Are you a Pedophile?

It seems that the British Airlines assumes you are, as long as you are a man that is...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../09/do0901.xml

As the title of the article says, how many paedophiles can there be? And who the hell is going to molest a kid on an airplane in front of all those people? Has there even been any cases of this before? And how do the airlines get away with this blatant sexism? Certainly labeling the entire male sex as potential child rapists or paedophiles would cause much more harm than good?

Notice in the comments section too - some men have been too afraid of receiving an accusation of being a sex offender to help lost children! This law is ridiculous.:thumbsdown:

EDIT: Thanks Del Arroyo.

p - e - d - o is an accepted variant.

Without looking into the linky, I think this must be Boris Johnson's column, no? I read it last week and I totally agree with him. The man is much smarter than he is made out to be.

A friend of mine has had similar experiences and refuses to fly BA any longer.

What in God's name is going on in the UK? :dizzy2:

Although this is an utterly bizarre and discriminatory policy, I would not mind in the slightest if the aircrew insisted I was seated away from children on a long flight.

^We have gone PC insane...thats what.

The government has got it into its head to try and please everybody...yea, good luck with that! As shown, you can barely move or think without it being a problem to somebody.


On a side note...is that even legal? To blatently discriminate against that man? (see, now- Im doing it! eeergh!) And pretty much accuse him of likely being a criminal without any suspiscion of said crime whatsoever?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lancelot

^We have gone PC insane...thats what.

The government has got it into its head to try and please everybody...yea, good luck with that! As shown, you can barely move or think without it being a problem to somebody.


On a side note...is that even legal? To blatently discriminate against that man? (see, now- Im doing it! eeergh!) And pretty much accuse him of likely being a criminal without any suspiscion of said crime whatsoever?

---

Apart from which, that stewardess should know Boris Johnson is one of the nicest, smartest and funniest personalities in British politics. How many kids get the chance to talk to an MP for an hour or more? The silly cow should have encouraged those kids to talk to him.

I. Just. Can't. Believe. It.

Sorry to nit pick Adrian, but the point of the article was that they were his own kids. Other than that, I absolutely agree with you.

In fact, I hadn't considered that aspect of it at all-I mean, Boris is pretty distinctive, isn't he? If the stewardess isn't able to recognise such a major public figure, then it's hardly suprising that she's stupid enough to toe the BA line.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Big King Sanctaphrax

Sorry to nit pick Adrian, but the point of the article was that they were his own kids.

---

No, the point was that the stewardess didn't know they were his kids.

Part of the explanation for this nonsense must be the prevalent neo-lioberalism. An ideology that tells us life is nothing more than a huge contract with an infinite amount of small print in which all of our actions have calculable financial consequences in the form of claims, rewards, fines, point deductions, profits, interests, etcetera. Letting a single man sit next to children on a plane has become a calculable risk, albeit ever so small, that should be avoided in order to prevent potential claims and damages on account of BA 'negligence'.

Life has become an exercise in cost/benefit calculus.

"Even as I write, I can imagine the lip-pursing of some of my lovely high-minded readers. How would you like it, they will say, if some weird chap was plonked next to your kids? And they are right that I would worry about some strange adult sitting next to my children, chiefly because I wouldn't want the poor fellow to come to any harm."

:laugh4: :2thumbsup:

Now that's a real father!

Wait:

"I blame the media, I blame the judges, I blame the lobby groups, and in particular I blame the cowardly capitalist airline companies that give in to this sort of loony hysteria..."

Doesn't the British Government still subsidize the airlines?

I can see why BA do it though. I can see the Daily Mail headline...

"PEDO ABUSES CHILDREN ON FLIGHT AS BA DO NOTHING

Join our campaign to charge BA cheifs with neligience/treason/paedophilia!"

Hm, let's see: I'm male. I'm 28.

Ok, from now on I won't post anymore in threads started by members younger than 16.

On second thoughts, I won't post anymore in a thread were a minor has already posted.

Maybe I shouldn't post at all at the Org, since this is a game forum and there might be minors in here...

:no:

Common sense. Does it still exist? Maybe they should make laws against the use and abuse of the term "common sense" because obviously the term is often used by possible pedophiles, because they use it to obtain a situation where they can do, well you all know what they do...

:wall:

No....


but I am not going to complain if all the crying, screaming, vomiting, fidgeting, pestering, needing the toilet every five minutes etc goes on at the far end of the plane :clown:

:inquisitive: who came up with that notion?

If that means that I do not have to sit next to bored kids anymore on long-distance flights this would be enough reason to fly more BA :thinking:

Uhm ... I mean ... bad BA ... BAD BAD :smash:

They should make the pesky kids sit on the wings, ala Flight of the Pheonix.

