Children on planes

mag3 wrote:
As long as I (being the male adult) am not the one ordered to move from my seat. If they don't want kids
seated next to me because I'm a male, then fine, but the burden is on them to seat the kid elsewhere not me!
I recall instances where the adult male is the one ordered (not just "asked") to move. Unacceptable!!!

Hear hear. No way they're gonna take away my aisle seat...


--

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.

....George Bernard Shaw

Steve wrote:
Excerpts from http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet


There's a growing storm surrounding British Airways' policy against
seating children next to male strangers, even when the child's parents
are on the same flight. The policy's impetus? The perceived threat of
a man sexually abusing a child.

I am SO against this policy. Because it increases the chances of some foul
little kid being put beside me. YUCK.


--
ant
Don't try to email me;
I'm borrowing the spammer du jour's addy

In article . com,
"Tchiowa" wrote:

Steve wrote:
Excerpts from http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet


There's a growing storm surrounding British Airways' policy against
seating children next to male strangers, even when the child's parents
are on the same flight. The policy's impetus? The perceived threat of
a man sexually abusing a child.

snip

The memo delivered to children by BA's policy is: Men are scary and
not to be trusted. As Wendy McElroy reasoned, "Kids may hesitate to
approach a policeman or fireman who are, after all, still men. And how
is that message being heard by the boys who will grow into men?"

Not to mention that preventing kids from being seated next to
strangers probably isn't the best way to prevent sexual assault; a
mere 10 percent of child sex-abuse cases are perpetrated by strangers.
The policy is irrational and hysterical; worse yet, it's sexist. As
McElroy writes: "One thing is clear: some airlines are going to treat
your father, husband, and son as sex offenders simply because they are
male."

There is one other sad reality. In our world today if something *did*
happen to a child on a plane the parents would sue the airline blind
and get millions. They are forced to take extraordinary and often
offensive actions just to protect themselves from today's lawyers.

This is nothing new. I am 45 and I have been flying on commercial
airlines since I was nine. Even when I was a kid and my folks would pack
me off to fly alone from Philadelphia to Miami to stay with one of my
dad's brothers, I was always seated next to a woman.

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 06:42:11 -0800, Steve wrote:


The logic of these airlines' policy rests on the greater occurrence of
child sex abuse by men. Men do account for 86% of sexual abuse cases
reported against boys and 94% of cases reported against girls,

Most rapes are perpetrated by men, too. Perhaps women shouldn't be seated
next to unrelated men, too.

DaveM

DaveM wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 06:42:11 -0800, Steve wrote:


The logic of these airlines' policy rests on the greater occurrence of
child sex abuse by men. Men do account for 86% of sexual abuse cases
reported against boys and 94% of cases reported against girls,


Most rapes are perpetrated by men, too. Perhaps women shouldn't be seated
next to unrelated men, too.

DaveM

It would be easier if they simply were not permitted to fly without an
appropriate escort.

"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message
...


DaveM wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 06:42:11 -0800, Steve wrote:


The logic of these airlines' policy rests on the greater occurrence of
child sex abuse by men. Men do account for 86% of sexual abuse cases
reported against boys and 94% of cases reported against girls,


Most rapes are perpetrated by men, too. Perhaps women shouldn't be
seated
next to unrelated men, too.

DaveM

It would be easier if they simply were not permitted to fly without an
appropriate escort.

Who ? All those potential make rapists ? Make them get castrated before
flying - I'm sure the TSA would love that job.

Miss L. Toe wrote:
"Frank F. Matthews" wrote in message
...


DaveM wrote:

On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 06:42:11 -0800, Steve wrote:



The logic of these airlines' policy rests on the greater occurrence of
child sex abuse by men. Men do account for 86% of sexual abuse cases
reported against boys and 94% of cases reported against girls,


Most rapes are perpetrated by men, too. Perhaps women shouldn't be

seated

next to unrelated men, too.

DaveM

It would be easier if they simply were not permitted to fly without an
appropriate escort.


