NAAFA's Airline Tips for Fat People

"Martin W. Smith" wrote in message ...
Jonathan Smith wrote:

"Martin W. Smith" wrote in message ...
Citronella wrote:

You want the armrest up so that you can spill over into my seat space
that I paid for??

I know EXACTLY what I would tell you if you tried something like that
while seated next to me....

and I would even smile pleasantly while telling you.

I would say that given the US demographic of fat people, the US
government ought to require the airlines to have the same percentage of
fat person seats, ie rows with one fewer seat in them, where each seat
is wider. Then a fat person could either have a fat seat or a non-fat
seat, but if he sat in a non-fat seat, he would have to prevent his body
from intruding into the other passenger's space, or take another flight.

martin

Most airlines already have this sort of accomodation - some call it
business class, others call it first class.

Yes, but that prices those seats out of the reach of most fat people.

So your solution would be for skinny people to subsidize low cost
extra wide seats for fat people? I don't think so.

I think the US government has done plenty to intrude on our lives.
Let's not try for more. I like SWA approach - if you need more room,
buy two seats. This is an option open to everyone, BTW.

js

Jonathan Smith wrote:
So your solution would be for skinny people to subsidize low cost
extra wide seats for fat people? I don't think so.

No. They can charge extra fro wider seats. They already do that. Didn't
you know?

I think the US government has done plenty to intrude on our lives.

That's what the government is supposed to do, when you can't solve the
problem yourself.

Let's not try for more. I like SWA approach - if you need more room,
buy two seats. This is an option open to everyone, BTW.

Then you are arguing for allowing the airlines to determine what the
standard seat size is. Why? The standard seat size should be based on
the standard person size, which is an average that must include fat
people. Currently, the standard seat size does not take fat people into
account. That is discrimination. Since you can't solve the problem
fairly (you have just demonstrated that), the government ought to step
in. Did you think the airline seat size was passed down from God? Did
God provide measurements in cubits for seat sizes, when he told Noah to
build the ark? I don't think so.

martin

--
Draft Wesley Clark for President!
www.DraftWesleyClark.com

Martin Smith email:

Martin W. Smith wrote:
Jonathan Smith wrote:
So your solution would be for skinny people to subsidize
low cost extra wide seats for fat people? I don't think so.
No. They can charge extra fro wider seats.

But you've already lamented is that obese folk can't afford to buy
them so that argument is pretty much shot in the ass.

They already do that. Didn't you know?

Not all airlines make that accomodation. When I flew out to Chicago
last summer it was on a budget flight with no "first class" section on
the plane at all.

I think the US government has done plenty to intrude
on our lives.
That's what the government is supposed to do, when you
can't solve the problem yourself.

The airlines are handling the problem as they see fit; unfortunately
for overweight folk there are more pressing problems than seat size that
require attention.

Let's not try for more. I like SWA approach - if you need
more room, buy two seats. This is an option open to everyone,
BTW.
Then you are arguing for allowing the airlines to determine
what the standard seat size is. Why?

Umm, because they're also responsible for setting the price on that
seat? In a free-enterprise system the airlines can do as they see fit
and everybody else can take the train (or boat) as necessary.

The standard seat size should be based on the standard
person size, which is an average that must include fat
people.

If they did that, fewer people would be able to fit on the plane and
ticket prices would go up accordingly - for everyone, not just people
with extra freight built in. Of the roughly 110 people on the
aforementioned flight to Chicago absolutely NO ONE had any trouble
fitting into a seat. 0%. The average passenger fit well into their
seat.
I weigh 170# at 5'10". If someone else weighs 340# at 5'10" it would
be grossly unfair for me to have to foot the bill for *their* "extra
passenger", which is precisely what you're suggesting.
And your "fair" idea to set an average won't help fat people either -
if you average the two aforementioned weights you'll come up with it'll
come out to 255#, which makes for a nice, big comfy (if overpriced) seat
for me but still isn't big enough for for someone twice my weight.

