Really?

Not that there's anything wrong with it.

From more than one perspective there certainly are bigger fish to fry, but here at A2K we like to sink our teeth into minnows as well as Great Whites.

The linked Guardian article gives us what is, at least, a different perspective than that of Eden's at Change.org. It was the first entry on the list when I Googled the names of the two women involved.

While The Guardian didn't feel the need to go to any lengths to classify the kiss, their report agrees with Eden's that it was just one.

It is here we begin to see divergence:

Eden assumes it was the inherent homophobic prudery of the repressed attendant that led to her challenging the couple. The Guardian, more plausibly, reports that the attendant was responding to a complaint from another passenger. I'm sure Eden and Change.Org would argue that the flight attendant should have told the complaining passenger to mind her own damned homophobic business, but that doesn't make for good customer relations and a speedy and efficient boarding process.

In any given year I will spend between 50% and 75% of my time travelling, and this travel almost always involves flying. I have been on a lot of planes and seen a lot of conflicts arise between cabin crew and passenger. 95% of the time the passenger is responsible for starting the conflict and 100% of the time responsible for escalating it.

Eden describes the reaction of the two women as being extremely upset, and they probably were but when you read Eden's account of what happened you get the impression that the ladies were sobbing into their hankies, not filling the cabin with F-bombs.

The Guardian was, I feel certain, spot on when it reported:



According to The Guardian, Southwest eventually "reached out to extend goodwill" – a form of words that fell just short of an outright apology.

Perhaps this came after Eden wrote her e-mail or anything short of an outright apology is not acceptable to the couple.

Considering that Southwest, apparently, did apologize to Billy Joe Armstrong, of Green Day, I would think it's a safe bet that they have considered and rejected the idea of issuing one to Leisha and Camila. The extension of goodwill was appropriate for an organization that services the public, and an apology was not and is not necessary.

It's hard to imagine that even the most hardened homophobe would complain to a flight attendant about a single peck in public between two members of the same sex, not because it's unimaginable that it might offend one, but because it is very difficult to see how one could have detected the couple's orientation from so innocent a gesture in the first place.

Nevertheless if the couple did believe they were being targeted because of their orientation, the appropriate response would have been to at least wait until the plane was boarded and the flight underway before voicing their displeasure to the crew or waiting until the flight had landed and they were in the terminal, to complain to the airline.

Neither course of action would have forced them to suffer further "indignities" nor would they have prohibited them from taking additional steps: Calling a press conference, writing a letter to the CEO of Southwestern, suing the airline or having their fan club circulate an on-line petition on their behalf.

Instead, as is too often the case today, the women confused making a scene with making a statement, displaying belligerence with displaying a backbone, and rudeness with righteousness.

It's hard to imagine their fellow passengers even understanding what might have triggered the torrent of obscenity, and the resulting long delay of their take-off...let alone expressing any sympathy.

right Finn.... those stupid ******* dykes had it coming.

Can you supply a link to The Guardian article, because I can't see any sign of it on the website?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2011/sep/30/leisha-hailey-thrown-off-flight?newsfeed=true

Only one I could find.

Thank you, I didn't know whether or not Finn meant The Guardian or another guardian.

Sorry - I forgot to include it previously

http://www.guardian.co.uk/tv-and-radio/2011/sep/30/leisha-hailey-thrown-off-flight?newsfeed=true

If that's how you chose to view it.

I do get The Guardian every day. It is a great newspaper, left of centre and very objective, I'd be a hypocrite to say otherwise.

Don't piss off a lesbian, especially the butch ones.

They didn't have anything coming nor did they receive anything because of their sexual orientation.

Do you think they were taken off of the plane because they were lesbians?

If they were the foul-mouthed belligerants it appears they were, then they did get what they deserved.

I thought I expressed myself pretty clearly that even if they were asked not to kiss on the plane because of homophobia, their reaction was not justified.

If they had been called "stupid f*cking dykes, their reaction was not justified.

I'm not going to hype up the situation by suggesting they put any of the other passengers safety in jeopardy, but they sure as hell inconvenienced them by delaying the take off while marshalls dragged their nasty assess off of the plane.

It's unlikely that their reaction had anything to do with their sexual orientation or the mix of male and female sex hormones rushing through their brains. These sorts of nonsensical displays of obnoxious outrage are on the rise across virtually every demographic.

Women (heterosexual or otherwise) used to be able to lord it over men that they, unlike us, were not at all prone to pugnacious displays designed to replace a basic insecurity with the appearence of confident aggression. Unfortunately that is less and less the case these days.

The incidents arise all of the time, as one did just last week. There was a time when I would have been amazed at the level of vitriol directed by a female passenger at a flight attendant for telling her to turn off and stow her phone..."now!"

Apparently the woman was outraged that the attendant was firm and didn't say "please" on this the third time she had to specifically instruct her to quit braying into her damned cell. Fortunately the foul-mouthed woman had a travelling companion (or simply a brave aisle mate) who quickly got her to calm down and shut up or we might have had to turn back to the gate to dump off the harridan too.

About an hour into the flight the Hag was all smiles and loudly apologized to the attendant for losing her temper. You see, it was just that the call was so important.(Apparently it was a matter of life and death that she be able to discuss the latest episode of Project Runway with her friend).

take a joke pal.... you need some real barbeque to calm you.

Exactly.

From Memphis.

Barbeque is pig. end of story. I've had memphis barbeque style beef
, both wet and dry rub. It's good but REAL barbeque is PIG.

My question is why did the flight attendant feel the need to pass on the complaint? Would the complaint been made or filed if it had been a mother kissing a daughter or a niece or a friend? Why do people feel the need to complain about other peoples behavior on a plane unless it is dangerous. The complainant should have been told to mind their own business in the first place.
I think the ladies crossed the line with their language but the idiot who complained should have been asked to leave to, for causing a stink where none was needed.

The most insightful observation yet.

Good question

It could be that the account of what transpired isn't complete.

Maybe it was more than a simple peck, and the attendant felt she could no longer ignore the complainant.

Maybe she thought about telling the complainant to mind her own business but didn't want to cause a ruckus during the boarding process.

Maybe she is something of a homophobe and it bugged her too.

I think the best course of action would be to have ignored the complainant or politely brushed her off. If it really was only one innocent peck then the complainant would have no reason to continue her objections. The offense would have been over.

I have a feeling there is something missing from the account.

Homophobia perhaps?

Seems as likely as anything else.