Sexist Virgin Australia Outrages Men
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Bali
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sexist Virgin Australia Outrages Men
Sexist Virgin outrages men
Virgin Australia has promised a review after facing a firestorm of criticism from men outraged at its policy of barring males from sitting next to unaccompanied children.
A public backlash has prompted Virgin Australia to announce it will review its policy barring men from sitting beside unaccompanied children on flights.
The company was today widely criticised after a Sydney fireman reported his experience of being asked to swap seats because he was sat beside two unaccompanied boys.
Read more: Virgin Australia | Man Asked To Move Due to Paedophile Fears
Virgin Australia has promised a review after facing a firestorm of criticism from men outraged at its policy of barring males from sitting next to unaccompanied children.
A public backlash has prompted Virgin Australia to announce it will review its policy barring men from sitting beside unaccompanied children on flights.
The company was today widely criticised after a Sydney fireman reported his experience of being asked to swap seats because he was sat beside two unaccompanied boys.
Read more: Virgin Australia | Man Asked To Move Due to Paedophile Fears
Is it just me or does this Fireman need to toughen the f**k up!! To be honest I wouldn't want my unaccompanied children sitting next to a Male passenger who is traveling by themselves, I don't care if that offends that passenger. This is a common policy over most big airlines.
Unfortunately its all part of the world we live in. None of us like security screening but its also a response to unpleasant events. How would the airline explain if a peodophile did get put next to an UM and the unfortunate happened?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Qantas has the same policy and looks like they've upset someone.
Qantas | Airline | Unaccompanied child policy | Man 'humliated'
Qantas | Airline | Unaccompanied child policy | Man 'humliated'
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: NZ
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ollie,
Woman can be pedophiles too, it is a psychological condition.
It is a condition of most airlines that crew supervise the UM throughout the flight, how can you be certain that by swapping male pax with a female that you haven't just made the situation into something that it wasn't? Both men and women are capable of heinous acts.
Should we also separate the elderly from dodgy looking fella in case they flog their purse. Or maybe separate those with a different religion in case of some uprising...
It comes down to the parent willing to accept that these are the risks associated with sending your child off on their own. The best way to deal with it - don't send them on their own.
Woman can be pedophiles too, it is a psychological condition.
It is a condition of most airlines that crew supervise the UM throughout the flight, how can you be certain that by swapping male pax with a female that you haven't just made the situation into something that it wasn't? Both men and women are capable of heinous acts.
Should we also separate the elderly from dodgy looking fella in case they flog their purse. Or maybe separate those with a different religion in case of some uprising...
It comes down to the parent willing to accept that these are the risks associated with sending your child off on their own. The best way to deal with it - don't send them on their own.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Western Pacific
Posts: 721
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't know about the rest of you, but with the way things are these days, if I was seated next to an unaccompanied child, I would ask to be moved. It's just safer that way.
I'm thinking that the man doth protest too much!
I'm thinking that the man doth protest too much!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: messemate way to bondi icebergs
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Shark slayer fair point.
This is sexism to the very core! We live in a world that has gone more than full circle. Imagine if there was a movie about a female stripper equivalent to magic mike. Look at the family law act! Rampant female favoritism. I don't mind inequalities being made a public issue.
But I'm not sure wether making a scene of this issue
a) helps the particular situation
b) takes society further down the PC bull**** path
c) actually aid solving inequalities for anyone.
What it does do is make the flight attendants day much harder when these martyrs want to make a scene and delay flights.
This is sexism to the very core! We live in a world that has gone more than full circle. Imagine if there was a movie about a female stripper equivalent to magic mike. Look at the family law act! Rampant female favoritism. I don't mind inequalities being made a public issue.
But I'm not sure wether making a scene of this issue
a) helps the particular situation
b) takes society further down the PC bull**** path
c) actually aid solving inequalities for anyone.
What it does do is make the flight attendants day much harder when these martyrs want to make a scene and delay flights.
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: South of O
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]What it does do is make the flight attendants day much harder when these martyrs want to make a scene and delay flights./QUOTE]
Nothing I read showed that either of these two guys behaved as if they believed they were martyrs, nor was it ever indicated that they made a scene, delayed a flight or even made a flight attendant's day any harder.
