Should single men be able to sit next to unaccompanied kids on planes ?

[wylie]

My homo mates are good to have a chat and drink with because they are funny but if i had a young son im not sure i would trust them to babysit him. This is a LOT different than sitting next to someone in a packed plane with the lights on.

OMG!!! Why not mention that to your "homo mate" and then pick yourself up off the floor. You will have to get back on the floor to find your teeth .

Note to you - homosexuals like other "men". They are no more likely to want to fiddle with your son than a straight friend or your straight friend's wife. What an absolute joke. You belong in the 1950s.

Man oh man... I'm just gobsmacked, but judging by some of your other posts, not surprised at all.

 

[Dazz]

Yes.....is being the answer to the question.

 

[bump]

Make sure you tell them that and see how long they stay your mates.

Ive told them and they werent offended

 

[wylie]

Ive told them and they werent offended

Then they are NOT good friends.

 

[bump]

Then they are NOT good friends.

I agree and i never said they were good friends, i probably consider them more drinking buddys.

 

[VYBerlinaV8]

I think the comment about the pendulum swinging was probably pretty accurate. In times past (and in some situations even today) there exists prejudice against various groups of people. As society has tried to deal with this, misandry has emerged.

FWIW, I'm not that worried about misandry, but that's probably because I'm a confident and educated man who knows who he is. I deal with misandry on a case by case basis, usually by making a smartarse comment back to the person in question. Just as there are plenty of men who are not mysogynist or racist, there are plenty of women who are balanced, sensible and not misandrists.

And at the end of the day, I'm quite happy for there to be misandrist jokes. After all, I've laughed at plenty of misogynist ones.

 

[VYBerlinaV8]

Something your not telling us bump or sunfish?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2126957/Homophobes-attracted-sex-study-finds.html

Maybe there's something to this. I don't really have a problem with homosexuals (of either gender), primarily because I don't understand or appreciate their situation beyond simply thinking about it.

 

[Jake D]

Here's a handful of things that have crossed my mind while I read this thread. In no particular order.

1. Homosexual ≠ paedophile. Not remotely.

2. I understand & accept the "policy" but completely disagree with the implementation. Plan ahead better with your seating allocation, if you fail at this point, leave the guy alone and just monitor the situation better, you've already got flight attendants doing laps the whole time.

3. I am slowly starting to realise that my normal helpful self can be seen as creepy, and as such, quite often second guess my offers to assist anyone, ladies struggling with shopping, other guys caught in the rain waiting for a bus while I drive past to the station, not just young kids who look lost.

4. (related to 2) Despite any common sense I usually possess, if I were the guy in the article, and I was asked to move away from the young boys, a voice in my head would probably have told me they were accusing me of paedophilia, I would have gotten offended, I would have kicked up a stink, and they would have had to arrest me before that plane went anywhere.

5. I understand that 3 and 4 seem contradictory. I don't care.

 

[BayView]

My homo mates are good to have a chat and drink with because they are funny but if i had a young son im not sure i would trust them to babysit him.

Isn't this the same as you saying that your hetero mates can't be trusted around a 9 year old girl; because they happen to like girls?

Just because they are gay doesn't make them automatically a pedophile.

But; it's always a good policy to be wary no matter who the adult is or their sexual preference.

It's no doubt a cynical view, but...

This is a LOT different than sitting next to someone in a packed plane with the lights on.

Pedophilia can take many different forms.

The girl on the recent Aus TV Comedy show in the news had her leg and backside stroked.

That can easily be done on a plane within the confines of the seats; especially if the guy is in the aisle seat, shielding the view with his own body.

 

[wylie]

Jake D... what a sensible, sane post that is. Kudos to you.

Everything in your post is pretty much how I feel.

Several years ago I was driving home on dusk and saw a young buy walking beside a reasonably busy road. I drove past, unsure what to do, did a u-turn and drove up beside him, wound down the window and asked him if he was ok. I have three sons, one was about this boy's age.

He said he had run away from home. He was probably 7 kms from his home. I left him outside my car and called his mother on my mobile. No answer. I called a few more times. I had to make a decision. I told him I had sons his age (probably a well-tried grooming technique) and drove him to the local police station.

What amazed me was that the police didn't ask for my name or contact details. I could have done anything to that boy, and they didn't even get my details. I imagine his mother may well have been driving the streets looking for him (he was about 10 years old) and that was why she didn't answer the phone.

I was aware that I was putting myself at risk of some sort of accusation by picking him up, but as a mother, I also knew that if I left him on the side of the street, the next car to pull alongside might not have had the impulse to protect him. No way could I have left him there...

