Airlines asking men to move seats because they might be molesters

[Eri]

Multiple airlines reserve the right to force any man sitting next to an unaccompanied minor to switch seats with a woman. They say the policy is due to "parental concerns," but it's probably mostly due to the airline companies wanting to cover their asses; parents have sued airlines over child molestation incidents in the past.

The most recent case took place on Qantas Airlines, when a flight attendant asked a 31-year-old male nurse sitting next to a 10-year-old girl to switch seats with a woman on the opposite side of the aisle. The nurse said he was "humiliated" by the switch. "After the plane had taken off, the air hostess thanked the woman that had moved but not me, which kind of hurt me or pissed me off a bit more because it appeared I was in the wrong, because it seemed I had this sign I couldn't see above my head that said 'child molester' or 'kiddie fiddler' whereas she did the gracious thing and moved to protect the greater good of the child," he told The Age.

http://jezebel.com/5934753/should-airlines-be-allowed-to-forbid-men-from-sitting-next-to-unaccompanied-minors

Jez is typically a very feminist site and never tolerates discrimination against women. But suddenly many of their comments are ironically cheering on the very discrimination they rally against. Comments like;

Most men aren't child molesters, but most child molesters are men. That's just a fact and whatever humiliation an adult male may feel by being asked to switch seats pales in comparison to the trauma child abuse victims face.

So what is your take on the airlines issues? Here's mine, quoted from someone who pretty much said exactly what I would've.

You know what? Most Muslims aren't terrorists, but most airline terrorists are Muslim. It only makes sense that Muslims should be kept as far away from the cockpit as possible. If they're sitting up front, just ask them to move.

So what if a few Muslims are humiliated? It's nothing compared to what the victims of 9/11 felt.

Any discrimination should not be tolerated, it's not magically okay since it happens to men less.

 

[Aethren]

Feminists tend to be a rather hypocritical bunch, so I generally pay as much attention to them as I do a screaming little kid in a store. None. There are exclusions to this, however, if they prove themselves intelligent enough to be worth listening to, but most tend not to be.

I would sue the fuck out of that airline, sexual discrimination is bad for business.

 

[Vrex360]

I also saw a lot of comments that were equally outraged by the gender discrimination present in this story. In fact I would go so far as to believe the majority of the comments are either outraged or remarking about the sheer silliness of it.

I also noted that the article itself most certainly wasn't 'pro' forcing men to move to other seats, and instead offered up other suggestions like higher supervision and 'kids only' sections of the plane. They aren't shouting out from the rooftops about how great this is or demanding that all men get locked in crates you know.

Yes there are people posting dissenting opinions, that always happens in these kinds of online discussions. However from what I've seen there really isn't an anti male bias in that comment thread.

Anyway I don't think it's a good idea to force people to move, especially not based solely on gender (statistics be damned). That's why I actually agree with what the article says, the idea of having little sections of the plane solely for children travelling alone that are heavily supervised is likely a better solution.

 

[Keoul]

They could do the win-win thing where the man gets upgraded to business class or the child gets upgraded.
They get separated to a part of the plane where they can be easily monitored, neither party gets offended and it shouldn't come at such a colossal cost to the airline since they upgrade people at random already (over booking the flight etc).
Then again they could just keep an eye out? they don't have to upgrade them, just if they feel the guys sitting next to them are a tad suspicious.

 

[LetalisK]

Utter horseshit, of course. Having a penis does not suddenly turn a human into a molester or rapist.

As far as the feminists are concerned, you mean there are some hypocrites in that group? Shocker! Besides being human, this wouldn't be the first time members of an equal rights movement, and specifically pro-women's rights in this case, have been hypocritical.

 

[Kae]

Well it's definitely stupid, but I agree with the article, having a heavily monitored kid specific section would be bes, it would also be a good idea if this isn't cost effective to do as Keoul [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/18.385137.15300832] said and just upgrade the child to business class, where he will be more easily taken care off, and that way you don't humiliate the poor guy who is most likely innocent because there aren't that many child molesters and the chance that he actually is one is pretty slim.

 

[theLadyBugg]

First of all, I've never read an article from somebody on the Jezebel team that I didn't see at least one enormous problem with.

Specific to this article:
- Definitely sexism; women are also capable of being child molesters, and it's absurd paranoia to assume any man traveling alone is a pedophile.
- I've never understood why unaccompanied children are on commercial flights. There must be a thousand circumstances that I'm not thinking through, but if you're worried a stranger is going to make a pass at your kid, why put them on the plane? I also resent it a little when parents expect the employee of any place they bring their children to be their babysitter; in this case, air hosts/hostesses.
- A "kids only" section of the plane is a horrible idea. Seriously. One or two children with their parents are unruly on a plane, and you want to put all of them next to each other? Not in this lifetime.

