Woman kept off flight for offensive shirt

Optimist · 05-25-12 at 02:02 PM

Some people, including on this forum. Makes me facepalm at the reaction to a word.

**lvstealth** · 05-25-12 at 02:07 PM

everyone should accept profanity?

interesting position!

smiling,
Mandy

Narubxan · 05-25-12 at 02:15 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by lvstealth

everyone should accept profanity?

interesting position!

smiling,
Mandy

one thing is "**** you", or "go **** yourself" which is insulting, another is the word by itself describing an action.

Besides it is only profanity because some people keep being offended at a combination of 4 letters that isnt even derogatory, yes, i prefer have everyone accept it as the simple word it is than censor people for using it :P

bogus109695 · 05-25-12 at 02:17 PM

your mistaken. The suits are so wealthy now they fly their own chartered private jets to wherever. The only people left to fly regular crowded flights are the "trailer trash". AKA the commonly abused. I don't consider myself trailer trash but I don't often have a choice on what I get to wear.

Narubxan · 05-25-12 at 02:21 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by bogus109695

your mistaken. The suits are so wealthy now they fly their own chartered private jets to wherever. The only people left to fly regular crowded flights are the "trailer trash". AKA the commonly abused. I don't consider myself trailer trash but I don't often have a choice on what I get to wear.

O_o you dont? that is... odd.
Anyway, to wear that tshirt is a choice, not lack of it.
Unless all tshirts she owns are about ****ing senators ofc.

But that aside, i dont see anything wrong with it, only immature people who cant see a word.

Notorious_dog · 05-25-12 at 02:29 PM

Oprah?

**lvstealth** · 05-25-12 at 02:56 PM

so, you suggest that profanity should be acceptable if it means intercourse, but the same word when used differently should remain profanity?

so interesting!

smiles,
Mandy

Narubxan · 05-25-12 at 03:46 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by lvstealth

so, you suggest that profanity should be acceptable if it means intercourse, but the same word when used differently should remain profanity?

so interesting!

smiles,
Mandy

no, i dont think that the word should be profanity at all.
However sex is perfectly normal, nothing wrong with using the word ****

Now, to say "**** you" is an insult, its not the word that is "wrongly" there, simply that its meant as an insult, you can insult without using profanity, it is the intention that makes it an insult.

the word itself is perfectly normal as any other word... to get stuck up to it seems silly and immature to me.

There are words that do represent derogatory terms and those i understand to be profanity, such as f*g, n*gger and such.

but ****? i can only see it offend someone really prude, and even so, the joke is on him/her for being prude.

what happened to good ol' "dont blame others for your shortcomings"?

**lvstealth** · 05-25-12 at 04:19 PM

so, for all that find the word its self a profanity you say they are all just "prudes"; the religious sector should just accept it, forget their traditions, forget their belief system and accept yours? for all that find it just rude, crass and unacceptable for their children, they should accept your public offensiveness, because they are prudes? so rude is higher on your scale than prude?

i would agree to your right to do as you please in teaching your children about the crude word in your home, but i do not agree with your right to force the world to accept your profanity in a public venue, and certainly not in a business.

you are not blind to its use here, and yet you think it means intercourse! are you truly that short of words that you need to offend 67% of the world? tell them that they have to accept profanity? wow!

interesting stance!

smiling,
Mandy

Narubxan · 05-25-12 at 05:42 PM

67%? and you always chastise people for making up numbers :P i doubt every single abrahamic religion follower does care about it or is as sexually repressed, hilariously the number of people who say that are religious and the number of people who actually "give a crap" is quite disparate.

Well the truth is, i dont need to use the word at all, my vocabulary is good enough, although im working on it as well as i find it lacking sometimes, as you might have noticed im sure.

The thing is, why should the woman be blocked from a flight she payed for because of a word on a tshirt? it is a harmless word.

My right to teach it to kids, true enough, but as i said, almost all "profanities" i learned was from pre and elementary school, there is no way to prevent the kids to learn a word (that is harmless), the only thing it does is perpetuate the notion that the word is rude (and the act dirty?) and punish people for it, which serves no point whatsoever aside to satisfy someone's belief/desire and make people angry over nothing (why should their belief be held higher than the woman's?)

If anything i find it sad for the person who reported her, hope she is happy for wasting peoples time and money out of not accepting a word, i would call that being a jerk.

You have your morality i have mine, the word is harmless thus should not be "forbidden" or controlled in my view.
We are discussing views i am sure, not laws and regulations.

