British Airways considers all men to be paedophiles

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by Superflyer

OK if someone is of middle eastern descent are they asked after sitting on the plane to please move to a different spot that will cause less damage when they set off an explosive? No they are allowed to sit where they were assigned, with their family.

I spent Christmas day with a Kurdish family and I've been told what they have gone through at security. Trust me - they would much, much, much rather be given a different seat for the flight.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

How are you on racial profiling at airport security? Just because someone is Muslim doesn't mean they want to blow up the plane.

Ok, I was going to just let this slide but you continued on with some more remarks like this.

Are you really trying to compare this policy of not allowing children to sit near a male to that of the current issue of Islamic Terrorists trying to blow up planes?

The first thing we have to ask ourselves, like some already have in this thread, is there really a problem with men molesting children on airplanes? Without actually looking into the matter I would venture to guess no, and if I were a betting man (which I am) I would also bet that there is no problem with men molesting children on airplanes.

The second thing we have to ask ourselves is, is there a problem with Muslim men trying to highjack, blow up and or crash planes into large urban centres? The answer is yes there is. It is true that the majority of Muslim men who fly DO NOT want to blow up the plane, but there has been several recent and ongoing attempts to do just that.

Thus, if a policy of profiling was in place, there would be justification to conduct such a program. Lets face it, there hasn't been an attempt by old white women to blow up planes, yet, as it stands now, they are subject to the same security procedures as a young adult muslim male who is traveling from Yemen on a one way ticket purchased last minute with cash. Does that make sense? No.

Even if we forget the above. If we just base this arguement on the current system. Everyone goes through some kind of security screening. Thus, before anyone even sets foot on a plane, everyone is in someway considered a possible threat. Does the BA policy do the same? No, women and children are automatically considered not a threat where as the man is.

This just seems like the typical nonsense in todays society where we MUST treat everyone exactly the same no matter the circumstances because heaven forbid someone gets offended.

If there was a large problem with men molesting children on airplanes, I would have no problem with a higher level of scrutiny, but that just isn't the case.

You also talk about how a Kurdish family you know had a hard time going through security. So what, I travel a lot and some times I have the same hassle. My wife and I missed a flight one time and had to rebook through a different city with the same day departure. Every connecting city we went through we had the full meal deal with security. Pulled into private areas, full pat down and complete search of all belonging because we fit a target of last minute booking, no lead time, and paid cash. Was it annoying, sure. Did I complain? Not at all. Why because I know that there are real threats in this world that want to kill people and the only way to stop them is by being proactive.

Hell, when I fly for work my ticket is coded LEO (Law Enforcement Officer). Usually I have zero problems, but on one occasion myself and my partner where given the full meal deal when we got back to Canada because we fit the profile. Tickets purchased last minute. Transiting several source countries, tickets purchased by the same credit card yet myself and my partner were not sitting together on the plane. Did I bitch about it? No, that is how the real world works. We all have to sacrifice a bit to ensure all of our safety. I wish it wasn't like that but unfortunately there are some really bad people in this world that do not value human life.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

The first thing we have to ask ourselves, like some already have in this thread, is there really a problem with men molesting children on airplanes? Without actually looking into the matter I would venture to guess no, and if I were a betting man (which I am) I would also bet that there is no problem with men molesting children on airplanes.

The second thing we have to ask ourselves is, is there a problem with Muslim men trying to highjack, blow up and or crash planes into large urban centres? The answer is yes there is. It is true that the majority of Muslim men who fly DO NOT want to blow up the plane, but there has been several recent and ongoing attempts to do just that.

Is there really a problem with Muslim men trying to hijack planes? In the last 20 years there have been about 204 million flights in the US alone. Of those, how many were hi-jacked or blown up? About 8 or 9? Just guessing, but I'd guess about an average of about 10 or so muslim men where on each of those flights. So, of the 2 billion muslim men who've boarded flights, 8 or 9 of them have been terrorists! Of all the ways you might die each day you wake up, boarding a flight that is going to be blown up by terrorists is not one of them. You are much more likely to get hit by lightning at some point that day, far more likely to die in a car crash on the way to airport. You are about 500 times more likely to die choking on your sandwich on your flight than you are to be killed by a terrorist.

I would guess there have probably been several times as many child molestations on airplanes compared to terrorist attacks. It is still a stupid policy though.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Is there really a problem with Muslim men trying to hijack planes? In the last 20 years there have been about 204 million flights in the US alone. Of those, how many were hi-jacked or blown up? About 8 or 9? Just guessing, but I'd guess about an average of about 10 or so muslim men where on each of those flights. So, of the 2 billion muslim men who've boarded flights, 8 or 9 of them have been terrorists! Of all the ways you might die each day you wake up, boarding a flight that is going to be blown up by terrorists is not one of them. You are much more likely to get hit by lightning at some point that day, far more likely to die in a car crash on the way to airport. You are about 500 times more likely to die choking on your sandwich on your flight than you are to be killed by a terrorist.

