Dan McCluskie, a nurse from Wagga Wagga, Australia (yes, it is a real place, I Googled it) was on a flight to Sydney this June when airline staff accused him of being a child molester.
Not in so many words, mind you – but by a Qantas stewardess who made him swap seats with a female passenger.
Dan was seated next to a 10-year-old girl, who was traveling without her parents. In keeping with Qantas policy, the stewardess swapped the 31-year old with a female passenger – in a way that drew considerable attention to the process.
“There were people that looked during the actual move,” Dan explained to the Brisbane Times. “People looked at me or looked around because there was a bit of a ruckus at the back of the plane.”
“It was as if I had this sign I couldn't see above my head that said 'child molester' or 'kiddie fiddler', whereas the female passenger who moved did the gracious thing and moved to protect the greater good of the child."
This comes just weeks after another passenger – a firefighter – was moved away from two unaccompanied young passengers on a Virgin flight, in an action a Sydney law professor claimed: “effectively places all men in the category of potential offender.”
In the sex positive sphere, perhaps this isn’t an entirely revolutionary concept – after all, tropes like “all men are potential rapists” still get carted out with alarming regularity. But in the “real world” is this policy sexist and discriminatory? Most would argue that it is.
“I think it absolutely sucks; it's totally and utterly discriminatory in my mind,” explains Dan McCluskie.
In addition to being deeply embarrassing and humiliating for those men forced to move to meet this policy, questions are also raised about how effective this strategy is in protecting kids.
“The only thing that will make a child safer on a plane,” Joe Tucci, chief executive of the Australian Childhood Foundation, “is how much supervision the staff offer.”
“If a child is going to be harmed or hurt it's probably going to be by someone closer to them than a stranger on a flight,” echoes Dan.
But Qantas, and other airlines, argue that their policy of preventing minors from sitting next to men stems largely from the requests of the parents who let their children fly unaccompanied.
“The policy reflects parents' concerns,” explained a Qantas spokesperson.
So what do you think of this policy? Is it discriminatory and sexist, or reasonable given the circumstances? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
Not in so many words, mind you – but by a Qantas stewardess who made him swap seats with a female passenger.
Dan was seated next to a 10-year-old girl, who was traveling without her parents. In keeping with Qantas policy, the stewardess swapped the 31-year old with a female passenger – in a way that drew considerable attention to the process.
“There were people that looked during the actual move,” Dan explained to the Brisbane Times. “People looked at me or looked around because there was a bit of a ruckus at the back of the plane.”
“It was as if I had this sign I couldn't see above my head that said 'child molester' or 'kiddie fiddler', whereas the female passenger who moved did the gracious thing and moved to protect the greater good of the child."
This comes just weeks after another passenger – a firefighter – was moved away from two unaccompanied young passengers on a Virgin flight, in an action a Sydney law professor claimed: “effectively places all men in the category of potential offender.”
In the sex positive sphere, perhaps this isn’t an entirely revolutionary concept – after all, tropes like “all men are potential rapists” still get carted out with alarming regularity. But in the “real world” is this policy sexist and discriminatory? Most would argue that it is.
“I think it absolutely sucks; it's totally and utterly discriminatory in my mind,” explains Dan McCluskie.
In addition to being deeply embarrassing and humiliating for those men forced to move to meet this policy, questions are also raised about how effective this strategy is in protecting kids.
“The only thing that will make a child safer on a plane,” Joe Tucci, chief executive of the Australian Childhood Foundation, “is how much supervision the staff offer.”
“If a child is going to be harmed or hurt it's probably going to be by someone closer to them than a stranger on a flight,” echoes Dan.
But Qantas, and other airlines, argue that their policy of preventing minors from sitting next to men stems largely from the requests of the parents who let their children fly unaccompanied.
“The policy reflects parents' concerns,” explained a Qantas spokesperson.
So what do you think of this policy? Is it discriminatory and sexist, or reasonable given the circumstances? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below.
It's a stigmatizing policy that only gives the illusion of safety. If I had a child, I rather (s)he be seated next to someone qualified to help (nurse, doctor, teacher, EMT, etc), than next to some random female who for all I know drank a quart of whiskey and popped some pills before being dropped off at the airport because she hates to fly.
Virgin is reviewing their policy on this, I hope they realize how ineffectual it is and end it.
It's definitely discriminatory to men. Has anyone in the history of airplanes ever been molested on one? It's a cramped area with limited private space. If the attendants paid even minimal attention to a minor they would be able to detect any potentially predatory actions long before it turned into an issue. Seriously, who is dumb enough to try to molest someone on a plane?
Experiment, I wouldn't doubt that someone, somewhere, sometime, was molested on an airplane (after all, groping on crowded trains is a well-known issue in Japan and probably occurs elsewhere). However you are 100% correct in that doing so is insanely stupid and risky, and simply instating a policy that flight attendants must frequently check in on unaccompanied minors would likely be MUCH more effective than the very sexist policy that's currently in place.
Sounds sexist to me a woman could also be a child molester even though more times than not it is a man. They should just sit kids alone or move them to first class where it should be easier for the staff to keep a eye on them.
Wow, never knew about this. If they are going to do it (and I disagree with the policy) they should do this before anyone boards the plane. I wouldn't want to sit next to a kid, so yeah, but I don't want to be labeled a child molester either, by being moved by a stewardess.
Like Experiment said, I've never heard of this happening on a plane. Kids are way overprotected today.
This is completely sexist and it makes me sad to think that our society in all its wisdom and equality that we try to act like we focus so much on that it has gotten to a point that we don't see that it can go both ways.
That rant said let me move on to the important part. As it has been stated it should have been dealt with before boarding, but it wasn't so in that case it needs to be down in a manner that would not draw attention to the person being moved but that is not a situation that can always be done. Maybe upgrade that person to first class to get him out of the way even though he is likely not an issue in the first place. Of course the replacing him with a female is a pretty big sign that something is going on.
Personally I think the policy needs to be dropped. I remember flying with out my parents as a kid and back then what they did was have an airline staff see you off the plane and to your next flight or to the security area where you would pass through to meet up with who was picking you up. This insured that some crazy male or female child molester didn't follow you off the plane and try something then when you are actually at risk.