In Iran, Saudi Arabia, and the Sudan, women are required by law to wear head scarves in public. Some women find this deeply offensive. Do airlines have policies about this?

For example, if a Delta/Lufthansa/Qantas pilot/flight attendant is female, and does not want to wear a head scarf, will the company put her on a scheduled flight to Saudi Arabia? Would it even be legal under American/European/Australian law to require this? What happens in practice?

(I know there is typically a bidding system. What happens if an employee through the bidding system gets such a flight.)

American carriers don’t fly to those countries. Moot conversation.

There have been issues raised by certain airlines in the past; one that comes to mind is Air France and their IKA route (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35962239), a route which AF now lets FAs opt-out of. Similarly, LGBT+ flight attendants have raised issues about flying to destinations in Iran (again with AF) but to no avail.

deltalaw wrote:

American carriers don’t fly to those countries. Moot conversation.

Read the question.

I believe the headscarf rule in Saudi Arabia is only applied (or strictly applied) to the two holy cities, Mecca and Medina. In fact, only Muslims can enter and live in this two cities. Other cities like Jeddah are more moderate. It isn't unusual to see women without headscarves.

afterburner wrote:

I believe the headscarf rule in Saudi Arabia is only applied (or strictly applied) to the two holy cities, Mecca and Medina. In fact, only Muslims can enter and live in this two cities. Other cities like Jeddah are more moderate. It isn't unusual to see women without headscarves.

Um, really?!?!

1836Sam wrote:

afterburner wrote:

I believe the headscarf rule in Saudi Arabia is only applied (or strictly applied) to the two holy cities, Mecca and Medina. In fact, only Muslims can enter and live in this two cities. Other cities like Jeddah are more moderate. It isn't unusual to see women without headscarves.

Um, really?!?!

I've been to Saudi Arabia twice. The first time was in 1989 and the second one was last year. On both occasions I saw women without headscarves in public places (especially in malls). They were foreigners. Most probably migrant workers from Southeast Asia.

afterburner wrote:

1836Sam wrote:

afterburner wrote:

I believe the headscarf rule in Saudi Arabia is only applied (or strictly applied) to the two holy cities, Mecca and Medina. In fact, only Muslims can enter and live in this two cities. Other cities like Jeddah are more moderate. It isn't unusual to see women without headscarves.

Um, really?!?!

I've been to Saudi Arabia twice. The first time was in 1989 and the second one was last year. On both occasions I saw women without headscarves in public places (especially in malls). They were foreigners. Most probably migrant workers from Southeast Asia.

Well that probably answers the question.

deltalaw wrote:

American carriers don’t fly to those countries. Moot conversation.

I don't think all the examples were American. I'm sure Lufthansa flies Berlin->Riyadh direct.

I found this statement on Delta.com. So guess this is how Delta handles it.

Delta Air Lines does not discriminate nor do we condone discrimination against any of our customers in regards to age, race, nationality, religion, or gender.
Delta does not operate service to Saudi Arabia and does not codeshare with any airline on flights to that country. Delta does not intend to codeshare or share reciprocal benefits, such as frequent flier benefits, with Saudi Arabian Airlines, which we have confirmed with SkyTeam, an Amsterdam-based 14-member global airline alliance.

deltalaw wrote:

American carriers don’t fly to those countries. Moot conversation.

Airliners.net is not an American forum about American aviation for American members.

Contrary to popular belief, headscarves are not mandatory in Saudi Arabia. However, wearing an Abaya or similar non-revealing clothing is mandatory.

As you get to the hotel, a clothes rack with loaner abayas is wheeled out for female crew. As you depart the hotel, the abayas are returned.

Starlionblue wrote:

Contrary to popular belief, headscarves are not mandatory in Saudi Arabia. However, wearing an Abaya or similar non-revealing clothing is mandatory.

As you get to the hotel, a clothes rack with loaner abayas is wheeled out for female crew. As you depart the hotel, the abayas are returned.

I dunno. The Internet seems quite clear on Saudi law on this matter.

" Saudi Arabian dress code legally requires all women, local and foreign, to wear an abaya, a typically black garment that covers everything except the face, hands, and feet, in public." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab_by_ ... udi_Arabia

I can find 10 million more examples.

