Another passenger that is toooo hot to fly for Southwest////
http://video.nbc4.com/player/?id=154922
Printable View
Another passenger that is toooo hot to fly for Southwest////
http://video.nbc4.com/player/?id=154922
LOL!! in all seriousness, i don't think that there was anything wrong with what this one was wearing. it's nowhere as short as the other one's skirt. then again, this could just be due to fallout from the other situation last week.
Picture? I can't click on the vid.
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o.../tooshort1.jpg
http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o.../tooshort2.jpg
here ya go phil... she's got a nice apartment from the looks of it. wonder why she's flying WN.
Interesting to see,this one...She didn't seem bothered by it UNTIL this recent one happened.
She thought about it, goes HEY, that happened to me 3 MONTHS ago, it didn't bother me then but it will NOW.
She then brings it up.
The recent one, the one who showed up on TODAY, might have a BIT more creditbility, but still ridiculous.
Back then, WN had a huge history of sex in its flights, being luv bites, luv seats and luv potions, absolutely NO denying that. However, this was back in the 1970's folks. Back then SEX was ALL the rage and was used in everything, not just aviation. However times have CHANGED....WN had to adapt to how folks were now, so away went the short skirts and hot pants and came pants and such. WN was adjusting to the times. Back then, if this passenger had boarded, most likely she would not have been asked to cover herself. But in this day and age....its changed.
Again folks, both passengers were NOT BOOTED OFF THE FLIGHTS.....as many seem to think here and other websites (you know which ones)
They were simply told about their attire and asked to be changed or do something about it.
We have told many passengers here in STL their dress was to low or the miniskirt was to little or the shirt they wore revealed just a bit to much, these never made the news..yet these two did.
Again I ask, why did the woman that her incident that happened in June, wait 3 months later to bring it up? I don't think it bothered her much until this other incident happened.
Alex
Cancidas, I don't understand what you mean by her nice apartment People that are well off don't fly WN?
It could be because of what was falling out of the top of her dress.Quote:
Originally Posted by cancidas
Again, I would have killed to have someone looking lie this sitting next to me on a flight.
Since msnbc pumped the story all week long, I am familiar with both cases.
I have to say that I am quite surprised with some of the posts here basically justifying the airline.
Since when in America (in 2007...) an airline can censure your outfit?
You can argue that girls today tend to dress like, how to put it, "escorts", but nobody made SW the police of public values.
I would have expected more backing to the freedom side.
Izhar
Styles, trends or whatever, if there's someone sitting on a plane that literally looks like a stripper or a hooker, or if even "normal looking" outfit is leaving very little to the imagination and it makes families uncomfortable, the airline has a right to ask a person to adjust. Do you folks really think that's a big deal?
I think the only issue here is if it warrants being asked to leave the flight, which it isn't. There's a way of asking a person without embarrassing him/her.
The facts are that no family-related person complained to the crew about the girl's outfit. The FA approached her in his (or her) innitiative.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
Regardless. If it's deemed inappropriate, the crew should be able to make the request....BEFORE there are complaints.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
In this example above, do you think she looks like a stripper?? The one above looks fine IMHO.
I personally don't think its a big deal either way. Most of America is prude about it though.
Waht is shown after the fact is SURELY somewhat different than how it was displayed during the incident. Everything we are hearing is very one sided. That outfit can easily be adjusted to look much more slutty.
Mario and i_mizrahi it has nothing to do with being prudish or freedom. Any airline can remove a passenger from a flight for w/e reason they deem will make the flight safe and comfortable for the other passengers. Its right in the terms of carriage that you can be removed from a flight. Really though she should cover up a bit, you're flying with other people and should respect the surroundings you're going to share for the given amount of time with other people. The girl is an attention whoah plain and simple.
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
Tom, in my opinion, its just a silly reason to get rid of someone on the plane, hence the prude remark.
The girl above is not wearing a bra and, at her size, certainly should be if she wants to look a bit classier. That alone is grounds for being called "inappropriate."
Whether or not you guys (or others) enjoy how she looks, doesn't mean it's appropriate or wouldn't make other people uncomfortable.
I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here and once again stating visable facts. I'm not agreeing with either side.
Yet, they dont tell the 350 pound woman in stretch pants and a visible thong to get off the plane. In my male-minded opinion, that is more revolting to a young child, than a decent looking girl in a green dress.
What about the overweight guys wearing loose jeans so that when they go to the overheads you get a face full of plumbers crack?
True story, my boss was headed to FLL about 6 weeks ago with his family, there were 4 of them so mom & 1 kid sat in 21 E/F and dad and the other kid sat in 22 E/F. Being the good dad he was, he let the kid have the window seat. He reward, a 350 pound woman in a house coat :shock: plops down next to him. Who, right after take-off whips out a Checkers Double Slop burger with all the fixings dripping all over the place and after wolfing that thing down in about 2 bites, yanks up her housecoat and gives herself an insulin shot in the leg! Now tell me THAT is not offensive!
Gross and offensive are two things. Someone looking fat and messy is one thing, but overly sexual appearance is another. Two completely different things.
Quote:
Yet, they dont tell the 350 pound woman in stretch pants and a visible thong to get off the plane. In my male-minded opinion, that is more revolting to a young child, than a decent looking girl in a green dress.What about the overweight guys wearing loose jeans so that when they go to the overheads you get a face full of plumbers crack?
I totally agree. I find that even more offensive (or gross, or whatever) than most provocative clothing. I guess it all just boils down to the fact that no matter what size you are, you should be wearing clothes that fit and flatter you.
ok, you got me there. honestly, those were two incomplete thoughts. i was commenting on the apartment simply because from what i saw in the video. i was curious only as to where she was going for what in regards to her choosing WN to fly. phil, you know me and you know that i simply don't care enough about people to be bothered by how they spend thier money. poor or well off, it just doesn't concern me in the least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
good point. the woman with the burger and insulin is innapropriate. an adult should not conduct themselves in that manner, especially in front of children.Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.
Unfortunately, the contract of carriage is a contract of despotism. As far as I know, those girls were not seated INFRONT of the pilots, so their distructing appearence shouldn't have caused a safety problem. The "contract" approach is disturbing because it opens the door to much more dangerous options, such as racist or bigot crew members who gets to decide with their own unlimited power that they prefer a flight without Jews or Muslims or black people etc. It may sound hysterical, but its a real concern.Quote:
Originally Posted by T-Bird76
Izhar
This was in today's (Sep 15th) speednews
Quote:
September 15: Southwest Airlines issued public apology to a customer who was asked several months ago to de-plane because of inappropriate attire...
...In conjunction with the apology, the airline launched "mini-skirt" fares.
The pair of incidents is laughable. WN is far from a 'classy' airline, let perhaps that qord should be nixed from usaage in this case.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mellyrose
Quote:
Originally Posted by candicas
Thanks for the laugh Matt.
At what point does it stop? What it I am offended by the obese person to my right, or the stinky forgot-to shower person to my left?
In the end, WN wins with an advertising hitch.
I didn't write that! You're misquoting Mario! ;) :?Quote:
Originally Posted by mirrodie
No im not :?: :?: :?: :?: :wink:
mario's right. all that's gonna come out of this is free PR for WN. it's not like they lost an airplane somewhere. people are going to make up thier own minds and will still continue to fly WN.
By the way: what if a real hooker wants to fly SW, say for a business appointment? I guess she shouldn't try to pose as a college girl... :wink:Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil D.