Kids and men on planes.

[Wolf]

But there ARE paedophiles about (who are these three people who buy all the child pornography....??) and to feed their creepy appetites they blend in, appear inconspicuous, are good at befriending kids. They look like most of us, I'd guess.

I agree with you on that, and i would say that in addition to being good at blending in ("devious", The Harold said) they are also smart enough not to try to molest a child on a plane in full view of other passengers and passing airline staff. My concern would be that the paedophile would be likely to attempt to follow the child on debarking, which means that the important things to be sure of are: the child has someone waiting for them to take charge of them at the other end of the flight and that the child is very clear on the landing procedure and not to accept offers from people no matter how charming they are.

As to there being paedophiles at large - blame the sentencing system. The cops have caught a fair few that juries of twelve reasonably intelligent people have deemed to be guilty. The fact that many of those molesters are out on the streets, and possibly scoping out kids on planes or swings, is because the legal system of New Zealand deems that they can reenter society after a few months in jail.

Wanna solve the molester problem? Jail 'em for life. No need for notifying communities or discriminatory airline policies or books of known offenders being published or people worrying that little Johnny might be chatting with a known paedophile - because the known ones won't be here any more. That just leaves the lesser number of "unknown ones" to be caught and jailed for life...

[kerryg]

If you're looking at it from a statistical perspective, consider sitting kids next to a white person instead of a black person due to the relative rates of imprisonment for violent offending.

You make a good point but perhaps your analogy is a bit simplistic? Is a kid more likely to be the subject of a violent attack by a black person than an adult (I would say, if anything violence is more likely between adults) . We are talking about protecting kids here, aren't we? Then there's this: most of us have travelled on long flights and (if you're a cheap bastard like me) in cabin class where the seats are jammed together. The physical proximity to a fellow passenger is probably as close as you'll get to sleeping in the same bed without actually doing so. Not to put a male and a kid in that kind of proximity seems prudent to me PROVIDED THAT it is done without creating a fuss, or humiliation. Evidently this policy has existed for years and who would have known? I certainly didn't know about it, it would never have occurred to met until the media got hold of it because some guy was understandably annoyed (..I've no issue with his objections) at being asked to move. It should never have come to that if the seats were allocated properly.The airline screwed up.

[Lou Girardin]

Fuck I hate "society" as an entity. Burn down all the cities and go back to tribal living with autonomous chieftains - sure, people died in intertribal wars but at least within the individual tribes there was a community spirit that seems to have died somewhere along the Road to Nationalism.

It's not society that's at fault. It's the attitude epitomised by Maggie Thatchers "there is no society" that has created the attitudes that nurture molesters.
Then you have the 'protectors' of society, like Cindy Kiro, who under the guise of public concern promote their particular agendas.
The marginalisation of men started a long time ago.

[kerryg]

not to try to molest a child on a plane in full view of other passengers and passing airline staff. .

Well yes, that's sounds reasonable and there's truth in that.... but I have a good friend who was a cabin attendant for years (no...he's not gay) and the stories he tells about what goes on between passengers in aeroplanes would probably amaze you

[Wolf]

It should never have come to that if the seats were allocated properly.The airline screwed up.

Screwed up and LIED: the claim that it was more than just company policy in an attempt to direct action away from where it was deserved.

I think the company should pay compensation on the grounds of harrassment - to the couple that were split up (and the wife seconded into being a free "safe" babysitter) as well as the bloke that was accused of being a potential paedophile.

I also think Cindy Kiro should be made to publically retract her statements of commendation then resign from her post as she is clearly unfit for her position. OK, so her bailiwick is Child Safety - great, I'm all for that, but not at the cost of civil rights. If she directed her energy towards keeping kiddy-fiddlers off the streets for the rest of thier natural lives instead of commending sexist policies in keeping with her own sexist attitudes, then it would be OK.

Using her clout as a Commissioner to uphold sexism against men is inappropriate and she should not hold her position.

[ManDownUnder]

Not to put a male and a kid in that kind of proximity seems prudent to me PROVIDED THAT it is done without creating a fuss, or humiliation. Evidently this policy has existed for years and who would have known? I certainly didn't know about it, it would never have occurred to met until the media got hold of it because some guy was understandably annoyed (..I've no issue with his objections) at being asked to move. It should never have come to that if the seats were allocated properly.The airline screwed up.