I don't know how seriously the law is enforced.

To and from the hotel and at the airport that is not required in Saudi. Westerners are kept in guarded compounds, different rules apply.

Crew are issued a letter of introduction to show the religious police if questioned.

Once you go out in public it’s time to observe local customs. At shopping malls there are religious police that enforce these dress codes. Eating areas have different colour tables for males, females, and families. Some shops are women or family only, or have segregated areas for family only.

It really isn’t that bad, just a little different.

zeke wrote:

To and from the hotel and at the airport that is not required in Saudi. Westerners are kept in guarded compounds, different rules apply.

Crew are issued a letter of introduction to show the religious police if questioned.

Once you go out in public it’s time to observe local customs. At shopping malls there are religious police that enforce these dress codes. Eating areas have different colour tables for males, females, and families. Some shops are women or family only, or have segregated areas for family only.

It really isn’t that bad, just a little different.

Separate but equal is widely judged immoral in many contexts. Separate but equal restaurants (or restaurant areas) has been judged immoral in my country since the 1960s.

kitplane01 wrote:

zeke wrote:

To and from the hotel and at the airport that is not required in Saudi. Westerners are kept in guarded compounds, different rules apply.

Crew are issued a letter of introduction to show the religious police if questioned.

Once you go out in public it’s time to observe local customs. At shopping malls there are religious police that enforce these dress codes. Eating areas have different colour tables for males, females, and families. Some shops are women or family only, or have segregated areas for family only.

It really isn’t that bad, just a little different.

Separate but equal is widely judged immoral in many contexts. Separate but equal restaurants (or restaurant areas) has been judged immoral in my country since the 1960s.

Legally of course that's the case in the US and elsewhere. But let's be careful not to turn this into an indictment of Islam or Muslim countries. The separate treatment of men and women is a worldwide issue and impacts many cultures and religions.

For example females are not allowed to pray next to men at most Jewish holy sites including the Western Wall. In Jerusalem’s Ultra Orthodox neighborhood of Mea She’arim, there are signs indicating you are not welcome to enter unless married women cover their hair and shoulders. There have been known incidents of women throwing stones are other women who are not sufficiently covered. Areas in Brooklyn and the Catskills also have encouraged observance of Ultra Orthodox cultural norms.

And of course women in the Catholic church cannot server as priests, cover their hair and wear modest clothing in churches, nuns are expected to dress modestly and until recently, cover their hair. etc.

You might disagree with these policies (as I do) but this is their culture and custom.

The same is true of flight crews. If there's a concern about their ability to be safe, or their personal conduct could lead to the violation of local laws, then most employers will find additional accommodation.

kitplane01 wrote:

Starlionblue wrote:

Contrary to popular belief, headscarves are not mandatory in Saudi Arabia. However, wearing an Abaya or similar non-revealing clothing is mandatory.

As you get to the hotel, a clothes rack with loaner abayas is wheeled out for female crew. As you depart the hotel, the abayas are returned.

I dunno. The Internet seems quite clear on Saudi law on this matter.

" Saudi Arabian dress code legally requires all women, local and foreign, to wear an abaya, a typically black garment that covers everything except the face, hands, and feet, in public." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hijab_by_ ... udi_Arabia

I can find 10 million more examples.

I don't know how seriously the law is enforced.

AFAIK foreign women aren't held to quite the same standard. See this note https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Culture_o ... abia#Dress.

Foreign women are required to wear an abaya, but don't need to cover their hair.

(Yes I know it is from Wikipedia, and so suspect. )

Reinforcing my impression is the fact that females were not lent a headscarf, just an abaya. Having said that, they would typically pull a fold of the abaya over their heads if they left the hotel, or wear their own scarf.

Normally we'd just hang at the hotel anyway so it was a bit of a moot point.

deltalaw wrote:

American carriers don’t fly to those countries. Moot conversation.

This might be news for you but there are other countries world that aren't governed under Sharia law.

Starlionblue wrote:

Normally we'd just hang at the hotel anyway so it was a bit of a moot point.

I think many women would very much disagree with you. They might reasonably feel discriminated against in a way men are not. Of course every person has their own viewpoint, but I would sympathize with such a position.

kitplane01 wrote:

I think many women would very much disagree with you. They might reasonably feel discriminated against in a way men are not. Of course every person has their own viewpoint, but I would sympathize with such a position.

