Affiliated aircrew

[Genghis the Engineer]

My mind was concentrated recently by a recent post on the subject of Mormon Pilots. Thinking around there are associations in the UK of flying farmers, flying lawyers, Christian Pilots, etc. No doubt elsewhere there are Jewish, Black, Asian, gay and other such pilots associations that I haven't come across.

The question I would like to pose to the house is - does it make a fig of difference? Surely anybody who considers their race, religion, marital state, sex, sexuality, etc. (or that of anybody else) in the slightest bit relevant to their job in a hangar or on a flight deck is in the wrong job.

(I'd make a slight exception for the flying farmers since they probably have a deep interest in flying from their own land which probably does present issues the rest of us don't worry about).

Views anybody?

G

[Dan Winterland]

Does anyone know of a society for under under-acheiving pilots???

[Capt Claret]

Genghis,

I would have thought that aviation and/or flying was the common link rather than race, colour, or sexual persuasion. Generally people look for like minded souls to be around, thus we can re-enforce our own views on life.

Perhaps the race/colour/sexual oriented pilots associations spring up because people don't really like different people and thus the 'minorities' try and find like minded souls. This would help avoid poofter bashing etc.

One only has to read many of the posts on PPRuNe to see how much acceptance there is of gays and people of non Anglo/European descent.

For example, had the recent Gulf Air tragedy instead been, say BA, would the ensuing thread have run to >500 posts, with derogatory comments about the crew and culture? Probably not.

------------------
bottums up !

[This message has been edited by Capt Claret (edited 12 October 2000).]

[Wiley]

There actually is a site for Christian pilots – Airborne. ( http://www.airborne.org/ ) It was set up a couple of years ago by Peter Kently, an Australian A340 captain who was then with Singapore Airlines. I haven’t looked at it in some time, but it had some quite serious and useful operational information on it as well as the Christian stuff.

[TowerDog]

If somebody started an association called
"White Male only Pilots Association",
we would never hear the end of the howling from the P/C crowd.

Screw 'em.

------------------
Men, this is no drill...

[Genghis the Engineer]

You'd hear me howling too - I think it would be just as utterly pointless as (say) a gay pilots association.

G

[Honest Frank]

But if someone opened up a "black pilots only " group would you scream then, calling them racist?Dont think so, reverse racism-cant be such a thing ,can there?

[Genghis the Engineer]

I am not politically correct, neither am I racist, sexist or any other -ist.

I do not agree with the need for Christian, Muslim, Budhist, atheist, Gay, Black, White, Womens, Mens, Neuters or bisexuals pilots groups. If (say) a gay society happens to have an aviation group within it, I think that's subtly different.

I accept that farmers and disabled pilots have specific common issues (flying from muddy fields, arranging special mods and medical conditions respectively) and there may be the odd other specific group I haven't thought of.

What the &*(^*(& is reverse racism? I've seen most races descriminate against most other races - how can you reverse it?

G

[Cyclic Hotline]

Er, http://www.ngpa.org/

[flapsforty]

Cyclic, just had a look at your link. What an amazing country is the U. S. of A! :)

I do not agree with the need for Christian, Muslim, Budhist, atheist, Gay, Black, White, Womens, Mens, Neuters or bisexuals pilots groups.
IMHO you can rightly disagree with somebody fulfilling certain needs if that fulfillment inconveniences you in any way Genghis. But how can you disagree with somebody's need?
It seems to be in the very nature of the word that "needing" is individual and what other people feel they need is none of our business.

------------------
A Singularly Simple Person........

[The President]

I'm with Genghis on this one. The justification for it is that the existance of minority groups within a larger group is to exercise a greater power than the individuals concerned can muster.

Let me explain... take Universities. They are not full of gays and lesbians, but in many universities (and the NUS too, I believe), they have a very loud voice through their LGB societies. They seek to advocate special treatment for their kind, at the neglect of the other members of the larger group.

This is the principal behind reverse discrimination. Someone in a majority group, like me (straight, white, male and in the aviation profession (which appears to be predominantly male at the moment)) cannot be discriminated against.

However if I was black, female and a lesbian, I would be a type of person grossly underrepresented in the aviation community. Therefore I'd probably want special treatment to see that I'm not discrimated against, wouldn't I? Fair enough.

However if these people feel that they are being discriminated against, should they not group together and make their voice heard? Well, I think "NO". Why? Because in so doing they are alienating themselves as a group... distancing themselves from the wider group as a whole, and in many cases instigating resentment amongst the people who are in the majority- who see that the minority are getting special treatment by an authority who fear the wrath of the anti-*ist brigade (and with it, public sympathy).

In short, and seperatism of a group within a group (and its associated pushes for special treatment) can only serve to erode the equal rights movement.

Beliefs, sexuality, gender, etc., has no relavence to the conduct of a safe flight. If the pilot is licenced, he or she can perform his or her duties to the standard required by the relavent authority. Any clubbing together of people based on a common factor (e.g., being gay) may be thought to be necessary in order to secure equal treatment- but in the end the 'equal' treatment will equate to positive discrimination and therefore breed resentment among the majority.

To illustrate my point, does anyone remember the 'rights for whites' slogans that were going up around the 1992 general election?