I respect the rule that the airliner doesnt allow such attire in flight and i wouldnt wear it, but truth is they would likely not care if it wasnt reported.

Bottom line, someone is imposing themselves over another for no real, tangible reason other than belief, and belief should hold no account in the world of rules and laws, as they are just that, beliefs.

I find that far more untactful than someone wearing a tshirt that has words on it, none of which is derogatory.
Admittedly the tshirt made me laugh due to its crassness, maybe you are right, they arent prudes... they just lack humor.

edit: here, some dude being silly making cottoncandy, ought to make ya smile :P

Code: Select All

http://sorisomail.com/partilha/273345.html

**lvstealth** · 05-25-12 at 07:22 PM

so, you think that is the point? that some folks are religious and also use profanity?

i do not always, nor for that matter ever chastise people for making up stats, i also do not declare that they are made up without backing it up. why would you toss out an inaccurate accusation? what was your aim?

the plane is not hers and hers alone, which limits her rights to do as she pleases. the word is not harmless; it is used as a pejorative. why should she be blocked? - she broke the rules. simple. they are the companies rules. they are allowed to make rules and enforce them. no passenger's belief is held higher than another's; the companies policy is just that, the companies policy. they own and operate the airline and have the right to refuse service to anyone.

the fact that you assume it was a woman that reported it say a lot! the fact that you are intolerant of those with differing views says much also.

i have not expressed my view, i do not think it pertinent, what is important is that i understand that all people are not alike and that people, companies and other enterprises can have their views. i would not venture to judge their belief system as better or worse, or deny them the right to have it. it is like smoking, some do, some do not, they have the right in private, but not in public.

in the instance of the woman, she selfishly tried to deny the rights of any with certain sensibilities. they did not deny her of any rights, the rules were/are posted, she chose to break them.

i find your words very telling of your character.

"The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins."
- Oliver Wendell Holmes (1841-1935)

smiling,
Mandy

**L1b3rta** · 05-25-12 at 08:12 PM

Some people in this thread just don't get that there are still social borders in place, even in this century. You can still try to cross the border if you consider yourself a social pioneer though, but don't whine like a little b**** if you're facing the consequences as there are more opinions in the play than just yours. Get over it.

Adanaliyik · 05-26-12 at 02:16 AM

@Narubxan:

Here's another way of looking at what she did. The whole object of that t-shirt she was wearing was to be offensive. I mean, if it said "I'd have sex with a Senator", it wouldn't have the impact it does. The whole impact is from the use of the word F***, precisely because a large number of people consider it offensive. She wore it, knowing it was offensive, and she boarded the plane with it, knowing it was offensive. That was her intent, to bring attention to her message by wearing a t-shirt with offensive language on it. So she shouldn't have been surprised when someone found it offensive enough to complain about it.

Now, let's look at your rude vs prude argument. You say that people should stop being offended by the word, because it just describes a natural function, the same way sh** does. And, anyone who does find it offensive, should just grow up. OK, I'll buy that, but only if you buy this: The human body is something completely natural, and something most people have (there are some whose bodies make their humanity questionable). If I decide to board an airplane with my junk hanging out in full view, why should anyone be offended? And if they get offended, shouldn't they stop being prudes and grow up as well?

Where do we draw the line? When is it OK for them to be offended, and when are they just being prudes?

:)

Narubxan · 05-26-12 at 08:26 AM

Mandy: Im not tossing out accusations :P the objective? to annoy you <3
I will rephrase the question, how did you come up with 67% of people being offended by it?

Ok, lets make this clear, i do not oppose the companies decision, as i said i understand and respect it, i wouldnt wear one of those shirts myself, that is not the point im trying to make, at all.
What i am trying to say, is a personal opinion that to make someone spend money, lose that money and time because someone got offended, is in my view, childish, just as she is for using that tshirt, the difference is, that tshirt harms no one, making her lose the flight due to intolerance for a simple word, does.

good old "get over it".
If the tshirt was so offensive, dont look at it. was there really a need to punish someone for a word? geez, and i thought we werent in the 20s anymore.
Above the ankle skirts would offend plenty of people back in the day, above the knee later, and the modern miniskirts would have given a stroke to some people.
And yet? people got over it, because it is truly meaningless if people use a skirt above or bellow the knee, as long no genitalia is showing.

Also, i might be wrong, but i've seen it used several times and might be due to me being portuguese and use a Latin-derivated language.