You come across as being very intolerant and disrespectful of other cultures.

People who travel widely like crew are used to blending in and being respectful in other countries, and often go out of their way to learn a few local phrases like please, thank you, good morning. It goes a long way to being welcomed.

I have had some great trips in Saudi, just by being polite. Locals have in my experience go out of their way to treat you like family. Their culture is to share everything they have with even relatively unknown people.

In contrast go to someplace like the US which is supposed to be “free”, you would be flat out getting anyone to have the time of day for you. Foreigners are either domestic workers or worse. Often immigration pull one or two of my female crew in uniform for secondary questioning in the back room and they are asked what is the purpose of your visitor today to the USA ? Why do you come to the US so often, are you a prostitute ?

“I’m crew, that’s why I have a crew visa, in uniform, on the GD”

deltalaw wrote:

American carriers don’t fly to those countries. Moot conversation.

You do understand the world extends beyond the Coasts of the US right ?

77H

zeke wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

I think many women would very much disagree with you. They might reasonably feel discriminated against in a way men are not. Of course every person has their own viewpoint, but I would sympathize with such a position.

You come across as being very intolerant and disrespectful of other cultures.

People who travel widely like crew are used to blending in and being respectful in other countries, and often go out of their way to learn a few local phrases like please, thank you, good morning. It goes a long way to being welcomed.

I have had some great trips in Saudi, just by being polite. Locals have in my experience go out of their way to treat you like family. Their culture is to share everything they have with even relatively unknown people.

In contrast go to someplace like the US which is supposed to be “free”, you would be flat out getting anyone to have the time of day for you. Foreigners are either domestic workers or worse. Often immigration pull one or two of my female crew in uniform for secondary questioning in the back room and they are asked what is the purpose of your visitor today to the USA ? Why do you come to the US so often, are you a prostitute ?

“I’m crew, that’s why I have a crew visa, in uniform, on the GD”

Well said. You’ll have to excuse some of my American counterparts. It is evident in several posts in just this thread alone that some believe that anything contrary to the American way is wrong. Rest assured fellow Americans, the world looks at the way we do things and let’s out a collective W T F.

77H

kitplane01 wrote:

Starlionblue wrote:

Normally we'd just hang at the hotel anyway so it was a bit of a moot point.

I think many women would very much disagree with you. They might reasonably feel discriminated against in a way men are not. Of course every person has their own viewpoint, but I would sympathize with such a position.

Most of the female crew felt that this was a very minor part of the job and while they were morally opposed to the concept of having to dress differently and such, for them it was not worth drawing a line in the sand over the whole thing.

We were not treated disrespectfully. Just in a different context.

If you want to make stand against such political systems, that's fine. But while acting as an employee this is not your place. If you can't handle such situations, don't work for an international airline.

zeke wrote:

You come across as being very intolerant and disrespectful of other cultures.

You come across as not caring about the rights and dignities of others.

77H wrote:

Well said. You’ll have to excuse some of my American counterparts. It is evident in several posts in just this thread alone that some believe that anything contrary to the American way is wrong. Rest assured fellow Americans, the world looks at the way we do things and let’s out a collective W T

Actually, the rule is that sexism is wrong. It's not pro-America, it's anti-sexism.

HERE'S THE THING: If you think head scarves are a cultural affectation, then it's a minor thing and all the noise is dumb. But if you think head scarves are a sign of gender oppression, then it's oppression and the problems are obvious. I think we all agree on that??

Starlionblue wrote:

If you want to make stand against such political systems, that's fine. But while acting as an employee this is not your place. If you can't handle such situations, don't work for an international airline.

Suppose you thought your employer was asking something immoral. Then protesting/requesting/complaining is appropriate. You should not be forced to give up your job (and seniority). The employer should instead behave morally.

At least one airline (Delta) is believes morality requires not being an airline in Saudi Arabia. https://news.delta.com/delta-issues-sta ... n-airlines

kitplane01 wrote:

You come across as not caring about the rights and dignities of others.

Unlike you I have obviously have talked to locals in Saudi, and they haven’t expressed their rights or dignity has been impacted.

It’s their custom.