Gotta say though the few times I flew BA I loved the legroom, free bacon and eggs for breaky and those lurverly blue leather seats.....:yes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AndresTheCunning

Hm, let's see: I'm male. I'm 28.

Ok, from now on I won't post anymore in threads started by members younger than 16.

On second thoughts, I won't post anymore in a thread were a minor has already posted.

Maybe I shouldn't post at all at the Org, since this is a game forum and there might be minors in here...

---

You promise ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Adrian II

Apart from which, that stewardess should know Boris Johnson is one of the nicest, smartest and funniest personalities in British politics. How many kids get the chance to talk to an MP for an hour or more? The silly cow should have encouraged those kids to talk to him.

---

Boris is probably my favourite politician, despite the fact that i disagree with a lot of what he says, that tells you what a nice character he comes over as being.

The "silly cow" comment is really unfair though, its not her fault, its BA policy.

It seems ludicrous but this is what PCness has lead to, however i would defend BA on two points, firstly, if anything did happen on a flight, and BA didn't have safety precautions, then they would be heavily critisized, and secondly, (as Boris comments but doesnt really adress) its fairly hypocritical to complain when its you, but if a man sat next to your kids, you might get slightly suspicious (if not you, then other people certainly would) :2thumbsup:

BA has always been okay for me, the food is edible, the seets sittable, and the magazines readable, i even got to sleep on a flight once :beam:

The next time I want to avoid having to sit near children on a flight I'm going to not shower for a couple of days before hand, wear a trench coat and read a baby magazine.

Based on the thread title I was really hoping for a quiz ...

I'm with Ser C on this one. I remember one flight to Japan I took where I was in the middle seat in coach (we were in cost-restrictions). An Indonesian gentleman (friendly, but oblivious) was on the aisle side, and his hyperactive 6 year old was in the window seat. I had a sprained ankle, so I was begging the guy to sit next to his son. I even offered him 1K yen ($10) to switch. Wouldn't do it. Next time, I'll just start stroking the kid's hair and blow into his ear once or twice. That should get me moved all the way up to first class.... and bonus, free restraints! :idea2:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I'm with Ser C on this one. I remember one flight to Japan I took where I was in the middle seat in coach (we were in cost-restrictions). An Indonesian gentleman (friendly, but oblivious) was on the aisle side, and his hyperactive 6 year old was in the window seat. I had a sprained ankle, so I was begging the guy to sit next to his son. I even offered him 1K yen ($10) to switch. Wouldn't do it. Next time, I'll just start stroking the kid's hair and blow into his ear once or twice. That should get me moved all the way up to first class.... and bonus, free restraints! :idea2:

---

Yea but that will only work on the return flight. You'd still be stuck with the kid on the way there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I'm with Ser C on this one. I remember one flight to Japan I took where I was in the middle seat in coach (we were in cost-restrictions). An Indonesian gentleman (friendly, but oblivious) was on the aisle side, and his hyperactive 6 year old was in the window seat. I had a sprained ankle, so I was begging the guy to sit next to his son. I even offered him 1K yen ($10) to switch. Wouldn't do it. Next time, I'll just start stroking the kid's hair and blow into his ear once or twice. That should get me moved all the way up to first class.... and bonus, free restraints! :idea2:

---

He wouldn't sit next to his own son? What a git.

Not that surprising really. This is the lunatic asylum of a country in which we live. If they wanted to make flights safer they could stop serving alcohol and breathalise passengers before boarding. The biggest problems are always caused by drunken louts harassing, and sometimes assaulting, stewardesses and other passengers. As usual the priorities are all wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I'm with Ser C on this one. I remember one flight to Japan I took where I was in the middle seat in coach (we were in cost-restrictions). An Indonesian gentleman (friendly, but oblivious) was on the aisle side, and his hyperactive 6 year old was in the window seat. I had a sprained ankle, so I was begging the guy to sit next to his son. I even offered him 1K yen ($10) to switch. Wouldn't do it. Next time, I'll just start stroking the kid's hair and blow into his ear once or twice. That should get me moved all the way up to first class.... and bonus, free restraints! :idea2:

---

that made me laugh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Don Corleone

I'm with Ser C on this one. I remember one flight to Japan I took where I was in the middle seat in coach (we were in cost-restrictions). An Indonesian gentleman (friendly, but oblivious) was on the aisle side, and his hyperactive 6 year old was in the window seat. I had a sprained ankle, so I was begging the guy to sit next to his son. I even offered him 1K yen ($10) to switch.

---

Now, that almost reads like a deja-vu for me.
When flying to the US one time (vacation trip with my wife) there was a 8-10 year old boy sitting next to me. His mother was sitting to rows in front of us together with her very well-behaving daughter and did not really care to switch places with my wife and me.
Of course a 10-hour flight is quite boring for a little boy so he continuously played with some noisy hand-held videogame (which did not have any earphones - this was 10 years ago), he also spilled a soft drink on my trousers and made a mess with his lunch (spaghetti with tomato sauce - what on earth were they thinking serving this as the meal for kids???).