But let's invert this for a bit. Let's say that 340# is a "normal"
weight for a 5'10" human. As a person that weighs half that, would it
be fair for me to demand that the airlines accomodate me by providing a
half-size seat at half the price?

Currently, the standard seat size does not take fat people
into account. That is discrimination.

A ludicrous assertion. The airline is not denying service to anyone -
they're merely insisting that fat people pay their fair share of the
freight bill.

Since you can't solve the problem fairly

Here's a fair idea: Weigh-ins. Just like most anything else that
requires shipment, you pay by the pound to cover costs of space on-board
and fuel just as if you were bringing extra luggage along. If you can
provide an authorized medical waiver that states your weight is the
result of something other than overeating (the most common cause of
obesity) then you get an appropriate handicap discount.

(you have just demonstrated that), the government ought to
step in.

The government should step in to help mollify the current obesity
"epidemic". Just like it's illegal for a barkeep to continue to sell
anything but soft drinks to a drunk person, make it illegal to sell
anything but lettuce and low-fat salad dressing to a fat person that
isn't overweight as a result of a medical condition.

Did you think the airline seat size was passed down from God?

No more than the recipie for Hostess Twinkies is.

Mikey (..and I'd be pretty sure that Adam and Eve were pretty svelte.)

Mike Given wrote:

Martin W. Smith wrote:
Jonathan Smith wrote:
So your solution would be for skinny people to subsidize
low cost extra wide seats for fat people? I don't think so.
No. They can charge extra fro wider seats.

But you've already lamented is that obese folk can't afford to buy
them so that argument is pretty much shot in the ass.

No, I don't mean the increased price should be a business class or first
class fare. That's way too high. Most people can't afford it. But a ten
percent premium, or something like that, for the extra space, is
reasonable. Two seats are far wider than a business class seat. Most fat
people don't spill over that much.

They already do that. Didn't you know?

Not all airlines make that accomodation. When I flew out to Chicago
last summer it was on a budget flight with no "first class" section on
the plane at all.

Yes, once again they have ignored the fat people demographic, as if
there aren't a lot of fat people in the US.

Then you are arguing for allowing the airlines to determine
what the standard seat size is. Why?

Umm, because they're also responsible for setting the price on that
seat? In a free-enterprise system the airlines can do as they see fit
and everybody else can take the train (or boat) as necessary.

Then they could make the seats even smaller, and pack them even closer
together. You wouldn't like that, but if they all got together and
decided to do it, you would have no choice. That's why the government
intervenes.

The standard seat size should be based on the standard
person size, which is an average that must include fat
people.

If they did that, fewer people would be able to fit on the plane and
ticket prices would go up accordingly - for everyone, not just people
with extra freight built in. Of the roughly 110 people on the
aforementioned flight to Chicago absolutely NO ONE had any trouble
fitting into a seat. 0%. The average passenger fit well into their
seat.

Yes, and that would be the case most of the time, so very few large size
seats would be needed, and ticket prioces wouldn't have to be changed
much, if at all.

I weigh 170# at 5'10". If someone else weighs 340# at 5'10" it would
be grossly unfair for me to have to foot the bill for *their* "extra
passenger", which is precisely what you're suggesting.
And your "fair" idea to set an average won't help fat people either -
if you average the two aforementioned weights you'll come up with it'll
come out to 255#, which makes for a nice, big comfy (if overpriced) seat
for me but still isn't big enough for for someone twice my weight.

I was actually think of an adjustable seat.

But let's invert this for a bit. Let's say that 340# is a "normal"
weight for a 5'10" human. As a person that weighs half that, would it
be fair for me to demand that the airlines accomodate me by providing a
half-size seat at half the price?

I don't understand your example.

Currently, the standard seat size does not take fat people
into account. That is discrimination.

A ludicrous assertion. The airline is not denying service to anyone -
they're merely insisting that fat people pay their fair share of the
freight bill.

A ludicrous assertion. The airline discriminates on the basis of size by
requiring fat people to buy two seats.

