About Us ThisisBigBrother.com

Alf · 26-10-2016, 12:48 PM

About a month ago I had to sit next to a fat woman (and I mean fat, huge actually) on a coach, but I didn't complain, I just got on with it.

The length of the M62 on half a seat.

Cherie · 26-10-2016, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alf

About a month ago I had to sit next to a fat woman (and I mean fat, huge actually) on a coach, but I didn't complain, I just got on with it.

The length of the M62 on half a seat.

sorry I know this isn't a laughing matter

Kizzy · 26-10-2016, 02:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaxie

They were sexist bigots, we should all care about discrimination against women.

And we do, nobody is defending their right to discriminate are they?

Northern Monkey · 26-10-2016, 03:13 PM

Oh you mean they weren't muslims?

Oh that's ok then.They can be as sexist as they like.

Carry on

Vanessa · 26-10-2016, 05:22 PM

i don't mind changing seats, but not near the window, i hate it

Ammi · 27-10-2016, 05:20 AM

...I don't know if it's accurate but I read on one media site that Mary Campos doesn't intend to sue the airline...she's insisting that they apologise to every female passenger on the plane, including any female staff...

...I think the main fault with this is with the airline/staff who made the decision to ask her to move, not the monks...not that I don't think their request was unreasonable because I think it was...but they could only ask is all they could do and they should have been told no, I'm sorry but these are the seats available on the flight/if they don't suit your needs then another flight maybe and you'll have to look at the alternatives...if for instance the monk's practice was to never speak../a vow of silence, they're obviously very entitled to that practise and it should be respected...but then it wouldn't be reasonable of them to place themselves in a position were spoken words were needed from them../where a requirement would be to answer a question or something...the airline should never have agreed to accommodate something that was going to discriminate against something else and I think all fault is with them when all they had to do was say no, we can't guarantee no female contact sorry...

Cherie · 27-10-2016, 08:12 AM

Yeah I agree Ammi and this is why I felt it was similar to the cake situation but maybe even worse because in this case they accepted both customers money and then proceeded to prioritise the monks needs over the woman (I understand she chose the seat?) and the female staff, that said maybe the airline were not aware of the monks requests until check in and on a full flight they were unable to reseat them alone, and obviously it's easier to swap one person around than 2, still doesn't make it right though, the monks should have been told if they travel on public transport in a westernised country they will be sat next to females and served by them religious beliefs or not, then it's up to them to make alternate arrangement, equality forms part of our culture and they have to accept that or stay put, this would have been a difficult call for the check in staff on a busy day though and to avoid hassle they just went with it, according to the article I posted its not an unusual request so maybe western airlines need a clear policy for their staff to follow

Ammi · 27-10-2016, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherie

Yeah I agree Ammi and this is why I felt it was similar to the cake situation but maybe even worse because in this case they accepted both customers money and then proceeded to prioritise the monks needs over the woman (I understand she chose the seat?) and the female staff, that said maybe the airline were not aware of the monks requests until check in and on a full flight they were unable to reseat them alone, and obviously it's easier to swap one person around than 2, still doesn't make it right though, the monks should have been told if they travel on public transport in a westernised country they will be sat next to females and served by them religious beliefs or not, then it's up to them to make alternate arrangement, equality forms part of our culture and they have to accept that or stay put, this would have been a difficult call for the check in staff on a busy day though and to avoid hassle they just went with it, according to the article I posted its not an unusual request so maybe western airlines need a clear policy for their staff to follow

...I'm failing to see the cake analogy...(I'm not saying there isn't one...)...just that I can't see it and that could be entirely me...mainly because one case tried to accommodate and to not discriminate..but in doing that, they failed to see another discrimination.../so tried to do right but completely failed in doing wrong if you like...whereas the cake situation was just saying no, we wont accommodate at all and clear discrimination, not trying to do right in any way...(it makes sense in my head ..

..)...also I think just too many 'presumptions' reported with it for me because I don't think we know how full the flight was/..there were certainly some seats available as she was moved to another or asked if she would move so not a full flight anyway...the obvious would have been...(assuming they were rows of 3 seats or even 4 as some have..)...yes, we can do that but you have to purchase 3(4) seats on the flight to assure your needs are met...

bots · 27-10-2016, 08:39 AM

it raises an interesting point. If that form of demand is accommodated, do they also ask fat people to move to a different seat, perhaps someone with a cold, a family with a crying baby, a passenger that is vomiting, someone who drinks alcohol.