Who ? All those potential make rapists ? Make them get castrated before
flying - I'm sure the TSA would love that job.



Castrating all the TSA staff appears just a bit excessive.

On Tue, 05 Dec 2006 04:39:16 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
wrote:

DaveM wrote:
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006 06:42:11 -0800, Steve wrote:


The logic of these airlines' policy rests on the greater occurrence of
child sex abuse by men. Men do account for 86% of sexual abuse cases
reported against boys and 94% of cases reported against girls,


Most rapes are perpetrated by men, too. Perhaps women shouldn't be seated
next to unrelated men, too.

It would be easier if they simply were not permitted to fly without an
appropriate escort.

Or dressed in a way that doesn't inflame male passions, of course - You
known, since my daughters became teenagers, I've become a lot more
sympathetic to the idea of the burqa.

DaveM

How about banning all children from flying. How about special routes just
for you brats.

I am fed up with the pandering of children and parents with no control over
their twerps. I flew Ohare to Rome with my parents in 1974 and I remember
being kept quite, occupied, and polite.

Certainly some children are, but the last 60% of my - DOMESTIC - trip[s
have had a multitude of brats runnign aisles, screaming, throwing things,
rocking back and forth, crawling under the seats, banging on the tray, and
more screaming.

One kid even came up to my laptop and started touching the LCD screen with
his gooey fingers. I informed him and his mother about behavior and
etiquette.


Get your damn little runts off the plane.
"Steve" wrote in message
...

Excerpts from http://www.salon.com/mwt/broadsheet


There's a growing storm surrounding British Airways' policy against
seating children next to male strangers, even when the child's parents
are on the same flight. The policy's impetus? The perceived threat of
a man sexually abusing a child.

Recently, a nine-year-old girl on a British Airways flight was moved
from her seat next to a 76-year-old man and his wife. The male
passenger, Michael Kemp, was first asked to switch seats with his
wife, but his wife refused because of a bad leg that required the
added space of an aisle seat. The stewardess ultimately refused to
seat the girl next to Kemp or between the pair, because doing so would
violate British Airways' child-welfare regulations. Once the flap was
publicized, an airline spokesperson said, "We apologise if Mr. Kemp
was offended by our request, but we have to balance the needs of the
child with those of the adult."

Both Air New Zealand and Qantas have adopted a similar policy banning
children from sitting next to male strangers.

The logic of these airlines' policy rests on the greater occurrence of
child sex abuse by men. Men do account for 86% of sexual abuse cases
reported against boys and 94% of cases reported against girls,
according to the US National Center for Post Traumatic Stress
Disorder. But if those statistics were the basis of public policy, we
couldn't have classrooms, sports teams, day care centers or summer
camps led by men.

The memo delivered to children by BA's policy is: Men are scary and
not to be trusted. As Wendy McElroy reasoned, "Kids may hesitate to
approach a policeman or fireman who are, after all, still men. And how
is that message being heard by the boys who will grow into men?"

Not to mention that preventing kids from being seated next to
strangers probably isn't the best way to prevent sexual assault; a
mere 10 percent of child sex-abuse cases are perpetrated by strangers.
The policy is irrational and hysterical; worse yet, it's sexist. As
McElroy writes: "One thing is clear: some airlines are going to treat
your father, husband, and son as sex offenders simply because they are
male."



--

A government that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support
of Paul.

...George Bernard Shaw

Perry Lea wrote:

How about banning all children from flying. How about special routes just
for you brats.

I am fed up with the pandering of children and parents with no control over
their twerps. I flew Ohare to Rome with my parents in 1974 and I remember
being kept quite, occupied, and polite.

That is how YOU remember it, and that was 32 years ago.
It is nice that you were quite occupied, and polite.


Certainly some children are, but the last 60% of my - DOMESTIC - trip[s
have had a multitude of brats runnign aisles, screaming, throwing things,
rocking back and forth, crawling under the seats, banging on the tray, and
more screaming.

Perhaps if you were flying ORD to FCO, it would be quieter.