 

[Truly Exotic]

Jake

He said he had run away from home. He was probably 7 kms from his home. I left him outside my car and called his mother on my mobile. No answer. I called a few more times. I had to make a decision. I told him I had sons his age (probably a well-tried grooming technique) and drove him to the local police station.

What amazed me was that the police didn't ask for my name or contact details. I could have done anything to that boy, and they didn't even get my details. I imagine his mother may well have been driving the streets looking for him (he was about 10 years old) and that was why she didn't answer the phone.

I was aware that I was putting myself at risk of some sort of accusation by picking him up, but as a mother, I also knew that if I left him on the side of the street, the next car to pull alongside might not have had the impulse to protect him. No way could I have left him there...

My assumption is that most pedophiles would do their business and leave them there or would take them somewhere else other then the police station so the police had no reason to suspect you,

It's almost like saying, some guy who came puffing into the police station to ask for directions= someone who had just robbed a bank and had run away from the crime scene

 

[HiEquity]

I agree the answer to the question is "yes".

This reminds me of the USA "pre-emptive strike". We will act now "just in case" a crime might be committed by someone. These types of policies sound all nice and safe and make us feel justified because "what could happen" is so horrendous but they have consequences, such as:

- Kids not getting any exposure to decent male role models in this case among the general public.
- Kids getting the idea that every man is a molester.
- Men feeling like second class citizens in their own society.
- People letting down their guard against women in the same position, where they can also do similar things and we need more awareness of this rather than less.
- People feeling justified in wrapping their kids up in cotton wool, where far fewer kids ride to school any more, play on the street or walk to the shops by themselves. And then parents wonder why their kids don't have any street smarts or are timid and insular in public and don't leave home until they're 30.

Keeping kids away from people is not the right answer. The presumption of innocence is the right answer - all men and women are entitled to it. Policies like this that curb individual freedoms of association for adults and children need to be very carefully considered to ensure the risk is sufficient to justify the policy and the consequent downsides.

I don't believe the risk to unaccompanied children in an open airplane with flight attendants keeping a special eye out on them justifies this particular incursion on our liberty. I'd like to see some evidence to the contrary first...

 

[Deltaberry]

What about single women?

 

[wylie]

What about single women?

That is exactly what others have pointed out. Statistically, they are less risk but if I was sending my children on a plane, I would be just as concerned about them sitting next to a "single" woman, a "single" man or a married woman or married man.

It all comes down to weighing up the risks. As HiEquity says, airline staff should be able to keep a good eye on any unaccompanied child/ren whether or not they are sitting next to ANYONE or even if they are sitting alone.

I'm guessing unaccompanied children on flights are not that common.

 

[turk]

Reading through the thread there seems to be basically only 2 reasons for supporting the policy, those being

-Preemptive action

-For the greater good

I hope that posters support this types of action won't protest when Companies and individuals act in the same fashion with all types of discrimination, such as

Racial

Religious

Sexual

Ageist

Political

and any other type of discrimination you can think of.


It would be questionable whether these actions would break sexual discrimination laws?

 

[BayView]

What about single women?

They end up becoming an ex-wife and take your house, so steer clear.

 

[Ed Barton]

I'm guessing unaccompanied children on flights are not that common.

With the rate of relationship breakdown i think they are quite common as kids are sent off for holiday's with the non custodial parent.

 

[Tuppence]

Now it's Qantas too.

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/nurse-humiliated-by-qantas-policy-20120813-243t4.html

 

[Jake D]

Now it's Qantas too.

http://www.theage.com.au/travel/travel-incidents/nurse-humiliated-by-qantas-policy-20120813-243t4.html

The link to the article about the guy successfully suing British Airways for discrimination is quite interesting.

 

[Ed Barton]

A nurse was made to feel as if he had a sign that read "kiddie fiddler" over his head after he was moved away from a young girl on a Qantas flight, he said.
Daniel McCluskie said he had a similar experience to a firefighter on a Virgin Australia flight when he was made to switch seats with a woman because he was sitting next to an unaccompanied child.

In 2010, British Airways changed its policy that men travelling alone could not sit next to unaccompanied children after they were taken to court for contravening the Sex Discrimination Act.

British Airways now seats unaccompanied children in their own area after businessman Mirko Fischer sued the company when flight staff asked him to move away from a child after he had switched seats with his pregnant wife.
BA denied its policy was discriminatory but admitted to sex discrimination in Mr Fisher's case and agreed to pay him £2161 in costs and £750 in damages.

Read more: http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/tra...ntas-policy-20120813-243t4.html#ixzz23PGuZxPM

the message you have entered is too short. is this long enough?