Two women asked to "cover up" their clothes on air

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Superman
Pink Foamin' at the Mouth
Posts: 9690
Joined: 2002-12-16 12:29am
Location: Metropolis

Post by Superman »

Bizarre Religious Pamphlet wrote:Ask yourself, "Would I feel comfortable with my appearance if I were in the Lord's presence?
The sheer amount of stupidity in that sentence is literally making my eyes hurt. Doesn't God just have some kind of divine X ray vision anyway? Why would dressing conservatively around the All Mighty even make a difference? Does he like his minions to be dressed well? So... our souls are on the line, and he's keeping a look out for our attire?

Just when I thought the god of the fundies couldn't get any more superficial... I guess that sort of sums up Joe Fundie in a nutshell though; it's all about how you look to other people...
User avatar
FSTargetDrone
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 7878
Joined: 2004-04-10 06:10pm
Location: Drone HQ, Pennsylvania, USA

Post by FSTargetDrone »

Superman wrote:Does he like his minions to be dressed well? So... our souls are on the line, and he's keeping a look out for our attire?
Gotta make sure the womenfolk look demure and chaste, I guess.
Image
User avatar
Eris
Jedi Knight
Posts: 541
Joined: 2005-11-15 01:59am

Post by Eris »

Mlenk wrote:I wasn't aware that the American southwest was considered Bible thumping but then again the only place I've ever lived in in the Southwest is Las Vegas (going on my 20th year here) which probably doesn't paint a stereotypical picture of your average Southwest community
It varies a lot. Take Arizona as an example. My town of Tucson is very secular and left-wing, largely due to our massive and fairly high quality university. On the other hand, the exurbs around Phoenix were one of the spawning grounds for the megachurches.

On topic, that 'halter top' dress is cute, and scarcely shows her off any more than a well-fitting tank top would. And moreover, if she were in Tucson, it is, I suspect, as much a fashion decision as it is a practical decision. It's effing hot down here. You want something light like that.
"Hey, gang, we're all part of the spleen!"
-PZ Meyers
User avatar
brianeyci
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 9815
Joined: 2004-09-26 05:36pm
Location: Toronto, Ontario

Post by brianeyci »

Actually the brochure is logically consistent. It just follows from flawed premises. If I understand it right, they want everybody to be dressed their best all the time no matter what, or try to, so God's X-Ray vision will see your "intent" and believe you to be modest.

I can basically go around and point at this woman, that woman, that woman, and tell whether it'll satisfy fundamentalists after reading the whole of that brochure. What I understood is the more attractive you are, the more you should hide your attractiveness to be modest. For example a woman with large breasts shouldn't wear anything to draw attention to their breasts. So basically almost all modern women's fashion is out, and if you're an attractive blond you're shit out of luck and have to dress as conservatively as possible all the time. Don't show forearms, neck, be guilty if you're hot, and don't wear excessive makeup.

Besides the hypocritical factor (who the fuck wears business casual all the time), I can imagine an inverse proportional equation to satisfying fundamentalists. The more naturally attractive you are, the more you should work to hide your beauty according to their standard of behaviour. This is the hidden message, and any time you meet fundamentalists you should confront them with this, especially since they place such a great emphasis on "nature" and "natural" (at least with their gay arguments.)
User avatar
Civil War Man
NERRRRRDS!!!
Posts: 3790
Joined: 2005-01-28 03:54am

Post by Civil War Man »

Majin Gojira wrote:I believe another Southwest employ (or was it some other airline?) was fired because her she posted a picture of herself on her blog in uniform, and a tiny bit of her bra was showing.
She worked for Delta, I believe. Penn and Teller had her on for a Bullshit episode (I think the one they did on Manners).
User avatar
The Spartan
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4406
Joined: 2005-03-12 05:56pm
Location: Houston

Post by The Spartan »

I read about her appearance on the Today Show and, apparently, this is not a SW Air dress code issue per se. It's more of a "Flight Attendants can kick you off for any reason even though they tend to to publish them" issue and this one was being a bitch.

It's especially amusing to me that she wore that same outfit on her return flight on a SW Air flight and was complimented by a different attendant. :lol:

It's not the Today Show link but here's another article that mentions that: Link
The Gentleman from Texas abstains. Discourteously.
Image
PRFYNAFBTFC-Vice Admiral: MFS Masturbating Walrus :: Omine subtilite Odobenus rosmarus masturbari
Soy un perdedor.
"WHO POOPED IN A NORMAL ROOM?!"-Commander William T. Riker
User avatar
Spin Echo
Jedi Master
Posts: 1490
Joined: 2006-05-16 05:00am
Location: Land of the Midnight Sun

Post by Spin Echo »

Considering she flashed her crotch when she sat down on the Today show, I'd have to say her skirt was probably too short for good taste. I wonder what underwear she had the day she was flying. If she had just a g-string, it's possible people saw more than just pantie. Still, I can't see kicking someone off the plane for being a fashion victim.

