Even though they said it was "revealing attire" it was just a short skirt. Some people are way too sensitive, and are shoving their religion down other peoples throats. The picture of the girl showed a woman who was wearing a white top with a short skirt. That was it. I think whoever was offended, is a closet sexual predator.
2007-09-07 03:36:48 · 4 answers · asked by ron197192064 4 in Travel ➔ Air Travel
The actions of Southwest are riduculous on their face. The only people possibly disturbed by Miss Hooter Hottie are insecure women and muslim's. Either way, if Miss Hooter is wearing street legal attire, Southwest has nothing to say.
2007-09-07 07:15:02 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
whilst i think of blaming the religious precise is slightly out of left field, I do experience that SW have been way out of line in asking this lady to step off the airplane. definite, her skirt replaced into very short, in certainty, for the period of her interview this morning, they had to blur her mid areas temporarily as she resumed her seat to steer away from showing her underclothes on stay television, yet as she advised Matt Lauer, she replaced into sitting pass legged with a mag in her lap so she wasn't reveling something to different passengers. in certainty, in case you study the information assurance, she replaced into not asked to go away the flight because of the fact of a passenger grievance. extremely, it replaced right into a grievance from yet another flight attendant that led to her removing. She's 23, captivating, and the climate replaced into over one hundred tiers. a quick skirt replaced into suitable decrease than those situations. definite, a employer does have the the final option to refuse service to anyone, yet this replaced into the main ridiculous reason. The airline has no printed dressed code and she or he replaced into dressed provocatively, not obscenely. As her lawyer pronounced on the immediately instruct, has she been Paris Hilton, or another action picture star, no person might have stated her outfit. whilst i don't inspire the rampant litigation so commonplace in this united states, I do experience she is owed an apology for her scientific care.
2016-11-14 10:21:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The airlines are a business. They have the right to refuse service, just like any other business.
Flying is not a right, it's a priviledge.
You're assuming it's about someone else's religion. But, the reality is that people rarely stop to consider that they're going to be in a small space with 100 other people for several hours, and how they're own actions impact those 100 other people.
As for the sexual predator comment, that's just ridiculous.
2007-09-07 06:31:27 · answer #3 · answered by Bobbi O 2 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Yes, they overreacted. The woods are full of every type in CA and bad dress is just one issue. You learn to just roll your eyes and ignore if you don't agree.
2007-09-07 07:18:23 · answer #4 · answered by Flatpaw 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