Since you can't solve the problem fairly

Here's a fair idea: Weigh-ins. Just like most anything else that
requires shipment, you pay by the pound to cover costs of space on-board
and fuel just as if you were bringing extra luggage along. If you can
provide an authorized medical waiver that states your weight is the
result of something other than overeating (the most common cause of
obesity) then you get an appropriate handicap discount.

Fair enough.

(you have just demonstrated that), the government ought to
step in.

The government should step in to help mollify the current obesity
"epidemic". Just like it's illegal for a barkeep to continue to sell
anything but soft drinks to a drunk person, make it illegal to sell
anything but lettuce and low-fat salad dressing to a fat person that
isn't overweight as a result of a medical condition.

Not fair, because it violates the principle of separation of church and
state. Diets are religions.

Did you think the airline seat size was passed down from God?

No more than the recipie for Hostess Twinkies is.

So you do think the seat size was passed down from God?

martin

--
Draft Wesley Clark for President!
www.DraftWesleyClark.com

Martin Smith email:

Martin W. Smith wrote:
Yes, and that would be the case most of the time, so very few large size
seats would be needed, and ticket prioces wouldn't have to be changed
much, if at all.

Every inch used for larger seats takes away from the number of normal
seats. Even if they're not being used.

I was actually think of an adjustable seat.

Where would the other space come from? Or do you mean three seats that could
be converted to two?

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu

Founded in 1969, the National Association to Advance Fat Acceptance (NAAFA)
is a non-profit human rights organization dedicated to improving the quality
of life for fat people.

Get a clue... loose wieght ROTFL BJ





Miguel Cruz wrote:
Martin W. Smith wrote:
Yes, and that would be the case most of the time, so very
few large size seats would be needed, and ticket prioces
wouldn't have to be changed much, if at all.

Every inch used for larger seats takes away from the number
of normal seats. Even if they're not being used.

I was actually think of an adjustable seat.

Where would the other space come from? Or do you mean three
seats that could be converted to two?

miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world:
http://travel.u.nu

Martin W. Smith wrote:
Mike Given wrote:
Martin W. Smith wrote:
Jonathan Smith wrote:
So your solution would be for skinny people to subsidize
low cost extra wide seats for fat people? I don't think so.
No. They can charge extra fro wider seats.
But you've already lamented is that obese folk can't afford
to buy them so that argument is pretty much shot in the ass.
No, I don't mean the increased price should be a business
class or first class fare. That's way too high. Most people
can't afford it. But a ten percent premium, or something like
that, for the extra space, is reasonable.

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of offering a 50%-off
second seat as a *courtesy* to oversized passengers. The airline still
loses the 1/2 the price of a second seat but as I'll demonstrate a
little further on there's a certain amount of pragmatism to the idea.

Two seats are far wider than a business class seat. Most fat
people don't spill over that much.

I've been airborne to (at rough counts) 20 different destinations on
somewhereabouts 40-50+ different commercial flights and once via private
jet. Excluding the private jet, of all those flights I only ever saw
one passenger large enough for special seating. Recollecting time spent
in airports, I can say I don't recall seeing too much of anyone that
wouldn't fit (or at least squeeze) into a coach-class seat.
Ergo contenplorum, most overweight folk (or at least those prone to
airline travel) are not quite *that* overweight.

They already do that. Didn't you know?
Not all airlines make that accomodation. When I flew out to
Chicago last summer it was on a budget flight with no "first
class" section on the plane at all.
Yes, once again they have ignored the fat people demographic,
as if there aren't a lot of fat people in the US.

See above; your alleged demographic doesn't exist, or at least it
doesn't have much significance, or at least not enough to consider
refitting an entire fleet of planes with larger and less-profitable
seating. It'd be cheaper to settle potential out-of-court and continue
to discriminate.

Then you are arguing for allowing the airlines to determine
what the standard seat size is. Why?
Umm, because they're also responsible for setting the price
on that seat? In a free-enterprise system the airlines can
do as they see fit and everybody else can take the train (or
boat) as necessary.
Then they could make the seats even smaller, and pack them even
closer together.