But to use "she" to refer to a single person among "people" is correct when his/her gender is unknown, as far as i have known. if that is not the case, then i rectify that to she/he, i meant no discrimination gender-wise, thanks for that :P

I dont disagree with your argument, but we are talking of different things.
And i do still think that belief and sensitivity has no place in rules and laws, no more than church has in state.
To live in a society means to learn to accept others views, even if they are offensive to you, else there is no society, but an imposition.

I know and agree with that quote, expect who got punched was her, for having real loss, not whoever got offended.
Mentalities change luckily, just as skirts stopped giving aneurysms to people, so will words someday, and i cant wait for it.

My character? true, i know how i am, what you choose to interpret from it is up to you :)
My view is that im a live and let live person, dont sweat the small stuff.
To be offended is a choice, you can choose to be offended by a simple word and ruin someone's day, or you can choose to rise above it and ignore it.

And that choice did tell me much about that person's character, and makes me sad.

Quote:

Adanaliyik

True. but i dont see nudity and words to be at the same level tbh.
Being fully naked can bring harm, its unhygienic and depending on the person it can cause revulsion or arousal, neither of which you want in a plane, not to speak about body odor.
Again i say, im not against what the company did, i think she was a fool for using it knowing that it could cause her harm, my point is and always was, that it is sad someone chose to ruin someones day, financially and time-wise, and who knows what more, because of a simple word.

I never used a tshirt like that, nor do i go down to a level of crassness unless im just goofing off and only with people i know wont get offended by it, even so its rare.
But i sure wont be offended by it, even if it was the famous "seal cub clubbing club", which i find tasteless and hate animal abuse, it is still my choice to ignore it, a tshirt is not a judge of character, at best of opinion and sense of humor (or lack of it)

If such tshirts are so offensive, they shouldnt be sold.

05-25-12 at 03:46 PM	#22
Narubxan Master Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: in the Twilight Posts: 1,063	Quote: Originally Posted by lvstealth so, you suggest that profanity should be acceptable if it means intercourse, but the same word when used differently should remain profanity? so interesting! smiles, Mandy no, i dont think that the word should be profanity at all. However sex is perfectly normal, nothing wrong with using the word ** Now, to say "** you" is an insult, its not the word that is "wrongly" there, simply that its meant as an insult, you can insult without using profanity, it is the intention that makes it an insult. the word itself is perfectly normal as any other word... to get stuck up to it seems silly and immature to me. There are words that do represent derogatory terms and those i understand to be profanity, such as fg, ngger and such. but ***? i can only see it offend someone really prude, and even so, the joke is on him/her for being prude. what happened to good ol' "dont blame others for your shortcomings"? Last edited by Narubxan; 05-25-12 at 03:48 PM.*

05-25-12 at 05:42 PM	#24
Narubxan Master Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: in the Twilight Posts: 1,063	67%? and you always chastise people for making up numbers :P i doubt every single abrahamic religion follower does care about it or is as sexually repressed, hilariously the number of people who say that are religious and the number of people who actually "give a crap" is quite disparate. Well the truth is, i dont need to use the word at all, my vocabulary is good enough, although im working on it as well as i find it lacking sometimes, as you might have noticed im sure. The thing is, why should the woman be blocked from a flight she payed for because of a word on a tshirt? it is a harmless word. My right to teach it to kids, true enough, but as i said, almost all "profanities" i learned was from pre and elementary school, there is no way to prevent the kids to learn a word (that is harmless), the only thing it does is perpetuate the notion that the word is rude (and the act dirty?) and punish people for it, which serves no point whatsoever aside to satisfy someone's belief/desire and make people angry over nothing (why should their belief be held higher than the woman's?) If anything i find it sad for the person who reported her, hope she is happy for wasting peoples time and money out of not accepting a word, i would call that being a jerk. You have your morality i have mine, the word is harmless thus should not be "forbidden" or controlled in my view. We are discussing views i am sure, not laws and regulations. I respect the rule that the airliner doesnt allow such attire in flight and i wouldnt wear it, but truth is they would likely not care if it wasnt reported. Bottom line, someone is imposing themselves over another for no real, tangible reason other than belief, and belief should hold no account in the world of rules and laws, as they are just that, beliefs. I find that far more untactful than someone wearing a tshirt that has words on it, none of which is derogatory. Admittedly the tshirt made me laugh due to its crassness, maybe you are right, they arent prudes... they just lack humor. edit: here, some dude being silly making cottoncandy, ought to make ya smile :P Code: Select All http://sorisomail.com/partilha/273345.html Last edited by Narubxan; 05-25-12 at 05:47 PM.