The airline were completely wrong

Cherie · 27-10-2016, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ammi

...I'm failing to see the cake analogy...(I'm not saying there isn't one...)...just that I can't see it and that could be entirely me...mainly because one case tried to accommodate and to not discriminate..but in doing that, they failed to see another discrimination.../so tried to do right but completely failed in doing wrong if you like...whereas the cake situation was just saying no, we wont accommodate at all and clear discrimination, not trying to do right in any way...(it makes sense in my head ..

..)...also I think just too many 'presumptions' reported with it for me because I don't think we know how full the flight was/..there were certainly some seats available as she was moved to another or asked if she would move so not a full flight anyway...the obvious would have been...(assuming they were rows of 3 seats or even 4 as some have..)...yes, we can do that but you have to purchase 3(4) seats on the flight to assure your needs are met...

In both cases the discrimation was caused by religious beliefs, with regard to buying the seats even then they would still have to accept being served by female staff

Ammi · 27-10-2016, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

it raises an interesting point. If that form of demand is accommodated, do they also ask fat people to move to a different seat, perhaps someone with a cold, a family with a crying baby, a passenger that is vomiting, someone who drinks alcohol.

The airline were completely wrong

..indeed they were...but I think (and not meaning to be controversial at all..)...that Kizzy has also made some points in the thread that are very valid also in that it does matter how the media portray as in 'muslim'... and I'm saying that having read quite a few global articles now....all saying basically the same because there isn't really anything to say other than the words of the lady...but it's more the many comments that have been made from some readers and really quite something in their racism and 'hate'../I mean awful but sadly commonplace as well because to some and far too many...?...'Muslim' has come to be representative of fear and hate for them with the rise of ISIS and terrorist acts ....we're all sensible people, we can distinguish and separate but some can't and don't so there is an importance of accurate reporting..(I feel anyway..)....if wording like Muslim and 'forced' are used in media titles, which neither are true it would seem...then it's just going to be provocative in negativity....

Cherie · 27-10-2016, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ammi

..indeed they were...but I think (and not meaning to be controversial at all..)...that Kizzy has also made some points in the thread that are very valid also in that it does matter how the media portray as in 'muslim'... and I'm saying that having read quite a few global articles now....all saying basically the same because there isn't really anything to say other than the words of the lady...but it's more the many comments that have been made from some readers and really quite something in their racism and 'hate'../I mean awful but sadly commonplace as well because to some and far too many...?...'Muslim' has come to be representative of fear and hate for them with the rise of ISIS and terrorist acts ....we're all sensible people, we can distinguish and separate but some can't and don't so there is an importance of accurate reporting..(I feel anyway..)....if wording like Muslim and 'forced' are used in media titles, which neither are true it would seem...then it's just going to be provocative in negativity....

Don't you think that is part of the problem though, businesses are so frightened of appearing racist and hurting their brand they are rolling over to ridiculous requests that would not be tolerated from other groups of people?

Ammi · 27-10-2016, 09:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cherie

In both cases the discrimation was caused by religious beliefs, with regard to buying the seats even then they would still have to accept being served by female staff

...(I'm getting confused Cherie in trying to understand the analogy, I had to think a bit...

..)...all I can say really..(my thought processes..)...is yes, I can understand that religious beliefs/faiths etc are involved with both cases...but with the airline (what appears to me from the information we have..)...it appears that it did try to accommodate but with doing that, that's exactly where the discrimination occurred but in another direction.../more just not thought out as it should have been and maybe as you say/busy day etc for the staff who made the decision...so a blunder which did cause discrimination on gender to happen...that still doesn't mean the airline aren't fully accountable though because they are...whereas with the cake, it wasn't a blunder of any kind but a very deliberate discrimination/refusal on sexuality...also it left with no option as to the cake being purchased there because it was no, you just won't get it here...whereas with the seat, there was always the option of still having the flight with that airline but not moving seats so not allowing the discrimination to take place at all...still though, the airline would have had fully accountability for making the request ...

...I guess for me there just isn't a 'one size fits all' with these things and I can only look individually at them with my thoughts or when I try to see analogies of similarity...but yes, they both involved religious faiths/beliefs/practises etc is what I can see ....

bots · 27-10-2016, 09:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ammi

..indeed they were...but I think (and not meaning to be controversial at all..)...that Kizzy has also made some points in the thread that are very valid also in that it does matter how the media portray as in 'muslim'... and I'm saying that having read quite a few global articles now....all saying basically the same because there isn't really anything to say other than the words of the lady...but it's more the many comments that have been made from some readers and really quite something in their racism and 'hate'../I mean awful but sadly commonplace as well because to some and far too many...?...'Muslim' has come to be representative of fear and hate for them with the rise of ISIS and terrorist acts ....we're all sensible people, we can distinguish and separate but some can't and don't so there is an importance of accurate reporting..(I feel anyway..)....if wording like Muslim and 'forced' are used in media titles, which neither are true it would seem...then it's just going to be provocative in negativity....

there is bias in all reporting though, and there is always an agenda behind it. Just sometimes we are more accepting of the agenda.