On the other hand, I would like to see some sort of appropriate level of hygiene instituted for flights. I was stuck next to a guy on a transatlantic flight who I swear must have come directly from working out at the gym.
Doom dOom doOM DOom doomity DooM doom Dooooom Doom DOOM!
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

Spin Echo wrote:Considering she flashed her crotch when she sat down on the Today show, I'd have to say her skirt was probably too short for good taste.
Yeah, but the camera is in the perfect place to look up a woman's skirt when she sits down on a show like that. On an airplane, you'd have to be crouching in front of her seat to get that kind of view.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
User avatar
Spin Echo
Jedi Master
Posts: 1490
Joined: 2006-05-16 05:00am
Location: Land of the Midnight Sun

Post by Spin Echo »

Darth Wong wrote:
Spin Echo wrote:Considering she flashed her crotch when she sat down on the Today show, I'd have to say her skirt was probably too short for good taste.
Yeah, but the camera is in the perfect place to look up a woman's skirt when she sits down on a show like that. On an airplane, you'd have to be crouching in front of her seat to get that kind of view.
True. It's more that she made such an obvious miniskirt faux pas while on a TV show trying to convince people she wasn't dressed as a tart just makes me think she doesn't know how to move in them properly. Too short is not just a measure of physical length of the skirt, but whether the woman knows what sort of actions in them will be too revealing. I've women in skirts that length that can carry it off while seen women in longer skirts that can't.
Doom dOom doOM DOom doomity DooM doom Dooooom Doom DOOM!
User avatar
ThatGuyFromThatPlace
Jedi Knight
Posts: 691
Joined: 2006-08-21 12:52am

Post by ThatGuyFromThatPlace »

Weird, I fly Southwest out of Dallas all the time and have seen many provocatively dressed women that didn't have a problem.

Also, on the 'dress for the lord' front, in Genesis 'The Almighty' was angry when Adam and Eve started wearing clothes, I'd be more embarrassed to be dressed in the presence of the lord than undressed. :D
[img=right]http://www.geocities.com/jamealbeluvien/revolution.jpg[/img]"Nothing here is what it seems. You are not the plucky hero, the Alliance is not an evil empire, and this is not the grand arena."
- The Operative, Serenity
"Everything they've ever "known" has been proven to be wrong. A thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, they knew it was flat. Fifteen minutes ago, you knew we humans were alone on it. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow."
-Agent Kay, Men In Black
User avatar
Wicked Pilot
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 8972
Joined: 2002-07-05 05:45pm

Post by Wicked Pilot »

First off, to put a stop to the 'Southwest iz teh Fundy' wank going on, let me just point out that Southwest, like every other airline, hires their flight crew from all corners of the nation. This idea that you can tie the actions of an airline's flight crew by it's name is utter bullshit. Southwest is by far one of the most laid back airlines out there, you can get away with much worse with them that when some 'higher class' legacy carriers like United.


And when exactly did Southwest fly to Pearson? That doesn't seem to fit their business model.
The most basic assumption about the world is that it does not contradict itself.
User avatar
phongn
Rebel Leader
Posts: 18487
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:11pm

Post by phongn »

Wicked Pilot wrote:First off, to put a stop to the 'Southwest iz teh Fundy' wank going on, let me just point out that Southwest, like every other airline, hires their flight crew from all corners of the nation. This idea that you can tie the actions of an airline's flight crew by it's name is utter bullshit. Southwest is by far one of the most laid back airlines out there, you can get away with much worse with them that when some 'higher class' legacy carriers like United.
Hell, their flight attendants used to wear hot pants :D
And when exactly did Southwest fly to Pearson? That doesn't seem to fit their business model.
I'm pretty sure they don't (nor their codeshare partner ATA)

Aaand, in related news:
SFGate wrote:After a summer of record delays and customer complaints, one airline inadvertently flew into a roiling cultural debate by busting passengers for dressing too scantily.

Southwest Airlines has been on the defensive for a few weeks for demanding that two women its flight attendants deemed unsuitably dressed change their outfits or, in the case of one passenger, exit the plane.

Some columnists and commentators have lambasted Southwest for its actions, pointing out this is a country where every day seems to be casual Friday and teen starlets are regularly photographed without underwear. Others have said that, given the surplus of skin out there, asking for more conservative attire isn't such a bad idea.

Southwest, after issuing statements recently backing its flight attendants' decisions to ask the women to change or alter their outfits, apologized to one of the women, Kyla Ebbert, during a taping of the "Dr. Phil" television show on Friday.