Many countries around the world have different dress for males and females, from very primitive cultures to very advanced ones. Even your beloved North American aborigines.

Why “pick” on just one group?

zeke wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

You come across as not caring about the rights and dignities of others.

Unlike you I have obviously have talked to locals in Saudi, and they haven’t expressed their rights or dignity has been impacted.

It’s their custom.

Many countries around the world have different dress for males and females, from very primitive cultures to very advanced ones. Even your beloved North American aborigines.

Why “pick” on just one group?

It's not just Saudi Arabia. See the initial question.

And I have talked to Egyptians and Jordanians and Iranians and Pakistani (but not Saudi, you're right). And I'm aware things are different in Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

I can understand the "it's a custom" argument. I can even argue it if you want. But Saudi society is clearly sexist:
- Women must show the signed permission from a mahram (close male relative—husband, son, father, uncle or grandson) before she is free to travel, even inside Saudi Arabia
- Global Gender Gap Report ranked Saudi Arabia 141 out of 144 countries for gender parity
- This list can go on forever

This sexism makes me less comfortable with the "it's just culture" argument and more comfortable with the "this sexist government should not impose it's sexism on me" argument. If you want to argue that Saudi society isn't very sexist, I disagree. If you want to that the rest of Saudi society is sexist, but this one thing is not .. that feels naive.

kitplane01 wrote:

I can understand the "it's a custom" argument. I can even argue it if you want. But Saudi society is clearly sexist:
- Women must show the signed permission from a mahram (close male relative—husband, son, father, uncle or grandson) before she is free to travel, even inside Saudi Arabia
- Global Gender Gap Report ranked Saudi Arabia 141 out of 144 countries for gender parity
- This list can go on forever

This sexism makes me less comfortable with the "it's just culture" argument and more comfortable with the "this sexist government should not impose it's sexism on me" argument. If you want to argue that Saudi society isn't very sexist, I disagree. If you want to that the rest of Saudi society is sexist, but this one thing is not .. that feels naive.

You are still projecting your values on others, and judging them as being unjust.

You will find millions of households in the US which have they own restrictions and rules placed on the people who share the accommodation. People who live in the house see the way they do things in their house as just the way they do things, it is their custom. This may include how they have to dress, religion, what they can eat, where they are allowed to go out, when they have to be home, reporting, dating, using a phone, diving, working, traveling.

You ask the people who live in the household, they just accept that is the way their family is, it is their custom.

kitplane01 wrote:

zeke wrote:

You come across as being very intolerant and disrespectful of other cultures.

You come across as not caring about the rights and dignities of others.

77H wrote:

Well said. You’ll have to excuse some of my American counterparts. It is evident in several posts in just this thread alone that some believe that anything contrary to the American way is wrong. Rest assured fellow Americans, the world looks at the way we do things and let’s out a collective W T

Actually, the rule is that sexism is wrong. It's not pro-America, it's anti-sexism.

HERE'S THE THING: If you think head scarves are a cultural affectation, then it's a minor thing and all the noise is dumb. But if you think head scarves are a sign of gender oppression, then it's oppression and the problems are obvious. I think we all agree on that??

Right.... because oppression of women is nonexistent in the US. What is the “MeToo” movement all about then? Oh and let’s not forget the countless convicted rapists in this country who have gotten little more than a slap on the wrist for destroying women’s lives. Let’s clean up the mess at home before judging others shall we?

77H

zeke wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

I can understand the "it's a custom" argument. I can even argue it if you want. But Saudi society is clearly sexist:
- Women must show the signed permission from a mahram (close male relative—husband, son, father, uncle or grandson) before she is free to travel, even inside Saudi Arabia
- Global Gender Gap Report ranked Saudi Arabia 141 out of 144 countries for gender parity
- This list can go on forever

This sexism makes me less comfortable with the "it's just culture" argument and more comfortable with the "this sexist government should not impose it's sexism on me" argument. If you want to argue that Saudi society isn't very sexist, I disagree. If you want to that the rest of Saudi society is sexist, but this one thing is not .. that feels naive.

You are still projecting your values on others, and judging them as being unjust.