05-25-12 at 08:12 PM	#26
L1b3rta Guru Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 5,985	Some people in this thread just don't get that there are still social borders in place, even in this century. You can still try to cross the border if you consider yourself a social pioneer though, but don't whine like a little b**** if you're facing the consequences as there are more opinions in the play than just yours. Get over it. Last edited by L1b3rta; 05-25-12 at 08:14 PM.

05-26-12 at 08:26 AM	#28
Narubxan Master Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: in the Twilight Posts: 1,063	Mandy: Im not tossing out accusations :P the objective? to annoy you <3 I will rephrase the question, how did you come up with 67% of people being offended by it? Ok, lets make this clear, i do not oppose the companies decision, as i said i understand and respect it, i wouldnt wear one of those shirts myself, that is not the point im trying to make, at all. What i am trying to say, is a personal opinion that to make someone spend money, lose that money and time because someone got offended, is in my view, childish, just as she is for using that tshirt, the difference is, that tshirt harms no one, making her lose the flight due to intolerance for a simple word, does. good old "get over it". If the tshirt was so offensive, dont look at it. was there really a need to punish someone for a word? geez, and i thought we werent in the 20s anymore. Above the ankle skirts would offend plenty of people back in the day, above the knee later, and the modern miniskirts would have given a stroke to some people. And yet? people got over it, because it is truly meaningless if people use a skirt above or bellow the knee, as long no genitalia is showing. Also, i might be wrong, but i've seen it used several times and might be due to me being portuguese and use a Latin-derivated language. But to use "she" to refer to a single person among "people" is correct when his/her gender is unknown, as far as i have known. if that is not the case, then i rectify that to she/he, i meant no discrimination gender-wise, thanks for that :P I dont disagree with your argument, but we are talking of different things. And i do still think that belief and sensitivity has no place in rules and laws, no more than church has in state. To live in a society means to learn to accept others views, even if they are offensive to you, else there is no society, but an imposition. I know and agree with that quote, expect who got punched was her, for having real loss, not whoever got offended. Mentalities change luckily, just as skirts stopped giving aneurysms to people, so will words someday, and i cant wait for it. My character? true, i know how i am, what you choose to interpret from it is up to you :) My view is that im a live and let live person, dont sweat the small stuff. To be offended is a choice, you can choose to be offended by a simple word and ruin someone's day, or you can choose to rise above it and ignore it. And that choice did tell me much about that person's character, and makes me sad. Quote: Adanaliyik True. but i dont see nudity and words to be at the same level tbh. Being fully naked can bring harm, its unhygienic and depending on the person it can cause revulsion or arousal, neither of which you want in a plane, not to speak about body odor. Again i say, im not against what the company did, i think she was a fool for using it knowing that it could cause her harm, my point is and always was, that it is sad someone chose to ruin someones day, financially and time-wise, and who knows what more, because of a simple word. I never used a tshirt like that, nor do i go down to a level of crassness unless im just goofing off and only with people i know wont get offended by it, even so its rare. But i sure wont be offended by it, even if it was the famous "seal cub clubbing club", which i find tasteless and hate animal abuse, it is still my choice to ignore it, a tshirt is not a judge of character, at best of opinion and sense of humor (or lack of it) If such tshirts are so offensive, they shouldnt be sold. Last edited by Narubxan; 05-26-12 at 08:53 AM.

05-25-12 at 02:02 PM	#15
Optimist Newcomer Join Date: Jul 2008 Posts: 57	Some people, including on this forum. Makes me facepalm at the reaction to a word.

05-25-12 at 02:07 PM	#16
lvstealth Give me your Glow juice.. Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Tennessee, USA Posts: 5,119	everyone should accept profanity? interesting position! smiling, Mandy

05-25-12 at 02:15 PM	#17
Narubxan Master Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: in the Twilight Posts: 1,063	Quote: Originally Posted by lvstealth everyone should accept profanity? interesting position! smiling, Mandy one thing is "** you", or "go ** yourself" which is insulting, another is the word by itself describing an action. Besides it is only profanity because some people keep being offended at a combination of 4 letters that isnt even derogatory, yes, i prefer have everyone accept it as the simple word it is than censor people for using it :P

05-25-12 at 02:17 PM	#18
bogus109695 Apprentice Join Date: Dec 2009 Posts: 262	your mistaken. The suits are so wealthy now they fly their own chartered private jets to wherever. The only people left to fly regular crowded flights are the "trailer trash". AKA the commonly abused. I don't consider myself trailer trash but I don't often have a choice on what I get to wear.

