feminism is a black plague that is fueling the PC movement not just in the US but across the World now. I didn't even know or care much about it until I started learning more about what Third Wave Feminism truly means a few months ago. They vilify women who just want to stay home and raise kids. This story is a perfect example of Feminism hard at work in our culture. I understand what he was joking about. Seeing the life jacket as a "sexy" piece of apparel as a joke cause clearly it's not.... It wasn't so much about her as it was the life jacket. If he said "you look good in that" he still would have been kicked off without muttering the word "Sexy".

The bat-crazy signal went out, and the mens rights activists are here to save the day!

IslandRob · Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:15 pm

.

As they hauled his ass off the airplane, the passenger was heard to shout, "They never treated me like this on Trump Airlines!"

-ir

bennett123 · Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:19 pm

Perhaps he needs to get a job with Donald.

winginit · Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:23 pm

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
Revelation wrote:
And yet he wasn't on WN, and when he was asked/told to be respectful he didn't apologize, he tried to blow things off.

Maybe because there was nothing sexist in his remark? You guys are all crazy when defending the airline and F/A.

So now this has to be sexist to be a problem as opposed to simply disrespectful and disruptive? You are unbelievable.

ElliottM · Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:32 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
Would a woman find anything "sexy" about a male flight attendant demonstrating the life vest procedure? If so, I doubt it would be expressed so openly. But if that did happen, and if that flight attendant was embarrassed/offended by such public ridicule, it would not be inappropriate for the female passenger to be removed from the flight. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Agreed. I don't work in the aviation industry (yet) but my company's policies are similarly "gender-blind" - that is, they apply to ALL employees no matter the gender of either party.

Ideally, I agree with some of the others - the passenger should have been warned first that he would be removed from the flight if he continued his behavior. Nevertheless, I agree at the end of the day the airline and the FA were well within their rights, just as any private organization should have the right to refuse service to anyone for any reason. Otherwise, that is limiting the rights of an organization to choose who it does business with, which is a limitation on the private sector.

Thaumaturgic · Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:38 pm

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
Personally, I find that if the passenger only said "Ooh sexy!" and "C’mon, I’m just playing with you!" the airline/crew over-reacted. This is -in my opinion- another case of people wanting to be overly PC. Yes, people should not make sexist remarks, but people sometimes say things with sarcasm in mind which means that you should not take what that person said to the letter. And also, since when is it wrong to point to someone that you find him/her too your taste? We have come down to a world where nobody can give their opinion about religion, politics, race with out being fired at and called names. What happened to the time were you could say, with out being scared of loosing your job, that you disliked a certain nation, religion, race? People should not be racist or sexist, but people should be allowed to give their opinions about certain subjects in certain contexts with out having the fear of repercussion.

Let me know where you work so I can come over and interrupt you with unsolicited comments about how sexy your clothing is. No need to get upset though because im just being sarcastic

Revelation · Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:43 pm

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
Revelation wrote:
And yet he wasn't on WN, and when he was asked/told to be respectful he didn't apologize, he tried to blow things off.

Maybe because there was nothing sexist in his remark? You guys are all crazy when defending the airline and F/A.

Ok, we got it, in your world there's nothing sexist about commenting about how a piece of equipment a woman is using to do her job makes her look sexy or not, and we're all crazy for defending her when she does find it sexist.

grbauc · Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:56 pm

LeCoqFrancais wrote:
Personally, I find that if the passenger only said "Ooh sexy!" and "C’mon, I’m just playing with you!" the airline/crew over-reacted. This is -in my opinion- another case of people wanting to be overly PC. Yes, people should not make sexist remarks, but people sometimes say things with sarcasm in mind which means that you should not take what that person said to the letter. And also, since when is it wrong to point to someone that you find him/her too your taste? We have come down to a world where nobody can give their opinion about religion, politics, race with out being fired at and called names. What happened to the time were you could say, with out being scared of loosing your job, that you disliked a certain nation, religion, race? People should not be racist or sexist, but people should be allowed to give their opinions about certain subjects in certain contexts with out having the fear of repercussion.

Thank god you posted this. I was wondering if I'm the only one that thinks and feels this way. Thanks for a nice post with lots of common sense. For me you nailed it. Racist and sexist bigots are not what's being talked about here.

BobPatterson · Wed Oct 12, 2016 9:58 pm

Am I imagining things?

A couple of hours ago I made a post here that (I think) has disappeared. Did anyone see it?

I told how my 1973 dictionary did not contain the words "sexist" or "creep." I went on to mention that our vocabulary changes along with social changes regarding acceptable behaviors.

I'm quite certain that after I submitted the post I actually saw it in the forum.

Has this happened to anyone else?

aerolimani · Wed Oct 12, 2016 10:05 pm

BobPatterson wrote:
Am I imagining things?

A couple of hours ago I made a post here that (I think) has disappeared. Did anyone see it?

I told how my 1973 dictionary did not contain the words "sexist" or "creep." I went on to mention that our vocabulary changes along with social changes regarding acceptable behaviors.

It was there. I saw it. It's gone now. Maybe someone took "offense" to something in it, and clicked the "report this post" button. Who knosw? On the old a.net, replies kept the same number, no matter what. So, if a post was deleted, you could see where the number was missing. It appears that the new a.net numbers are dynamic, so there is no longer evidence of any missing/deleted posts.

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net