I am. And I should. And everyone does to some extent. Isn't the other choice to ignore evil and injustice? (If you wan't to argue I'm wrong in my judgement .. that's a different issue.) I always think of this ... For evil to win all that is needed is for good people to remain silent.

afterburner wrote:

I believe the headscarf rule in Saudi Arabia is only applied (or strictly applied) to the two holy cities, MeMedina. In fact, only Muslims can enter and live in this two cities. Other cities like Jeddah are more moderate. It isn't unusual to see women without headscarves.

During the Haaj non muslim flight attendants are not required to wear head scarves as one may enter into Mecca Itself. We landed and took off from King Faisal Airport,
And Certainly when I was there? There were very few if any Muslims working there on the ramp as most airlines brought in their own staff. It was so chaotic that whomever had a problem, everybody pitched in to help that airline no matter what airline you actually worked for. It was like the UN of airlines!![/photoid]

77H wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

zeke wrote:

You come across as being very intolerant and disrespectful of other cultures.

You come across as not caring about the rights and dignities of others.

77H wrote:

Well said. You’ll have to excuse some of my American counterparts. It is evident in several posts in just this thread alone that some believe that anything contrary to the American way is wrong. Rest assured fellow Americans, the world looks at the way we do things and let’s out a collective W T

Actually, the rule is that sexism is wrong. It's not pro-America, it's anti-sexism.

HERE'S THE THING: If you think head scarves are a cultural affectation, then it's a minor thing and all the noise is dumb. But if you think head scarves are a sign of gender oppression, then it's oppression and the problems are obvious. I think we all agree on that??

Right.... because oppression of women is nonexistent in the US. What is the “MeToo” movement all about then? Oh and let’s not forget the countless convicted rapists in this country who have gotten little more than a slap on the wrist for destroying women’s lives. Let’s clean up the mess at home before judging others shall we?

77H

What’s the theory behind this? Until things are perfect at home we cannot even notice problems abroad? Only perfect nations can criticize others?

kitplane01 wrote:

Starlionblue wrote:

If you want to make stand against such political systems, that's fine. But while acting as an employee this is not your place. If you can't handle such situations, don't work for an international airline.

Suppose you thought your employer was asking something immoral. Then protesting/requesting/complaining is appropriate. You should not be forced to give up your job (and seniority). The employer should instead behave morally.

At least one airline (Delta) is believes morality requires not being an airline in Saudi Arabia. https://news.delta.com/delta-issues-sta ... n-airlines

Maybe I'm a cynic but I'm fairly sure Delta has no commercial interest in operating to Saudi, so it can conveniently make such a statement. Companies do not, as a rule, have inherent morals. They have image. They are commercial concerns, not people.

I knew when I signed the employment contract that my employee operated to Saudi. My personal opinions of the Saudi regime did not change my professional behaviour when rostered to operate into Saudi. I was asked to operate an aircraft. I was not asked to actively participate in political activities I did not believe in.

Besides, for all we know the trade contact of international flights provides international exposure which has a long term liberalising effect on the local culture.

Again, if you don't want to find yourself flying to places you have moral qualms about, don't work for an international airline. Or any international concern, for that matter.

strfyr51 wrote:

It was so chaotic that whomever had a problem, everybody pitched in to help that airline no matter what airline you actually worked for. It was like the UN of airlines!!

Great anecdote in an otherwise "thread gone political".

strfyr51 wrote:

During the Haaj non muslim flight attendants are not required to wear head scarves as one may enter into Mecca Itself. We landed and took off from King Faisal Airport,
And Certainly when I was there? There were very few if any Muslims working there on the ramp as most airlines brought in their own staff. It was so chaotic that whomever had a problem, everybody pitched in to help that airline no matter what airline you actually worked for. It was like the UN of airlines!![/photoid]

Non Muslims ARE NOT allowed to enter the cities of Mecca and Medina. And there is no King Faisal Airport. There is King Faisal Air Force Base, which shares location with Tabuk Regional Airport. And it's more than 1000 km away from Mecca. The closest airport from Mecca is King Abdulaziz International Airport (JED) in Jeddah.

kitplane01 wrote:

I think many women would very much disagree with you. They might reasonably feel discriminated against in a way men are not. Of course every person has their own viewpoint, but I would sympathize with such a position.

