Community Chat

[Oznell]

I agree with all the posts that make the case that if one has a pass with the attendant perks, one abides by the rules for use. You all are so articulate. The counter arguments that others have made are interesting to hear too, but, to me, they don't hold water.

The feminist angle surprised me. I don't see it. Does anyone want to take a stab at making a sustained argument that women are being discriminated against by the imposing of these rules?

The debate is interesting. Especially enjoyed hearing from past and present airline employees on the issue.

One thing-- I missed the fact that a celeb had entered the debate.  Who was the celebrity?

[AngusandBuddhasMom]

Rules are rules but need to be clear. You don't makes rules then post oh hey we are not intending for these to be all inclusive. That makes for problems.

[shoppersince1989]

Having been an airline employee for 30 years (started in 1977), you know what the dress code is.

Back then, women had to wear dresses, or pant suits.

Even on Hawaii flights.  One could always tell who the airline people were.

Everyone else wore shorts.

Now, there's so much sloppiness.

I took advantage of my flying bennies.  Was very happy I could fly all over the world

It was well worth following the code.

And sometimes, if you were dress really sharp, you would be upgraded to First Class.

Jean

[CANDLEQUEEN]

I used to work for a major travel company, and we were given many years ago , free passes where you just paid the taxes, but there was a dress code when you were flying on a free pass, and you either had to abide by it, or don't take any more free passes.....It was never anything unreasonable, just nice  casual dress.......I would have never thought as I am on the plane on 2 free tickets to Hawaii, that it wasn't worth it! My husband either!

[JJsMom]

I know rules are rules, but it's a stupid rule IMO. Allowing shorts but not leggings clearly shows they are not concerned with casualness. Not allowing girls to fly because they are  in leggings is ridiculous.

[sidsmom]

---

@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:

---

@sidsmom wrote:

How did this become viral??

Shannon Watts, an activist, who was there at the terminal.

The passengers in question were...ok.

The gate attendant was...ok.

The passengers on said flight were...ok.

Everyone is ok....except Shannon Watts, activist.

She got her compliant-as-a-passenger knickers in a twist.

She's the one who tweeted UA directly, etc.

All this #legginggate talk has gotten

her & her website TONS of exposure.  

Well played, Ms. Activist, well played. 

---

I take it you are not thrilled with activist?

---

Au Contraire!

I l-o-v-e a good fight-for-the-cause, but all this #legginggate

just makes Ms. Watts look reeeeeally stupid.  It discounts her

efforts into other things she fights for.  It's such a non-story.

If anything, I'm disappointed Ms. Watts continued to speak of

these female passengers as "girls".  See?  She tapped into

that emotion....and the 'uneducated' is basing their reaction

off of that emotion.   I guarantee if she spoke of 'female passengers'

the conversation & viral aspect would not have been there.  

Smart on her part.  I can spot it a mile away. 

[AngusandBuddhasMom]

I don't know if it is on purpose but ignoring the fact that we are talking about children is what does not hold water.

Yes rules are rules and adults understand dress codes. But you all seem to be missing the point these were not adults they were young girls. And if your narrative is to ignore that to make your point then OK. But its only works with what the rules state. 

Employees using the passes. These rules are according to their rules : Not to be considered all inclusive. So they are by their own statement not including the attire for children. Since they do not point out children having to be included in these rules they have then no right to hold them up to the same litmus test as adults. So argue that rules are rules but if you plan on making finite rules then you have to point out who is included. And they instead make a point of being vague.

[AngusandBuddhasMom]

---

@sidsmom wrote:

---

@AngusandBuddhasMom wrote:

---

@sidsmom wrote:

How did this become viral??

Shannon Watts, an activist, who was there at the terminal.

The passengers in question were...ok.

The gate attendant was...ok.

The passengers on said flight were...ok.

Everyone is ok....except Shannon Watts, activist.

She got her compliant-as-a-passenger knickers in a twist.

She's the one who tweeted UA directly, etc.

All this #legginggate talk has gotten

her & her website TONS of exposure.  

Well played, Ms. Activist, well played. 

---

I take it you are not thrilled with activist?

---

Au Contraire!

I l-o-v-e a good fight-for-the-cause, but all this #legginggate

just makes Ms. Watts look reeeeeally stupid.  It discounts her

efforts into other things she fights for.  It's such a non-story.

If anything, I'm disappointed Ms. Watts continued to speak of

these female passengers as "girls".  See?  She tapped into

that emotion....and the 'uneducated' is basing their reaction

off of that emotion.   I guarantee if she spoke of 'female passengers'

the conversation & viral aspect would not have been there.  

Smart on her part.  I can spot it a mile away. 

---

They are girls not women. We are talking about children whose business attire is leggings.

[silentgirl]

---

@Oznell wrote:

I agree with all the posts that make the case that if one has a pass with the attendant perks, one abides by the rules for use. You all are so articulate. The counter arguments that others have made are interesting to hear too, but, to me, they don't hold water.

The feminist angle surprised me. I don't see it. Does anyone want to take a stab at making a sustained argument that women are being discriminated against by the imposing of these rules?

The debate is interesting. Especially enjoyed hearing from past and present airline employees on the issue.

One thing-- I missed the fact that a celeb had entered the debate.  Who was the celebrity?

---

No argument from me--beyond abiding by the rules, everything else is clutter-

[jaxs mom]

---

@SaRina wrote:

@Oh, okay @sidsmom, my curiosity got the better of me. I enlarged and read "The Rules."

Still doesn't equate in my mind how any length of shorts on a man -- even longer baggy shorts on a man definitely look sloppy to me -- is any more appropriate than leggings but then, I ain't makin' the rules. :-)

---

I agree with you. I don't see how shorts on anyone are more dressy than leggings. But whatever, I really don't care if someone is flying free as a perk and what they wear when they do so.