I think its up to us as individuals to treat reporting with the respect/contempt it deserves based on its content.

While i'm not happy with hatred of any type, I do believe the world has become much to politically correct toward certain sensitive subjects, and that forces agendas to be pursued using methods like this. We can't change the way people are, they do have thoughts if they don't agree with something and artificial suppression makes the problem worse, I think.

Ammi · 27-10-2016, 09:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

there is bias in all reporting though, and there is always an agenda behind it. Just sometimes we are more accepting of the agenda.

I think its up to us as individuals to treat reporting with the respect/contempt it deserves based on its content.

While i'm not happy with hatred of any type, I do believe the world has become much to politically correct toward certain sensitive subjects, and that forces agendas to be pursued using methods like this. We can't change the way people are, they do have thoughts if they don't agree with something and artificial suppression makes the problem worse, I think.

....hate in the content of how it was being expressed on some of these media reporting sites should always be supressed and not be allowed its voice at all ...it should be charged and it should be accountable and any media which is provocative/supportive of hate in it's reporting should also be accountable...I love how PC is brought into bear in feeling how wrong something is and feeling its importance and danger in that wrong/..I'll take my PC ass off the forum now because I have lots to do today...

..(btw, this wasn't slanting in reporting, the media headlines were incorrect to the facts as they appear to be and were left to be incorrect..)...

Northern Monkey · 27-10-2016, 09:49 AM

Well i did say it was the airlines fault back on page 1

bots · 27-10-2016, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ammi

....hate in the content of how it was being expressed on some of these media reporting sites should always be supressed and not be allowed its voice at all ...it should be charged and it should be accountable and any media which is provocative/supportive of hate in it's reporting should also be accountable...I love how PC is brought into bear in feeling how wrong something is and feeling its importance and danger in that wrong/..I'll take my PC ass off the forum now because I have lots to do today...

..

i think you are not hearing what I'm saying. Its PC culture that ultimately contributes to hate items, because people are suppressed from voicing opinions in a natural flow. Where hateful feelings are allowed to fester and then the floodgates are unleashed in a destructive way.

Feel free to be as PC as you like, and i will continue to mutter away in my corner

Ammi · 27-10-2016, 10:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i think you are not hearing what I'm saying. Its PC culture that ultimately contributes to hate items, because people are suppressed from voicing opinions in a natural flow. Where hateful feelings are allowed to fester and then the floodgates are unleashed in a destructive way.

Feel free to be as PC as you like, and i will continue to mutter away in my corner

....I do hear you completely and I'm all in agreement of the free flowing of opinions and communication being the way etc...I just don't agree with the whole 'PC culture' thing as it's portrayed...there would always be something..today it's PC culture, tomorrow it'll be whatever, in ages gone by before human rights laws, it was something else and a history of evidence of the existence of hate in the world...when people were allowed to voice their hate more freely and were less accountable, they still felt equally and they still hated equally and they still prejudiced equally as humans have at any time in history...we just now may feel a bigger voice in telling that hate how unacceptable it is....(I think we might have taken it off topic..

...and I really do have stuff to do so have a good day..

..)...

user104658 · 27-10-2016, 10:48 AM

I am 100% certain that this video was posted to highlight women's rights and had absolutely nothing at all to do with the fact that it was supposedly Muslims.

.

Ammi · 27-10-2016, 11:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toy Soldier

I am 100% certain that this video was posted to highlight women's rights and had absolutely nothing at all to do with the fact that it was supposedly Muslims.

.

...Niamh's USA flight..?...and leaving us a thread while she's away...

Kizzy · 27-10-2016, 11:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bitontheslide

i think you are not hearing what I'm saying. Its PC culture that ultimately contributes to hate items, because people are suppressed from voicing opinions in a natural flow. Where hateful feelings are allowed to fester and then the floodgates are unleashed in a destructive way.

Feel free to be as PC as you like, and i will continue to mutter away in my corner

It's really not, it's those who resist change railing against that change.

PC should just be renamed P, for progressive... Anything I have ever heard as a counter to anything 'PC' has been negative and regressive.

Nobody here is suppressed, there are plenty of media and organisations which cater for the non PC, the floodgates are constantly ajar.

Crimson Dynamo · 27-10-2016, 12:35 PM

you can repsect people's views however bat**** they are but religion should be given no favour, "oh you are a monk are you so what? Oh you are a vicar that is great I drive a bus, oh you are a full veil wearing muslim big deal I have on cords"

etc