How many is "many"?
My friend who flew there or were based there for years didn't have a problem. Their view is that it is their land, their customs, my friends were just there for work.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

If the crew didn't like flying to Saudi Arabia, that is an issue to be resolved between the crewmember, and the employer.

kitplane01 wrote:

You come across as not caring about the rights and dignities of others.

In some countries, spitting in public places is seen as an individual rights. In some countries, spitting in public is seen as a criminal offence. So, if I'm from a country where spitting in public places is an individual right, do you want me to spit in front of your house citing "if you care about the rights and dignities of others, don't complain about me spitting"?

As I said... when in Rome, do as the Romans do.

kitplane01 wrote:

But if you think head scarves are a sign of gender oppression, then it's oppression and the problems are obvious. I think we all agree on that??

Try and say that to the "headscarf advocating feminists" in some countries... they'd eat your words and have a good laugh... (not that I agree with them).

kitplane01 wrote:

And I have talked to Egyptians and Jordanians and Iranians and Pakistani (but not Saudi, you're right). And I'm aware things are different in Jordan and Saudi Arabia.

Yes, they are different. There are many things I don't like about Saudi, but if I'm there, I'm expected to respect (not agree) to their laws and customs. If you're a crewmember being assigned for duty there and has to have a layover, you are expected to respect that too.

If any crewmember has an issue with that, then it is their right to take that issue with their employer. Most who don't agree, just go and stay in their hotels and hang around the pool with their swimsuits on for their stay... and only wear the headscarft as they go between the hotel and their crew bus, as well as between the landside crew bus and immigration on departures, or between leaving the aircraft and the landside crew bus.
It's called PROFESSIONALISM... which is different from morality. Crew are expected to be put their professionalism ahead of their morality.

zeke wrote:

You are still projecting your values on others, and judging them as being unjust.

It's like talking to a sand dune...

strfyr51 wrote:

During the Haaj non muslim flight attendants are not required to wear head scarves as one may enter into Mecca Itself. We landed and took off from King Faisal Airport,
And Certainly when I was there? There were very few if any Muslims working there on the ramp as most airlines brought in their own staff. It was so chaotic that whomever had a problem, everybody pitched in to help that airline no matter what airline you actually worked for. It was like the UN of airlines!![/photoid]

Flights to Mecca use Jeddah's airport (King Abdulaziz Intl Airport)... Jeddah is located in Mecca province, but is some distance away from the city of Mecca. Non-Muslims in Mecca are limited to the very outskirts as the zone for Muslims only goes all the way to the edge of Mecca.

For flights to/from Medina, you use the airport at Medina (Prince Mohammad Bin Abdulazis airport). Non-Muslim crew will stay on the outskirts outside the Muslim only zone, which is much smaller than the zone in Mecca.

There is no airport in Saudi Arabia with the name of King Faisal at the moment.

afterburner wrote:

I believe the headscarf rule in Saudi Arabia is only applied (or strictly applied) to the two holy cities, Mecca and Medina. In fact, only Muslims can enter and live in this two cities. Other cities like Jeddah are more moderate. It isn't unusual to see women without headscarves.

You need to go to Riyadh then... I am told it makes Jeddah (and even Mecca and Medina) look liberal!

mandala499 wrote:

afterburner wrote:

I believe the headscarf rule in Saudi Arabia is only applied (or strictly applied) to the two holy cities, Mecca and Medina. In fact, only Muslims can enter and live in this two cities. Other cities like Jeddah are more moderate. It isn't unusual to see women without headscarves.

You need to go to Riyadh then... I am told it makes Jeddah (and even Mecca and Medina) look liberal!

I've never been to Riyadh. However my flight that flew me to Medina last year had a stop at Riyadh airport and some of the passengers disembarked there. One of them was a woman and she didn't wear a headscarf. So I assumed the city is quite moderate.

mandala499 wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

I think many women would very much disagree with you. They might reasonably feel discriminated against in a way men are not. Of course every person has their own viewpoint, but I would sympathize with such a position.

How many is "many"?
My friend who flew there or were based there for years didn't have a problem. Their view is that it is their land, their customs, my friends were just there for work.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

The Romans had slavery, killed Jews and Christians for public entertainment, and discriminated against women and French people. (Really Gauls, same thing.)

If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

kitplane01 wrote:

mandala499 wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

I think many women would very much disagree with you. They might reasonably feel discriminated against in a way men are not. Of course every person has their own viewpoint, but I would sympathize with such a position.