Don't be silly; besides, you're the one that brought demographics into
play here. Airline coach-class seats are tested by a variety of people,
no doubt some of whom will be wider and/or taller than average; such
things are also tested for smaller passengers (ie. children). A team of
designers then sends the appropriate design spec to Boeing or whomever.

You wouldn't like that, but if they all got together and
decided to do it, you would have no choice.

Actually I think the seat spacing is already too small; I can tell ya
about a few semi-nightmare flights as a result thereof. Flying anywhere
nowadays is a major peeve unto itself for lots of other reasons though.

That's why the government intervenes.

No. The government only intervenes when public welfare would be
threatened. Requiring a passenger to purchase a separate seat for
freight purposes is at the sole discretion of the indivdual airlines.
If the demographic starts to threaten profit margin is the only point at
which an airline might decide to re-engineer its aircraft for larger
passengers.

[..anecdotal example..]
The average passenger fit well into their seat.
Yes, and that would be the case most of the time, so very few
large size seats would be needed, and ticket prioces wouldn't
have to be changed much, if at all.

See above. Airlines aren't going to refit seating unless a
demographically significant number of oversize passengers make a fuss;
anecdotal monkey business about one passenger on one flight isn't going
to make a host of airline companies change their policy nor will it
likely warrant any goverment action. Which is as it should be.

[...]
And your "fair" idea to set an average won't help fat people
either - if you average the two aforementioned weights you'll
come up with it'll come out to 255#, which makes for a nice,
big comfy (if overpriced) seat for me but still isn't big
enough for for someone twice my weight.
I was actually think of an adjustable seat.

Specious reasoning; you still have to leave room for the seat to fully
expand, therefore it's space you can't use for anything else. Some
aircraft I've flown in are already equipped with very limited wheelchair
seating - but that's really only for truly handicapped folk, who should
not be put out by an overweight customer.
Unless of course you're proposing that extremely overweight people be
governmentally afforded handicapped status, which is a whole 'nother
argument altogether.

But let's invert this for a bit. Let's say that 340# is a "normal"
weight for a 5'10" human. As a person that weighs half that, would it
be fair for me to demand that the airlines accomodate me by providing a
half-size seat at half the price?
I don't understand your example.

It was simple enough; hypothesize that *all* airline seats would be
created for folks that would normally occupy two of the current-sized
seats. Would it be fair to charge me for a full-price ticket if I will
only occupy half of the seat? Shouldn't I be given a substantial
discount for my svelte frame?

Currently, the standard seat size does not take fat people
into account. That is discrimination.
A ludicrous assertion. The airline is not denying service to
anyone - they're merely insisting that fat people pay their
fair share of the freight bill.
A ludicrous assertion.

Polly wanna cracker?

The airline discriminates on the basis of size by requiring
fat people to buy two seats.

That's *not* discrimination. It would be discrimination if they
refused to allow the person on the plane at all, but that's not the
case. Labeling such a policy as "discriminatory" borders on libel.

If you think there's some foul plot at work by the airline companies
to make fat people feel bad, I suggest you read:

http://www.southwest.com/about_swa/p...onal_seat.html

..and you'll understand a bit more about the reality of things rather
than making petty whines about "discrimination".

Since you can't solve the problem fairly
Here's a fair idea: Weigh-ins. Just like most anything else
that requires shipment, you pay by the pound to cover costs
of space on-board and fuel just as if you were bringing extra
luggage along. If you can provide an authorized medical waiver
that states your weight is the result of something other than
overeating (the most common cause of obesity) then you get an
appropriate handicap discount.
Fair enough.