I guess the mother was really glad that she got rid of him for 10 hours :brood:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mithrandir

You promise ?

---

Only click if you are older than 18. The poster cannot be held responsible for any physical or psychological harm inflicted on minors caused by the reading of the spoiler.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Bad boy!

I'll punish you :whip:

(you ARE older then 18, are you?)

Just lock all children up at the back of the plane. That way they won't annoy the rest of the passengers and wont provide temptation to all the paedo's. Problem solved. You would then have to make sure the all the stewards on the plane were definitely Gay.
How could you allow males to work a plane that contained children, given their levels of control/access on that plane.

All cabin crew must be hot women. We must think of the children.

It's bits like this that let down right-wing journalism and make it so easy to dismiss:

Quote:

---

Every week there is some new tale of what a saucy French mistress is deemed to have done with her adolescent charges behind the bicycle sheds

---

Examples plucked from thin air and presented as common knowledge. He is making generally good points - but what the blazes is this about?

Well in the US, we have several cases a year or so of female teaches...shall we say taking advantage of young boys...and they never are punished as a male taking advantage of a 12 year old girl or boy would be.

CR

Another example of leftist liberalism in it's purist form: unabashedly discriminatory in its pursuit of enforcing bizarre social justice from a Godless self-superior ethical perspective.

Secular utilitarian ethics is as horrific as it gets.

Hey DA, it's been a little while. ~:wave:

And I see you haven't changed a bit. Just so you know: this is not frickin' liberalism. If anything, it's simple public hysteria coupled with, ah, the "capitalist" BA "establishing measures against Pedophiles" to profit from that hysteria.

Propaganda and Leftism aren't connotations, you know. :yes:

Oh, why am I bothering...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cowhead418

It seems that the British Airlines assumes you are, as long as you are a man that is...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/m.../09/do0901.xml

As the title of the article says, how many paedophiles can there be? And who the hell is going to molest a kid on an airplane in front of all those people? Has there even been any cases of this before? And how do the airlines get away with this blatant sexism? Certainly labeling the entire male sex as potential child rapists or paedophiles would cause much more harm than good?

Notice in the comments section too - some men have been too afraid of receiving an accusation of being a sex offender to help lost children! This law is ridiculous.:thumbsdown:

EDIT: Thanks Del Arroyo.

---

The flight he was on was to India if I'm not mistaken. My ex never sat near a man on flights to India. She had bad experiences in the past and was determined to avoid them in future. She travelled there 3-4 times a year. She was a bit of nutcase but I did understand her very well. Having said all that she was a 9 on a scale of 10 lookswise (sorry I'm male I quantify/objectify so sue me) and I can understand why people would want to feel her up. But I don't accept people who would do it against her wishes, that's just cruel. If they don't have any shame to molest an adult female, why would'nt they do the same to minor females who are even more vulnerable.

There are a lot of perverts out there, and on one occasion, in Paris airport while I was seeing her off on a flight to Bombay. I saw this Indian man about 45 years old behind us in the que. Just the way he was looking at her was so bad, so lewd, so lacking in any decency whatsoever, I understood why she would'nt sit next to a man on India bound flights. If he had his way he would'nt care whether she wants to be touched or not, he'd just do it.

After she left I went and had a word with that guy, just about manners and general civility towards women. How sad that he did'nt take offence and provoke me because my knuckles were itching to knock his teeth out. Instead he apologised ! Well that's great, yeah ?, but I'd have preferred to kick his ass.

I'm not defending BA, all I'm saying is that child abuse and sexual abuse is a big problem for females in India. Just caught my mind when reading that article.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Divinus Arma

Another example of leftist liberalism in it's purist form: unabashedly discriminatory in its pursuit of enforcing bizarre social justice from a Godless self-superior ethical perspective.

Secular utilitarian ethics is as horrific as it gets.

---

You see I think it is the response of the weak minded to the moral outrage and frantic curtain twitching of the petit-bourgeoise right wingers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Idaho

Examples plucked from thin air and presented as common knowledge. He is making generally good points - but what the blazes is this about?

---

So, you find an article easy to dismiss as although it is based on fact, there are some inane examples in it? Cheerfuly throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

Moral outrage at what exactly? Men??? I've not seen any rightwingers advocating that men are less trustworthy with children than women. Can you provide anything to prove me wrong?

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rory_20_uk

So, you find an article easy to dismiss as although it is based on fact, there are some inane examples in it? Cheerfuly throwing the baby out with the bathwater.~:smoking:

---

Becuase a serious point should have a reasonable number of examples to draw on. As soon as someone - and especially the gaffe-prone Johnson - starts shooting from the hip, I rightly switch off.