Close but no - I gotta disgree with you on that one too. I don;t agree with the bed scenario (although I see where you're coming from with it). As someone that flied long haul flights, in economy at least 10 times a year I feel I have some experience in the matter - albeit only my personal experience - which is one of an avid, non kiddie fiddler.

To put a kid in a bed with a non caregiving adult is the issue here, not the issue of that adult being male of female. To introduce the gender as a significant factor brings back to supposition that one will do harm, and the other wont.

Again - I'd suggest you use the same analogy, but make the difference race baced, or martial status, or religion or... you get the idea.

Statistically, within each of those groups its possible to find a race, marital status, age which is more likely to do something bad. It's still not a good idea to make policy or rules on that basis.

[ManDownUnder]

Well yes, that's sounds reasonable and there's truth in that.... but I have a good friend who was a cabin attendant for years (no...he's not gay) and the stories he tells about what goes on between passengers in aeroplanes would probably amaze you

True - not to mention what goes on amoung air crew...!

[Wolf]

True - not to mention what goes on amoung air crew...!

What, you mean they find time away from pilfering off the duty-free trolley to do something else?

[ManDownUnder]

What, you mean they find time away from pilfering off the duty-free trolley to do something else?

As tempting as it is to take up that offer to hijack the thread... I'd rather stick to this one (sorry chap... this is important to me)

edit - my bad however - I know I started that line of thought.
MDU

[Wolf]

Well yes, that's sounds reasonable and there's truth in that.... but I have a good friend who was a cabin attendant for years (no...he's not gay) and the stories he tells about what goes on between passengers in aeroplanes would probably amaze you

Yeah, I'm sure the mile-high club is still in fine form, but there's a bit of difference between a couple of consenting adults dallying and someone pressing their intentions on a minor - I'm pretty sure that if I saw someone attempting to interfere with a kid on a plane I'd take steps to get it stopped.

[kerryg]

Guess there's probably no single right answer, as in so many things. It's understandable that good men who love their kids and who are good dads and husbands get mad when they're lumped in with paedophiles. I share that anger. Is the airlines' policy unfair? Certainly.

But it's not really about fairness. It's about preventing something bad even if it is a little unfair or inconvenient, or even discriminatory towards some people. It goes on all the time. It is no less unfair that a nondrinker is stopped and checked at a checkpoint in case he's been drinking, or a Muslim cleric from Iran is subjected to closer scrutiny by Immigration officials when attempting to enter our country. They are prophylactic measures carried out for the general safety of society, for the greater good even if individual feelings get a little trampled in the process.

Anyway, I guess I have nothing useful to add so those are my last words on this subject.

[James Deuce]

Guess there's probably no single right answer, as in so many things. It's understandable that good men who love their kids and who are good dads and husbands get mad when they're lumped in with paedophiles. I share that anger. Is the airlines' policy unfair? Certainly.

But it's not really about fairness. It's about preventing something bad even if it is a little unfair or inconvenient, or even discriminatory towards some people. It goes on all the time. It is no less unfair that a nondrinker is stopped and checked at a checkpoint in case he's been drinking, or a Muslim cleric from Iran is subjected to closer scrutiny by Immigration officials when attempting to enter our country. They are prophylactic measures carried out for the general safety of society, for the greater good even if individual feelings get a little trampled in the process.

Anyway, I guess I have nothing useful to add so those are my last words on this subject.

Kerry that is just so conter the concept of Liberty, that I can't help but quote another Doyen of the Enlightenment, Benjamin Franklin: They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

[Beemer]

What about the women on the flight that are expected to act as a free baby-sitting service?

Yeah, I didn't see THAT as part of the terms and conditions on airline tickets! Besides, the kids would be in more danger sitting next to me (not from molestation, I'm not into that) because if they annoyed me, I'd be likely to give them a slap!

[James Deuce]

Yeah, I didn't see THAT as part of the terms and conditions on airline tickets! Besides, the kids would be in more danger sitting next to me (not from molestation, I'm not into that) because if they annoyed me, I'd be likely to give them a slap!

MIne can sit next to you. Learning to sit quietly is a good skill to have.

[Gremlin]

To look at this from another point of view, can I pass myself off as still being a child??

Miss, I want to sit next to her ...... or

I need constant supervision, how about her (air stewardess)


Yes, yes, I know for some of you, this is much more serious (I need to keep things light hearted), and I couldn't give a damn what others might think. If a small child hurts his/herself, I will go to help.

If a steward wants me to move, I'd tell them I was issued with this ticket, move the child

Pity the air nz stewardesses aren't cuter...