The statement from Southwest Airlines CEO Gary Kelly read, in part, "Kyla, you are a valued customer, and you did not get an adequate apology. We could have handled this better, and on behalf of Southwest Airlines, I am truly sorry. ... Our company is based on freedom even if our actions may have not appeared that way."

As part of the apology, the airline offered Ebbert two free round-trip tickets to anywhere Southwest flies.

The line between what's acceptable in public and private spheres is constantly shifting, but anger over "inappropriate" dress has been particularly heated lately. Atlanta's City Council made national headlines this month for considering a proposal to ban baggy pants in the city and levy fines for the "indecent exposure" of undergarments.

Hillary Rodham Clinton's decolletage on the Senate floor caused endless pundit jabber about how a female presidential candidate should dress. School districts around the country have addressed the issue of skimpy skirts and loud T-shirts in various ways. Bay Area schools have debated for years about how to deal with the increasingly sexy and casual clothes worn by some students.

Southwest passenger Setara Qassim, 21, clad in a green, low-cut halter dress with gold trimming, said in press interviews that she spent a flight from Burbank to Tucson wrapped in a blanket given to her by a flight attendant to cover the halter top.

Ebbert, 23, was flying from San Diego to Tucson in July dressed in a wispy, frayed miniskirt, a white tank top and a short green wrap sweater. She was told she was dressed too provocatively for "a family airline" (her words, from her appearance on Sept. 7 on the "Today" show).

Ebbert described to "Today" host Matt Lauer how she tried to hug her small cardigan around her chest and pull down her skirt "as far as it would go" before resorting to the airline blanket. Lauer delicately inquired whether she could have inadvertently exposed her underwear to passengers coming down the aisle of the plane. Her answer was no.

Hot pants and white go-go boots used to be part of the official uniform of Southwest in the early '70s, around the same time the airline used the motto "Sex sells seats," according to Time magazine. The company has had other problems with displays of skin recently: In 2003, the company fired two pilots for taking off all their clothing in the cockpit in a prank gone awry, USA Today reported.

Southwest said the airline had no record of Qassim's complaint but confirmed that the incident Ebbert described took place.

While no airline admits to an official dress code, wardrobe issues do fall within the range of customer issues negotiated by flight attendants and crews on a daily basis. It is technically within the rights of an airline to deny service to people based on what they're wearing (or on the basis of body odor or inebriation).

"I haven't personally heard of this before, but we're brand-new," said Abby Lunardini, director of corporate communications at Virgin America. "We haven't had any fashion faux pas yet."

Lunardini added that Virgin American doesn't "have any kind of policy around dress code, but if there was something offensive to other passengers, like an offensive T-shirt or if someone was completely not clothed, in cases like that, we'd say something to the passenger."

Patrick Smith, an airline pilot who writes a column for Salon magazine called Ask a Pilot, said in an e-mail that a number of conditions help to create confusion about flight etiquette.

"Rules about passenger dress are usually subjective, allowing employees to use judgment and common sense," he wrote. "You've got more and more people flying - and that includes many people who, in years past, would have driven or taken a Greyhound.

"Granted, people rarely dress up to fly anymore, but there are certain standards and certain protocols, however casual."

The idea that a passenger wouldn't be sufficiently garbed to fly is certainly a new one. Historically, airlines have worked hard to cultivate an air of exclusivity, and customers responded by dressing up for their flights.

Randy Johnson, editor of United Airlines' Hemispheres magazine and co-author of "The Age of Flight: A History of America's Pioneering Airline," said, "When commercial aviation first captured the country's imagination, it was an amazing new leap for humankind, and people who chose to fly across the country in two days, rather than creep across in two weeks, felt like the elite group they were.

"When United first brought women in the field as stewardesses on in the late '30s," Johnson said, "they were intended to make aviation a luxe-catered experience but also intended to increase safety. They have always played important role in arbitrating the environment of flight."

Elliott Hester, a flight attendant, syndicated columnist and author of "Plane Insanity: A Flight Attendant's Tales of Sex, Rage and Queasiness at 30,000 Feet," wouldn't reveal his employer's name but said in an e-mail that "our passengers can be 'officially' denied boarding for a variety of reasons, including intoxication, rude behavior, offensive body odor and, yes, wearing inappropriate clothing."

Said Hester, "I've never had to remove a passenger because of inappropriate attire, but on more than one occasion I was involved in the removal of passengers with horrendous body odor."

He also pointed to changes in the flight experience as sources of increased crankiness and complaints among passengers. "After enduring brutal lines at check-in counters and security checkpoints, passengers come on board expecting services that are no longer there," Hester said. "When we say 'Sorry, there are no pillows' to a passenger who wants one, it's easy for them to become upset."

Debates about dress codes are obviously not new - it's just unusual to hear them fought out in the air. University of Louisville English Professor Dennis Hall, who has written extensively about the cultural import of clothing, said the debate makes sense and invoked the phrase "privatization of public space" to describe the discomfort many feel at the increasingly lax codes of behavior and dress in the United States.