All I read from the articles was that they felt extremely embarrassed to be asked to change seats because of whom they were seated next to, solely on a policy that is not supported by any regulation.
Really, if airlines WANT to implement this type of policy, AND except money from parents who WANT to send their children around the country by themselves, the airline should organise it in a way that that does not affect/embarrass any of the other fare paying customers.
Nothing I read showed that either of these two guys behaved as if they believed they were martyrs, nor was it ever indicated that they made a scene, delayed a flight or even made a flight attendant's day any harder.
All I read from the articles was that they felt extremely embarrassed to be asked to change seats because of whom they were seated next to, solely on a policy that is not supported by any regulation.
Really, if airlines WANT to implement this type of policy, AND except money from parents who WANT to send their children around the country by themselves, the airline should organise it in a way that that does not affect/embarrass any of the other fare paying customers.
Last edited by squarebear; 16th Aug 2012 at 10:20.
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Cape Town / UK / Europe
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When my son was about 7, I booked him on a CPT-LHR flight as a UM. Nearer the time, I booked myself on the same flight but forgot to tell the airline to cancel the UM request.
When we checked in, the check in agent told me I couldn't sit next to him because he was a UM and only the person who had made the UM booking could cancel it and had to do so by phoning the call centre. I explained that I was the person who had made the booking ....... it took the intervention of a supervisor to get this done. Seats were changed, and when we got on board I was told by a FA (who obviously hadn't had the updated information) that I had to move. It was all quite good-humoured but had the makings of a farce!
When we checked in, the check in agent told me I couldn't sit next to him because he was a UM and only the person who had made the UM booking could cancel it and had to do so by phoning the call centre. I explained that I was the person who had made the booking ....... it took the intervention of a supervisor to get this done. Seats were changed, and when we got on board I was told by a FA (who obviously hadn't had the updated information) that I had to move. It was all quite good-humoured but had the makings of a farce!
Fact: People do get sexually assaulted on aircraft.
What's worse? An embarrassed fireman or a sexually assaulted child.
Get over it, it is a good policy, just badly administered on the day.
What's worse? An embarrassed fireman or a sexually assaulted child.
Get over it, it is a good policy, just badly administered on the day.
Last edited by virginexcess; 16th Aug 2012 at 12:02.
Bottums Up
To be honest I wouldn't want my unaccompanied children sitting next to a Male passenger who is traveling by themselves,
Statistically women abuse kids at much the same rate as men do. And as someone said above, on an aeroplane with many, many witnesses!
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Mostly at home
Posts: 356
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
During an annual Emergency Refresher day a few years ago, the Instructor gave an explanation for the policy. I can only assume it is true, and given some incidents that had occurred that caused it to be introduced, I'm inclined to agree.
The policy is not there to protect the children, but the male passenger (and consequently, the airline). I'll leave it at that.
The utterly uninformed and ignorant crap I've seen published over this ... well ... and I expect more here as well.
N
The policy is not there to protect the children, but the male passenger (and consequently, the airline). I'll leave it at that.
The utterly uninformed and ignorant crap I've seen published over this ... well ... and I expect more here as well.
N
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sydney
Age: 60
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What about male flight attendants?
Should they be allowed to
supervise unaccompanied children?
"Statistically women abuse kids at much the same rate as men do", really I would like to see the stats that back that up.
A study I just read from the UK says that 5 - 10% of child sexual abuse is carried out by male and females together and only 5% is carried out exclusively by female abusers. That is far from 50/50.
Clearly this policy is not trying to label ALL men as sexual predators but it is trying to reduce the risk of not only the child being abused but also it is protecting the male passenger from an unfounded accusation.
The ironic thing is that many posts above say that this is PC gone mad, infact it is the opposite, not allowing airlines to have these types of rules is PC gone mad.
A study I just read from the UK says that 5 - 10% of child sexual abuse is carried out by male and females together and only 5% is carried out exclusively by female abusers. That is far from 50/50.
Clearly this policy is not trying to label ALL men as sexual predators but it is trying to reduce the risk of not only the child being abused but also it is protecting the male passenger from an unfounded accusation.
The ironic thing is that many posts above say that this is PC gone mad, infact it is the opposite, not allowing airlines to have these types of rules is PC gone mad.
