Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
Quoting zkokq (Reply 2): Surely the airlines have the capability for not seating males next to minors with some sort of query through the database when they book tickets and such. I agree with the policy (in the sense of protecting the kids and the male, because I dont want to be accused or something I didnt do). I just dont agree with how it is handled. |
Quoting tayser (Reply 14): Hooray for common sense.......... Virgin are now reviewing the policy: |
Quoting cygnuschicago (Reply 3): I'm quite happy with a policy to not be seated next to an UM. |
Quoting STT757 (Reply 20): protecting children should be paramount over everything else, |
Quoting tayser (Reply 10): The Australian Sex discrimination commissioner / Australian Human Rights commission should scrutinise ALL Australian airline policies in this area - the policy is tantamount to labelling all males as kiddie-fiddlers - this is: 1) repugnant, 2) ignorant of the fact that not every paedophile has male genitalia, 3) absolutely atrocious, and 4) 100% sexist. |
Quoting BoeingVista (Reply 24): you have to make allowances for this and get off of your high horse. |
Quoting bastew (Reply 9): We have had the same policy at BA for years now. |
Quote: "On some services, this will be in a specially created Unaccompanied Minors zone within a short distance of the cabin crew in the galley. "We have recently changed our internal advice to our seating and airport teams to ensure that the seating of unaccompanied minors is managed in a safe but non discriminatory manner." http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/tr...natory-seating-policy-for-men.html |
Quoting kaitak (Reply 17): they have made a calculation that although they might get ticked off by equal opportunities and anti-discrimination quangos, it's a lot better than getting sued |
Quoting stealthz (Reply 26): No, you have to be honest enough to admit your child is at far more risk of abuse from someone in your family or a close friend and not someone in a very public space |
Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 28): On the positive side, it's a very good thing that "kiddie fiddlers" only fly the airlines and don't ride Greyhound buses or ride Amtrak and Via trains |
Quoting smi0006 (Reply 7): According to most airline procedures in priority UM should be seated next to the following people: 1. Other UMs 2. Female crew on duty travel in uniform. 3. Female airline staff on duty travel out of uniform 4. Female passengers |
Quoting STT757 (Reply 20): Perfectly fine with this policy, protecting children should be paramount over everything else |
Quoting StickShaker (Reply 30): Of all the child abuse cases that occur over a given timeframe it would be revealing to see just how many of those occurred during a flight by an UM. |
Quoting tayser (Reply 10): The Australian Sex discrimination commissioner / Australian Human Rights commission should scrutinise ALL Australian airline policies in this area - the policy is tantamount to labelling all males as kiddie-fiddlers - this is: 1) repugnant, 2) ignorant of the fact that not every paedophile has male genitalia, 3) absolutely atrocious, and 4) 100% sexist. |
Quoting OB1504 (Reply 31): If the parent initiates the request, that's fine |
Quoting stealthz (Reply 26): No, you have to be honest enough to admit your child is at far more risk of abuse from someone in your family or a close friend and not someone in a very public space! Much of the hysteria around child abuse is based on that denial... |
Quoting RWA380 (Reply 8): Mary Kay Letourneau, is a female, she has spent time in prison for having sex with a male student, it's not just men that commit |
Quoting smi0006 (Reply 1): I have no doubt that whilst it is a generalisation this rule came about as a child was molested by a male passenger... and the airline was sued for negligence. I doubt if airlines actually feel male passengers are a threat its just a way of protecting themselves. |
Quoting kgaiflyer (Reply 28): (3)-Here's an idea -- maybe we can make UMs wear bright orange or bright electric blue jumpsuits so we can avoid them like transported criminals. |
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 37): But, why are they moving the man? Why aren't they moving the UM? The man did nothing wrong, it's the airline that seated pax incorrectly. They should look around for another location for the child and then ask someone in that row to move, explaining that the UM needs to be here for xyz reason. |
Quoting ikramerica (Reply 37): I'm a man and don't have an issue with this rule, really. There are plenty of places to sit on an aircraft. But, why are they moving the man? Why aren't they moving the UM? The man did nothing wrong, it's the airline that seated pax incorrectly. |
Quoting VHHYI (Reply 27): Quoting bastew (Reply 9): We have had the same policy at BA for years now. Wasn't it changed after the an affected pax sued and won? |
Quoting ajd1992 (Reply 44): I personally would refuse to move. |
Quoting OzarkD9S (Reply 45): If they moved me to a First Class window seat I would gladly move away from any child, UM or not. Seriously, I've been asked to move once, very discretely and I was indeed moved to First, although my window seat was not forthcoming. The F meal was however and the flight was just over 2 hours (pre 9/11 if you haven't guessed). No window, but I had a good trashy book to read so no biggie. I was not offended in the slightest. No window seat or no First Class...send the little bugger elsewhere, sorry. |
Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 39): I once asked for AA to reassign the seating of a 14/15-year old male seated next to me to another seat in First—turns out he was the son of one of the f/a's, and she moved him to somewhere in Coach. In this day and age, it's not just the airline, but the passengers who have to pro-actively CYA. |
Quoting STT757 (Reply 22): All men are not predators, but are all predators men? |
Quoting ajd1992 (Reply 46): It's not even that though, it's the principle of they think because I've got wedding tackle i'm automatically a child abuser. It's on exactly the same lines of saying "Oh, he's Mexican so he's an illegal immigrant" or "he's black so he's been in prison for stealing a car". It's stereotyping of the highest degree. If they have a problem (and it is them, although if they asked me to move I would have problem with them) then that is for them to deal with - not to move a perfectly innocent passenger they have just implied is a child abuser. |