Kids and men on planes.

[Beemer]

My husband was rapt when he saw that item on tv last night - "great, that means I never have to sit next to any bloody children on a plane!" I was pissed off because that meant I potentially would end up sitting next to a child because I would be seen as safe. Fact is, we both hate kids and avoid trying to sit near them, particularly on planes where you can't get away from them! If a child was deliberately moved to sit next to me and my husband was moved, I would be complaining. I'd be tempted to claim I had Tourette's Syndrome and say I was prone to sudden outbursts of foul language!

I think it is stupid, as someone pointed out, do they really think a guy would try something on in a crowded plane? It's an insult to the 99% of men who would never harm a child. Have there been previous incidents involving men and unaccompanied children on flights?

And who will they target next? No men allowed to sit near attractive women in case they sexually harrass them? What ages do they class as children? Would they have a problem with a 12 year-old unaccompanied boy sitting next to a four year-old unaccompanied girl?

The question that begs to be asked here is why was the child flying unaccompanied? Who should be responsible for his or her safety - the airline or the parents/caregivers?

[ManDownUnder]

The question that begs to be asked here is why was the child flying unaccompanied? Who should be responsible for his or her safety - the airline or the parents/caregivers?

It's a sad fact that a number of kids need to go on planes to travel between one parent and the other, where they simply can't afford to accompany them...

There are situations where it "needs to be" but it doesn't make the original proposition that one gender or other is better for the child's welfare.

...still spewing about this one...

[James Deuce]

I sent this to the Commissioner for Children today.

"I'm deeply disappointed that the Commissioner for Children supports the stance of Air New Zealand and QANTAS that all men or violent paedophiles, potentially or actually. It is difficult to read any other meaning into this morning's response to the news article published by Fairfax, and I hope that a more sensible statement acknowledging the contribution of the overwhelming majority of men in NZ to the health, safety, and wellbeing of children in New Zealand can be made in the context of this blatant disregard for Human Rights and New Zealand's anti-discrimination laws."

I'll let you know what sort of shrug off, err, reply I get.

I know that some people don't agree that it is an issue at all, but: "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Thomas Jefferson "

[Devil]

I sent this to the Commissioner for Children today.
...................
I'll let you know what sort of shrug off, err, reply I get.

I know that some people don't agree that it is an issue at all, but: "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Thomas Jefferson "

Nice jeorb Jim. CEREBELLUM'D!!!

[ManDownUnder]

I sent this to the Commissioner for Children today.

"I'm deeply disappointed that the Commissioner for Children supports the stance of Air New Zealand and QANTAS that all men or violent paedophiles, potentially or actually. It is difficult to read any other meaning into this morning's response to the news article published by Fairfax, and I hope that a more sensible statement acknowledging the contribution of the overwhelming majority of men in NZ to the health, safety, and wellbeing of children in New Zealand can be made in the context of this blatant disregard for Human Rights and New Zealand's anti-discrimination laws."

I'll let you know what sort of shrug off, err, reply I get.

I know that some people don't agree that it is an issue at all, but: "All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent. Thomas Jefferson "

Make sure you send a copy to the ministers of Maori Affairs, Womens' Affairs and Mens' Affairs ok?

[James Deuce]

Men's Affairs. Heehe.

[terbang]

While we here in NZ while away the time inventing PC ways of protecting our childrens welfare I read that a 3 month old child, who survived the earthquake in Pakistan loosing everything, just died from the cold..!

However on another note the Catholic church in the USA has had an embarrasing spate of reported child abuse. This has been a fairly common thing in the past that was not so widely talked about. Exposing them, in a more PC world for what they are, has been a good thing.

[ManDownUnder]

While we here in NZ while away the time inventing PC ways of protecting our childrens welfare I read that a 3 month old child, who survived the earthquake in Pakistan loosing everything, just died from the cold..!

I agree that's not good, but it's a separate issue from the one at hand.

However on another note the Catholic church in the USA has had an embarrasing spate of reported child abuse. This has been a fairly common thing in the past that was not so widely talked about. Exposing them, in a more PC world for what they are, has been a good thing too.

I disagree - exposing them any which way is the good thing. There is no requirement for a PC World in order to achieve that though. As I said before - get the kiddie fiddlers and lock 'em up, chop bits off or do what's needed to keep our kids safe, no matter where they are.

Making generalised assumptions isn't going to help however. Of the Maori, Chinese, and European cultures in NZ, one of them will have the highest rate of child molestation - it's just the way statistics are. But to presume a member of that ethnic group poses sufficient risk to move a kid away from them is just plain lunacy.

It's not PC - it's bullshit

[Marmoot]

actually, it's about time government put a ban on male doctors examining children. You don't know how those touchy-feely moments may become sexually arousing.

Also ban male gyneocology.

Actually, ban all male doctors!

In fact, tell all females and children to wear veils! A bloody good idea! I'm sure someone has done it before somewhere!!!

deja vu.....

[Skyryder]

See here

http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3495794a11,00.html

Who would want to sit next to a whinging, snotty nosed kid for 15 hours? This policy works in the mans favour as far as I can tell. Maybe it should be extended to bus and train services too, including commuter services. I think it's a great policy!

This guys just winding everyone up. The only child Bartman is desribing is his own.

Skyryder

[Skyryder]

The question that begs to be asked here is why was the child flying unaccompanied? Who should be responsible for his or her safety - the airline or the parents/caregivers?

You raise and interesting point. If the child is not traveling with a caregiver is the airline parenti loci? Any legal types here know the answer to this.

Skyryder

[Karma]

You raise and interesting point. If the child is not traveling with a caregiver is the airline parenti loci? Any legal types here know the answer to this.

Skyryder

Not a legal opinion at all, but I'd hazard a guess and say yes, but only to a certain extent.

I'd imagine they have the same level of responsibility as say teachers or babysitters / nannys

[MikeL]

And the correct course of action would be to let my child continue to be molested and the molester go unchecked? I'm not sure that I understand the logic behind that comment Mike

Which comment? I don't quite understand how you inferred from anything I wrote that I am suggesting that molesters should not be stopped. My point was that there is a type of double standard here. The same middle-aged white male who today is insulted by being asked to move may tomorrow be a concerned father sending his child off unaccompanied. If the airline staff were to ask him whether he is happy for his child to sit next to a strange man, or whether he would prefer them to make "more appropriate" seating arrangements, what do you think his answer would be?

[Ixion]

What about buses? Do children still travel on buses? Or trains?

[James Deuce]

Which comment? I don't quite understand how you inferred from anything I wrote that I am suggesting that molesters should not be stopped. My point was that there is a type of double standard here. The same middle-aged white male who today is insulted by being asked to move may tomorrow be a concerned father sending his child off unaccompanied. If the airline staff were to ask him whether he is happy for his child to sit next to a strange man, or whether he would prefer them to make "more appropriate" seating arrangements, what do you think his answer would be?

My answer would be sure, no problem.

My kids have more chance of being run over, or drowning in the bath than being molested.

Your comment didn't read the way you intended at all and the follow up is a great deal clearer.