05-25-12 at 02:21 PM	#19
Narubxan Master Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: in the Twilight Posts: 1,063	Quote: Originally Posted by bogus109695 your mistaken. The suits are so wealthy now they fly their own chartered private jets to wherever. The only people left to fly regular crowded flights are the "trailer trash". AKA the commonly abused. I don't consider myself trailer trash but I don't often have a choice on what I get to wear. O_o you dont? that is... odd. Anyway, to wear that tshirt is a choice, not lack of it. Unless all tshirts she owns are about ****ing senators ofc. But that aside, i dont see anything wrong with it, only immature people who cant see a word.

05-25-12 at 02:29 PM	#20
Notorious_dog Elder Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 3,974	Oprah?

05-25-12 at 02:56 PM	#21
lvstealth Give me your Glow juice.. Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Tennessee, USA Posts: 5,119	so, you suggest that profanity should be acceptable if it means intercourse, but the same word when used differently should remain profanity? so interesting! smiles, Mandy

05-25-12 at 04:19 PM	#23
lvstealth Give me your Glow juice.. Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Tennessee, USA Posts: 5,119	so, for all that find the word its self a profanity you say they are all just "prudes"; the religious sector should just accept it, forget their traditions, forget their belief system and accept yours? for all that find it just rude, crass and unacceptable for their children, they should accept your public offensiveness, because they are prudes? so rude is higher on your scale than prude? i would agree to your right to do as you please in teaching your children about the crude word in your home, but i do not agree with your right to force the world to accept your profanity in a public venue, and certainly not in a business. you are not blind to its use here, and yet you think it means intercourse! are you truly that short of words that you need to offend 67% of the world? tell them that they have to accept profanity? wow! interesting stance! smiling, Mandy

05-25-12 at 07:22 PM	#25
lvstealth Give me your Glow juice.. Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: Tennessee, USA Posts: 5,119	so, you think that is the point? that some folks are religious and also use profanity? i do not always, nor for that matter ever chastise people for making up stats, i also do not declare that they are made up without backing it up. why would you toss out an inaccurate accusation? what was your aim? the plane is not hers and hers alone, which limits her rights to do as she pleases. the word is not harmless; it is used as a pejorative. why should she be blocked? - she broke the rules. simple. they are the companies rules. they are allowed to make rules and enforce them. no passenger's belief is held higher than another's; the companies policy is just that, the companies policy. they own and operate the airline and have the right to refuse service to anyone. the fact that you assume it was a woman that reported it say a lot! the fact that you are intolerant of those with differing views says much also. i have not expressed my view, i do not think it pertinent, what is important is that i understand that all people are not alike and that people, companies and other enterprises can have their views. i would not venture to judge their belief system as better or worse, or deny them the right to have it. it is like smoking, some do, some do not, they have the right in private, but not in public. in the instance of the woman, she selfishly tried to deny the rights of any with certain sensibilities. they did not deny her of any rights, the rules were/are posted, she chose to break them. i find your words very telling of your character. "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." - Oliver Wendell Holmes (1841-1935) smiling, Mandy

05-26-12 at 02:16 AM	#27
Adanaliyik Master Join Date: May 2012 Location: Turkey Posts: 1,162	@Narubxan: Here's another way of looking at what she did. The whole object of that t-shirt she was wearing was to be offensive. I mean, if it said "I'd have sex with a Senator", it wouldn't have the impact it does. The whole impact is from the use of the word F*, precisely because a large number of people consider it offensive. She wore it, knowing it was offensive, and she boarded the plane with it, knowing it was offensive. That was her intent, to bring attention to her message by wearing a t-shirt with offensive language on it. So she shouldn't have been surprised when someone found it offensive enough to complain about it. Now, let's look at your rude vs prude argument. You say that people should stop being offended by the word, because it just describes a natural function, the same way sh does. And, anyone who does find it offensive, should just grow up. OK, I'll buy that, but only if you buy this: The human body is something completely natural, and something most people have (there are some whose bodies make their humanity questionable). If I decide to board an airplane with my junk hanging out in full view, why should anyone be offended? And if they get offended, shouldn't they stop being prudes and grow up as well? Where do we draw the line? When is it OK for them to be offended, and when are they just being prudes? :)