"Running around in your apartment in states of undress is one thing, but on a plane it's something else," Hall said. "It's not that provocative outfits, especially worn by women, haven't been worn before. For example, you used to be able to go into any saloon or cocktail lounge, and those environments had women scantily clad. But it was understood that when you go there, that's what's going on.

"If you're sitting on an airplane," Hall continued, "you'd be less fully comfortable with seeing that. The people on the plane who complained, although they probably wouldn't analyze it like that, they're responding to the privatization of public space."
User avatar
ammisan
Redshirt
Posts: 12
Joined: 2007-09-08 04:02pm
Location: Las Vegas, Nevada

Post by ammisan »

"Running around in your apartment in states of undress is one thing, but on a plane it's something else," Hall said. "It's not that provocative outfits, especially worn by women, haven't been worn before. For example, you used to be able to go into any saloon or cocktail lounge, and those environments had women scantily clad. But it was understood that when you go there, that's what's going on.

"If you're sitting on an airplane," Hall continued, "you'd be less fully comfortable with seeing that. The people on the plane who complained, although they probably wouldn't analyze it like that, they're responding to the privatization of public space."
The thing I'm finding a bit cloudy here is "states of undress". Does a short skirt now equal an "undressed" state? Or a low-cut top, perhaps?

=/ perhaps Americans need to become a bit more comfortable with the idea of a less-clothed human body. [/quote]
Image
an ascii <3 for zed.
User avatar
Wicked Pilot
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 8972
Joined: 2002-07-05 05:45pm

Post by Wicked Pilot »

If I where in charge it would be mandated that everyone wear long pants, for safety reasons though.

I do find it odd that it was the flight attendants who brought this about, if it where such an issue the terminal agents should have been the ones to make the call. Boarding time is a little late to be informing someone that a change of clothes is in order.
The most basic assumption about the world is that it does not contradict itself.
User avatar
Superman
Pink Foamin' at the Mouth
Posts: 9690
Joined: 2002-12-16 12:29am
Location: Metropolis

Post by Superman »

Wicked Pilot wrote:If I where in charge it would be mandated that everyone wear long pants, for safety reasons though.
Safety reasons on a commercial airline? There's no way I'm flying for 10 + hours to Japan wearing pants. I say we mandate nudity.
User avatar
General Zod
Never Shuts Up
Posts: 29211
Joined: 2003-11-18 03:08pm
Location: The Clearance Rack
Contact:

Post by General Zod »

Superman wrote:
Wicked Pilot wrote:If I where in charge it would be mandated that everyone wear long pants, for safety reasons though.
Safety reasons on a commercial airline? There's no way I'm flying for 10 + hours to Japan wearing pants. I say we mandate nudity.
You know what the obvious problem with that would be? Quality control. I'd rather not sit next to some 300 pound naked redneck who doesn't know what deodorant is, thankyouverymuch.
"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."
User avatar
Wicked Pilot
Moderator Emeritus
Posts: 8972
Joined: 2002-07-05 05:45pm

Post by Wicked Pilot »

Superman wrote:Safety reasons on a commercial airline?
In case of fire it's much better to be wearing long pants than shorts or nylons. Yeah I know that even the most frequent flyer will not log enough hours to statistically expect to be in an accident, but we still mandate escape hatches, life rafts, personal floation devices, fire extengishers, crash axes, emergency oxygen, and etc, because when it happens it's damn good to be well prepared.
The most basic assumption about the world is that it does not contradict itself.
User avatar
Lord Poe
Sith Apprentice
Posts: 6988
Joined: 2002-07-14 03:15am
Location: Callyfornia
Contact:

Post by Lord Poe »

Hopefully, this isn't a knee-jerk reaction as to not offend Muslim passengers.
Image

"Brian, if I parked a supertanker in Central Park, painted it neon orange, and set it on fire, it would be less obvious than your stupidity." --RedImperator
User avatar
Darth Wong
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
Posts: 70028
Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Location: Toronto, Canada
Contact:

Post by Darth Wong »

Wicked Pilot wrote:First off, to put a stop to the 'Southwest iz teh Fundy' wank going on, let me just point out that Southwest, like every other airline, hires their flight crew from all corners of the nation. This idea that you can tie the actions of an airline's flight crew by it's name is utter bullshit. Southwest is by far one of the most laid back airlines out there, you can get away with much worse with them that when some 'higher class' legacy carriers like United.
Actually, in the incident that was reported on local radio, the flight attendants' actions were prompted by a complaint from another passenger.
And when exactly did Southwest fly to Pearson? That doesn't seem to fit their business model.
Maybe I heard that part of the story wrong on the radio. I heard the story while driving home.
Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html
Post Reply