How many is "many"?
My friend who flew there or were based there for years didn't have a problem. Their view is that it is their land, their customs, my friends were just there for work.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

The Romans had slavery, killed Jews and Christians for public entertainment, and discriminated against women and French people. (Really Gauls, same thing.)

If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

It's an expression...

Starlionblue wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

mandala499 wrote:

How many is "many"?
My friend who flew there or were based there for years didn't have a problem. Their view is that it is their land, their customs, my friends were just there for work.

When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

The Romans had slavery, killed Jews and Christians for public entertainment, and discriminated against women and French people. (Really Gauls, same thing.)

If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

It's an expression...

Obviously ... but there was a question: If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

kitplane01 wrote:

Starlionblue wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

The Romans had slavery, killed Jews and Christians for public entertainment, and discriminated against women and French people. (Really Gauls, same thing.)

If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

It's an expression...

Obviously ... but there was a question: If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

I think the expression can also be interpreted as "when in Rome, be polite to the locals and don't draw attention to yourself in such a way as would seem offensive or impolite in their culture."

kitplane01 wrote:

Obviously ... but there was a question: If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

What has immoral practice got to do with Technical Operations?

Dear Mods, I think it's clear what the OP is trying to do, and the answer he/she seeks has nothing to do with Technical Operations.

Starlionblue wrote:

I think the expression can also be interpreted as "when in Rome, be polite to the locals and don't draw attention to yourself in such a way as would seem offensive or impolite in their culture."

I find this a fascinating thread, as it is not just about "Head Scarves and Scheduling". In reality, if one felt uncomfortable within or visiting a culture, they would simply bid to avoid those flights. Everything is easily avoided. Even the most junior crew member can bid a Saskatoon layover over Dubai. However ...

What I find interesting, is that it is not hard to tell from what country people hail, simply by their answers here.

As a Canadian, we are irritatingly polite and accomodating. Same thing when travelling. But, we are also taught then when travelling, we are in fact, guests of that country and are expected to act as "guests". At my airline, we are taught the customs and quirks of everywhere we fly. Some things, while acceptable at home are not in other countries. Learn what is respectable and what is not, and adjust your actions accordingly.

I can see that some members here, come from countries that have a lot of "history". Not only have the seen things in the past, or read about them in history books ... but, they are far more worldly. They are well aware that their actions are not acceptable in some places because they have seen it first hand.

Then ... there are those that hail from countries with the belief, that even though they have never seen the outside world, their way of life MUST be the best way of life, because that is what they have been told. Not only would they be "offended" by actions from "foreigners" in ther country, the reverse is not true as they demand that they act any way they want whereever they go ... because they can do it at home.

I'll bet when they actually do venture beyond their hallowed borders, the world is a real eye-opener for them!

mandala499 wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

Obviously ... but there was a question: If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

What has immoral practice got to do with Technical Operations?

Dear Mods, I think it's clear what the OP is trying to do, and the answer he/she seeks has nothing to do with Technical Operations.

Actually, it did start as a question about scheduling and airliners. But clearly we are no longer talking about that. Thanks to everyone who participated. Now back to real airliner stuff…

kitplane01 wrote:

zeke wrote:

You come across as being very intolerant and disrespectful of other cultures.

You come across as not caring about the rights and dignities of others.

That from a culture that goes into hysteric antics on exposure of an innocent nipple, breastfeeding ( even with nipple in mouth ) and similar things.

WIederling wrote:

That from a culture that goes into hysteric antics on exposure of an innocent nipple, breastfeeding ( even with nipple in mouth ) and similar things.

The same culture that has not been able to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment since it was originally introduced to congress in 1921, some 98 years ago,

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

I’m an American of a rather right wing view and, after visiting 70-something countries, will absolutely testify that many countries and customs have their good (and bad) points. We fly airplanes, not make political statements.

gf

Don’t know about you, it is those differences which makes the job enjoyable. If the world was the same all over it would be a very boring place. The differences is what makes the job interesting, and is somewhat the reward for all the travel we do.

GalaxyFlyer wrote:

zekeAs said elsewhere, live and let live, I don’t care a hoot what a foreign custom is as long as they don’t try to export it. I don’t preach and don’t want to be preached. Funny, that’s how it worked out.