It would be except that available anecdotal evidence suggests that
oversize people consider the policy of even reserving (much less
actually purchasing) an extra seat to accomodate their bulk to be a
discriminatory practice. Which is, of course, completely assinine in my
book; wheelchair-bound folk have been doing it for years without almost
no complaints or congressional hearings at all. And the NAAFA's
solution of:

"ARMREST UP - When you get to your seat during pre-boarding, raise the
armrest between seats. This may give you the inch or two of extra space
you need. The chances are that the passenger who will be seated next to
you won't say anything; if he does, smile pleasantly and say that you'll
both be more comfortable if the armrest is up. "

My response to that particular line of bull**** would be, "No, we'd
have both been more comfortable if you'd have had the courtesy to
purchase an extra seat for your freight",
But even the same NAAFA document that I nabbed the above snippet from
at least acknowleges that (considerate) oversize folks are wont to
purchase a second seat, which serves two purposes - it makes the
oversize patron more comfortable and prevents a potentially disastrous
encounter with a fellow passenger whose seat might otherwise be intruded
upon. Which is why I said earlier that airline companies should
consider *some* discount in accomodating oversize passengers, but they
shouldn't have to take it completely on the chin.

The government should step in to help mollify the current
obesity "epidemic". Just like it's illegal for a barkeep
to continue to sell anything but soft drinks to a drunk person,
make it illegal to sell anything but lettuce and low-fat salad
dressing to a fat person that isn't overweight as a result of
a medical condition.
Not fair, because it violates the principle of separation of
church and state. Diets are religions.

Say what you will, but IMHO selling Twinkies to already-overweight
people is more of a crime than an airline charging extra for freight.

Did you think the airline seat size was passed down from God?
No more than the recipie for Hostess Twinkies is.
So you do think the seat size was passed down from God?

What part of the first word of the sentence I wrote when I replied to
that stupid query the first time did you not understand?

I do, however, get the feeling that you think oversized people should
be afforded all the courtesy and discount that handicapped folk get.
Feel free to refute that thought if the observation isn't accurate.

Mikey (..then we can all buy "Obesity Cripples!" bumperstickers.)

"Martin W. Smith" wrote:
Mike Given wrote:

But let's invert this for a bit. Let's say that 340# is a "normal"
weight for a 5'10" human. As a person that weighs half that, would it
be fair for me to demand that the airlines accomodate me by providing a
half-size seat at half the price?

I don't understand your example.

Okay, try this one. You and I go to a fine restaurant. I
order one plate of food. You order two. Should I be
required to pay as much money as you?

Currently, the standard seat size does not take fat people
into account. That is discrimination.

A ludicrous assertion. The airline is not denying service to anyone -
they're merely insisting that fat people pay their fair share of the
freight bill.

A ludicrous assertion. The airline discriminates on the basis of size by
requiring fat people to buy two seats.

Not all discrimination is bad. The word itself refers to a
neutral differentiation process. Discrimination becomes bad
when it is based on factors that do not have practical
relevance or whose relevance is limited to perpetuating
undesirable social policy.

Telling a fat person she can't be hired because she's fat
for a job that has no relevant physical requirements is one
thing.

Telling a fat person she must pay for the space she occupies
on an airplane is another.

The point mikey's trying to get through your head can be
restated another way.

Airlines have finite interior space. The number of seats
they can sell is dependent on the size of the space and the
size of the seats. They have to generate as much revenue
per seat as they can to be profitable. If they reduce the
number of seats by 40% to accomodate fat people, you should
expect the costs of the seats to go up 40%. Correct?

Why should a person who can fit into one of the current
seats subsidize a larger seat for someone who needs it?

Why is that fair to the smaller person?

miguel

In article , Mike Given says...



[..anecdotal example..]
The average passenger fit well into their seat.
Yes, and that would be the case most of the time, so very few
large size seats would be needed, and ticket prioces wouldn't
have to be changed much, if at all.

See above. Airlines aren't going to refit seating unless a
demographically significant number of oversize passengers make a fuss;
anecdotal monkey business about one passenger on one flight isn't going
to make a host of airline companies change their policy nor will it
likely warrant any goverment action. Which is as it should be.

