This story is just kinda goofy, not worthy of a GD, but irritating enough for the pit.
Lady wants to breast-feed her child. Sounds like she was kind of a dick about the specific rules, even though it was her right to do it. But her horrid, ultimately damning crime was, apparently SPEAKING TO AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. The guy apparently complained that her asking him if he had a problem with her breastfeeding her baby constituted an act by a ‘foreign national’ in international airspace made him feel the victim of terror and as such he wanted to file an assault charge."
So, in the end, she has to sign an agreement promising not to talk to Americans on flights. If there is one thing our country doesn’t need, it’s bullying “foriegn nationals” (i.e. Canadians) into promising never to talk to us. Even if they are flinging their boobies around.
What I don’t understand is this: Continental doesn’t have a policy regarding breastfeeding, but when another passenger complains, nursing mothers are requested to move to the back of the aircraft.
Huh?
Shouldn’t the answer be, “I’m sorry Sir, but Continental Airlines has a policy that allows breastfeeding on board”?
Of course, the whole “foreign national” comitting an “act of terror” on an “American plane during a time of war” is completely ridiculous. What was she gonna do, knock the pilot out with her tits?
I have no objection to women breastfeeding in a tasteful manner wherever the heck they feel the need to do so, and the actions of the man in the story, if true, are remarkably assholish. However, from later in the article:
I.e., we only have one person’s word that the other passenger claimed he felt like a “victim of terror” after being questioned by a non-American citizen.
Not that there’s nothing to bitch about here, but roasting the male passenger in effigy may be premature.
I agree the whole terrorism and foreign nationals bit is stupid, but there’s also this part of the article:
“When an announcement then came over the public address system stating that all mothers should change diapers in the plane’s bathrooms, she decided to ignore it.”
Given the extreme close quarters of airplane seats, this does not seem like an unreasonable rule. Changing diapers in your seat is at least as rude as changing them in a restaurant. I think the woman did deserve some form of reprimand for choosing to ignore this publically stated rule.
I’m so glad we have posters such as Zebra, for whom off-point shots at the President are the height of witless humor.
Oh, wait - I’m not.
Unless you can pull an amazing rabbit out of a hat, and meaningfully tie in President Bush to the events related in the OP, I’m going to call you a hapless half-wit.
I agree on the diaper bit. Most diaper changing tables on airplanes look fine to me. Sure, they’re small, but I don’t see the risk of the kid rolling off if you’re standing right in front of it. Turbulence may be a factor, but then, turbulence can knock your kid into the overhead bins if it isn’t secured properly as well.
“This man deserves to be pointed and laughed at by every person he meets every day for the rest of his life for being such a complete fuckwitted wuss.”
Does anyone know the exact words and tone of voice used when the woman asked if he had a problem with her breast feeding?
A polite, low tone of voice saying ‘Excuse me, were you upset by my breast feeding my son?’ is not something to respond to like an asshole.
However, if her statement was loud, sarcastic toned ‘Do you have a fucking problem with me?’ then his behavior is a little less over the top.
Think about it, it’s incredibly easy to be very nasty with a sentence that starts ‘Do you have a problem’ if you use the right tone of voice and inflection, knowing full well that when the statement is written down it looks very innocuous.