Saudi Arabia is spending billions of Dollars each year to export their hardcore fundamental Wahabism into the world. This includes sponsoring mosques all over Europe, Asia and North America. Mosques which then have to preach Wahabism, not regular Islam, but this hardcore version which believes in Sharia law.

So tell me again, how "live and let live" works if you are dealing with Saudi Arabia?

mandala499 wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

Obviously ... but there was a question: If the place you're going has an immoral practice, do you really "do as the Romans do"?

What has immoral practice got to do with Technical Operations?

Dear Mods, I think it's clear what the OP is trying to do, and the answer he/she seeks has nothing to do with Technical Operations.

Are you really that ignorant mandala? Or are you just unhappy with the topic?

The Op asked a very relevant question, which of course is part of the operations side of airlines. He wants to know if crews are forced to fly to these countries like Saudia Arabia where human rights are non existent.

That's a very valid question, especially if you are female or gay and so far the question has not been answered.

WIederling wrote:

That from a culture that goes into hysteric antics on exposure of an innocent nipple, breastfeeding ( even with nipple in mouth ) and similar things.

zeke wrote:

The same culture that has not been able to ratify the Equal Rights Amendment since it was originally introduced to congress in 1921, some 98 years ago,

I know bashing our mates from the US is very fashionable, but perhaps you guys should think first before writing. If shit hits the fan, do you want to sit in front of a US court or in front of a Saudi Arabian court? The answer, which you can give yourselfs, should bring some perspective back to that topic.

kitplane01 wrote:

zeke wrote:

kitplane01 wrote:

I can understand the "it's a custom" argument. I can even argue it if you want. But Saudi society is clearly sexist:
- Women must show the signed permission from a mahram (close male relative—husband, son, father, uncle or grandson) before she is free to travel, even inside Saudi Arabia
- Global Gender Gap Report ranked Saudi Arabia 141 out of 144 countries for gender parity
- This list can go on forever

This sexism makes me less comfortable with the "it's just culture" argument and more comfortable with the "this sexist government should not impose it's sexism on me" argument. If you want to argue that Saudi society isn't very sexist, I disagree. If you want to that the rest of Saudi society is sexist, but this one thing is not .. that feels naive.

You are still projecting your values on others, and judging them as being unjust.

I am. And I should. And everyone does to some extent. Isn't the other choice to ignore evil and injustice? (If you wan't to argue I'm wrong in my judgement .. that's a different issue.) I always think of this ... For evil to win all that is needed is for good people to remain silent.

Keep it up kitplane. We good people need to speak about the bad things in the world. There is no reason to keep back at all. Respect for a different culture must end once human rights are in danger. Forcing women to wear head scarfs and other clothing is in clear violation of human rights.

CARST wrote:

Keep it up kitplane. We good people need to speak about the bad things in the world. There is no reason to keep back at all. Respect for a different culture must end once human rights are in danger. Forcing women to wear head scarfs and other clothing is in clear violation of human rights.

Even if those things he spoke of are based on flawed knowledge & lack of first hand experience? The fact that he attacked the assertions of those who actually have BEEN to Saudi Arabia is saying a lot to be honest.

Would your response be the same if the question is about how Muslim women in airlines requesting to not serve alcoholic drinks onboard? I recall a few years back, an African American Muslim convert was fired from her job at a regional airline for merely asking accommodation for not serving alcoholic drinks from her colleagues, many of whom agreed.

Honestly, the question has been answered, and I don't think there's any need for this thread to continue.

[EDIT]

My reply was religious and I don't think anybody here is prepared to see another point of view.

CARST wrote:

I know bashing our mates from the US is very fashionable, but perhaps you guys should think first before writing. If shit hits the fan, do you want to sit in front of a US court or in front of a Saudi Arabian court? The answer, which you can give yourselfs, should bring some perspective back to that topic.

Good argument. in a way.
Either you die immediately ( beheaded in SA ) or you get wrung through the US negotiated judgment legal system and rot in prison afterwards.
The US is moving down while most other systems seem to improve.
Difficult to judge where the crossover is for the individual combinations.
In theory the US is a brilliant light on the horizon.
But that is a mirage.