One problem would be, if certain larger seats are made available, a large number
of passengers will want them - not just the obese or even overweight. How does
one deal with that? Query those who reserve by phone or online? Measure them
when they appear for the flight? What do you do with the large-but-can-fit pax
who sign up for these seats? And that minority of folks who always seem to
define for themselves soooome reason they haaaaave to have the better situations
in general? Say you're a ticket agent - you wanna deal with all that??

I also get back to the point that Mike also makes (I think) - there aren't
thaaaaaat many pax who really can't fit in the seats. I got my (at the time)
210 lb 6 foot tall person's pregnant broad beam in an economy class airline seat
- I've observed most large folks can - beer-bellied, overweight, whatever.
There's not much shifting around or slouching room to be sure, but by and large
(pun) the passengers fit in their seats - yes, with the armrest down. So we're
really talking about people several sigmas away from the mean who are really too
large to fit - the truly obese.

I'd be for offering 50% off a second seat - it may still get to the problems of
definition and perception as to need I described above, but I think to a much
lesser extent.

Banty

In article ,
Mike Given wrote:
Martin W. Smith wrote:
Mike Given wrote:
Martin W. Smith wrote:
Jonathan Smith wrote:
So your solution would be for skinny people to subsidize
low cost extra wide seats for fat people? I don't think so.
No. They can charge extra fro wider seats.
But you've already lamented is that obese folk can't afford
to buy them so that argument is pretty much shot in the ass.
No, I don't mean the increased price should be a business
class or first class fare. That's way too high. Most people
can't afford it. But a ten percent premium, or something like
that, for the extra space, is reasonable.

Actually I was thinking more along the lines of offering a 50%-off
second seat as a *courtesy* to oversized passengers. The airline still
loses the 1/2 the price of a second seat but as I'll demonstrate a
little further on there's a certain amount of pragmatism to the idea.

Two seats are far wider than a business class seat. Most fat
people don't spill over that much.

I've been airborne to (at rough counts) 20 different destinations on
somewhereabouts 40-50+ different commercial flights and once via private
jet. Excluding the private jet, of all those flights I only ever saw
one passenger large enough for special seating. Recollecting time spent
in airports, I can say I don't recall seeing too much of anyone that
wouldn't fit (or at least squeeze) into a coach-class seat.
Ergo contenplorum, most overweight folk (or at least those prone to
airline travel) are not quite *that* overweight.

I've been flying for as many years as I've been alive. I've flown
more recently, due to living further away from relatives but, I'd say
I've logged about 1.5 times your travel on everything from a Piper
Cherokee to a 747.

In recent years, maybe because I do now reside in the land of
butterfat, I have seen at least one passenger per flight that
has requested the seatbelt extensions. My horror story begins
in Detroit. Our connection from Indianapolis was late and the
only two seats near each other were two aisle seats in the back
of the plane. I'm a smallish woman -- about 20.5% body fat, 5'5"
BMI of 22 -- compared to my 6' 172# husband, so I got the seat
next to the large couple. She had raised the armrest up to allow
herself to spill over into my seat. They both had extensions and
had to ask for a *second* one for her spouse. I lowered the arm so that
I could have more of the room of my seat. She gave me a dirty look.
We had been up since 0330 - to make the hour+ drive to the airport,
negotiate self-park and the bus, check-in, security, etc; I was tired
and fell asleep. I awoke to an elbow jabbing me in my ribs. While
I slept she raised the arm and because I took up slightly more
than half my seat width my ribs were where her elbow would have been
if she put her hands at her side. We were making our intial descent,
so I didn't feel compelled to do anything but lower the armrest, again.
I got another dirty look.

THis is not the first time I have had to accomodate someone else
who failed to fit in their seat and needed some of mine; although,
it was the first time I got bruises. I think we got a bargain
fare of $200 during the peak of summer to a summer destination.
If the people with the 3 extensions had paid for one extra seat,
it still would have been a good fare at $300/pp and they wouldn't
have been so inconvenienced by my size 6 ass.

Alli

--
- "Relata refero. Ne Iupeter quidem omibus placet"
(I only tell you what I heard. Even Jove himself
cannot please everyone) -- Anon.