 

[Dags90]

Personally, I'd just be glad to be away from an unsupervised minor. I recently had a flight where I was sat between an unaccompanied brother (~12/13) and sister (~8/9). So annoying. I sat next to a creeper once on an airplane, but it's not like he did anything other than ogle any boy who looked like they were in highschool-ish.

I feel like if it's about "parental concerns" it should...involve the parents. And I say move the child, unless I'm getting an upgrade. Frankly, I feel bad for the women being asked to babysit somebody else's brat.

 

[Phasmal]

2) How is someone who isn't a child molester going to rape a child in a crowded plane?

Child molestation = not always rape.

-

Honestly, I have no idea what should be done about this, but if kids are getting molested something should be done.
I agree there should be a kid section of the plane or something.
Or a member of staff should be supervising the kid no matter who they sit next to.
A lot of parents are paranoid about this, and want to make their kids as safe as possible even if it discriminates (like dude I was talking to yesterday who doesn't like male nursery nurses).
I think the supervision route is probably the best one, but I'm not sure how they'd sort that out, especially on long flights.

I've been asked to move to sit next to a kid before, not on a plane, a coach. The guy who was moving seemed happy with it in a `Ha now I don't have to sit next to a kid` way.

EDIT: Also kinda feel you are misrepresenting the comments there. Most are not in favour of moving dudes, and just commenting how it is a sad thing that a man sitting next to a child is seen as suspicious.

 

[Supertegwyn]

Um, this story is not right. I know for a fact that it was Virgin, not Qantas that asked the guy to move.

Wrong airline, dudes.

EDIT: Aw shizzle, there were two almost identical cases on two different airlines.

 

[Nathan Crumpler]

Burnie Burns was talking about this in the 179th roosterteeth podcast. He told a story about how he was on a plane and there were two unaccompanied minors sitting in the seats in front of him. He noticed that one of the kids was freaking out from his ears popping from the pressure. Burnie wondered why this kid's parent didn't warn him about the air pressure in the plane. Any way, Burnie starts talking to the kid and telling how to deal with his ears popping. After a few minutes, a flight attendant showed up and starting taking over for Burnie in regards of helping the kid. At first he though she just now notice the kid neede4d help and started doing her job, but after finding out about certain airlines policy on moving men away from unattended minors, he is starting to rethink her reaction.

Here's the link to the podcast:
http://roosterteeth.com/podcast/episode.php?id=179

OT: Assuming a some one might be a child molester because he is male is as ridiculous as assuming some one might be a prostitute because she's a woman.

 

[Risingblade]

Wait...why the fuck wasn't the minor with a parent/guardian?

 

[Valanthe]

While discrimination is bad in any form, I'd like to ask a more important question, Who the hell lets a 10 year old fly unattended?

 

[BNguyen]

what would be funny (not of course to the victim but to the airline that enforces it), is if they had a man switch who isn't a child molester, with a woman who is.
This act will simply allow people who are typically viewed as molesters to get to their targets much more easily.
I just can't stand this sort of discrimination

 

[Akytalusia]

While discrimination is bad in any form, I'd like to ask a more important question, Who the hell lets a 10 year old fly unattended?

which dialect are you using in your avatar? the way i understand it, it reads 'deal hith it' o.o;;

OT: i have no strong opinion one way or the other. personally, i think discrimination on any level is due cause for concern, but this level is insignificant compared to levels that are worth focusing on.

 

[Montezuma's Lawyer]

Short answer: No.

long answer: NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO.

Are you fucking kidding me with this crap? I'd expect this in the middle of the 90's when child molesters and satanic cults roamed the land, feasting upon the genetalia of children.

But in 2012?

 

[Raioken18]

The thing is... justifications like that are common and it makes it increasingly uncomfortable for men in terms of relating to children. My girlfriend and I both love kids, but...

Ok, so this had only happened like a few times but in the past we had been shopping and come across lost children. The first time as a responsible male I took a little girl up to the checkout to inform the cashier that she was lost. Immediately security was called over and I was basically interrogated in front of a busy checkout line, then when the mother got there she just death stared me like I had kidnapped her child and not found her lost and crying... They also wouldn't let me leave till I'd given them my drivers license to verify my identity and also took down my home address.

So now whenever I see a lost child, I either ignore them or ask my girlfriend to take them to a checkout or to get a staff member. Basically because if I provide aid to a child, as a male I am immediately in the wrong, where as my girlfriend is treated so differently for performing the same actions. She basically gets thanked instantly and allowed to go back to her shopping.

This also makes me worry about when I have my own kids if I'd even suffer those looks as a father taking care of his own child, or if I'd be interrogated or death stared for doing so. Why as a male should I feel discomfort in the idea of caring for my own children or other children.

I might get used to that sort of thing but... why should I have to get used to it?