I agree with everything here, but there is still a problem with certain Muslims trying to hijack or blow up planes. Just because there haven't been hundreds doesn't mean there isn't a problem. 1 every 5-10 years is still a problem. And if we didn't have themeasures in place that we have now there would have most certainly been more. I guess one could ask, if profiling stopped even 10% of these attacks, would it be worth it? I would say yes. We could save a lot more resources, which we could then use to attack the actual problem.

I would guess there have probably been several times as many child molestations on airplanes compared to terrorist attacks. It is still a stupid policy though.

I don't know, maybe it is a big problem that I don't know about. Can you find even 1 news article showing that a child was molested on a aircraft?

[Jetsfan]

[quote=Devils'Advocate;2268178]It's too bad that in this society, if a man looks middle-eastern, he is deemed a terrorist.

Hemi-Cuda: Come on now..... Men are FIVE TIMES MORE LIKELY to abuse a male victim and TWENTY TIMES MORE LIKELY to abuse a female victim. Statistically speaking, a child is far, far safer with a female than a male.


Single mother had sex with boy, 12, almost 200 times... and marked each encounter with a star in her sordid diary


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1244367/Single-mother-36-faces-jail-seducing-boy-12-having-sex-200-times.html#ixzz0dIc3qnlE

[photon]

Basic reading failure? "More likely" doesn't mean the other option never happens.

[Jetsfan]

Originally Posted by photon

Basic reading failure? "More likely" doesn't mean the other option never happens.

So you try to deflect the problem of female sexual predators by insinuating that I cannot read.

Your actions are so boring and predictable.

Whats next? Will you say things like..."you hate women", "you can't get laid", "you're gay"....blah....blah....blah...

Your misandry is pathetic.

[frinkprof]

Originally Posted by Jetsfan

So you try to deflect the problem of female sexual predators by insinuating that I cannot read.

Your actions are so boring and predictable.

He did nothing of the sort. Your response to the statement that "a child is far, far safer with a female than a male" was to post a story about single case of a child being abused by a woman. Contained nowhere in that story was any statistic or claim to the contrary of the statement you responded to.

Photon then correctly pointed out that your post did not refute the statement to which you responded. If you had responded to a post that said "females never abuse children," then your post would have correctly refuted that, but you didn't.

The truth is often boring and predictable.

Originally Posted by Jetsfan

Whats next? Will you say things like..."you hate women", "you can't get laid", "you're gay"....blah....blah....blah...

Your misandry is pathetic.

This is a "strawman" argument. If the insinuation that you can not read is false, then you may want to read this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman

[photon]

Originally Posted by Jetsfan

So you try to deflect the problem of female sexual predators by insinuating that I cannot read.

Your actions are so boring and predictable.

Now instead of basic reading failure, it's basic logic failure. See frinkprof's post as to why.

Originally Posted by Jetsfan

Whats next? Will you say things like..."you hate women", "you can't get laid", "you're gay"....blah....blah....blah...

I can see nothing here relevant to anything I've said so, purple monkey dishwasher?

[Swarly]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

...there is no problem with men molesting children on airplanes.

I guess this is something we'll have to disagree on. I do see a problem with men molesting children, be it on the ground or in the air.

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

Come on now..... Men are FIVE TIMES MORE LIKELY to abuse a male victim and TWENTY TIMES MORE LIKELY to abuse a female victim. Statistically speaking, a child is far, far safer with a female than a male.

But on an airplane? I'd guess that the rate is effectively zero for either gender.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by SebC

But on an airplane? I'd guess that the rate is effectively zero for either gender.

And, of course, your guess would be wrong.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/200...ed_with_f.html

[SebC]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

And, of course, your guess would be wrong.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/200...ed_with_f.html

No indication though if he was a stranger... but hey, you've provided evidence for why priests should not be allowed to sit next to minors on airplanes.

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by SebC

No indication though if he was a stranger... but hey, you've provided evidence for why priests should not be allowed to sit next to minors on airplanes.

Your claim was that "that the rate (of sexual abuse) is effectively zero for either gender." I attempted to prove that it is not zero.

If you meant "occupation" instead of "gender", then you should have said so.
And if you meant "sexual abuse by a stranger", then you should have said so.

[Flames in 07]

I really hope he wins that lawsuit.

[jolinar of malkshor]

Originally Posted by Devils'Advocate

And, of course, your guess would be wrong.

http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/200...ed_with_f.html

I am impressed. You actually found at least one. Serious question. How long did it take to search for that? Where there many others that you came across or did you stop looking when you found this one.

Just the other day I was listening to the radio and there were reports of some dude groping people on the bus. One would think that this kind of activity would be much more prevalent on a bus where it is easy to get on and off (the bus that is). Is there any bus authorities that have the same policy as BA?

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I am impressed. You actually found at least one. Serious question. How long did it take to search for that? Where there many others that you came across or did you stop looking when you found this one.

I guess the flip side is this- does it happen often enough that it isn't news worthy? I'm not saying it is- I simply do not know.

For example- you almost never hear about car thefts in Calgary hitting the news. So based on that, one could conclude that car thefts are extremely rare.

What about simple sexual assaults? The "he grabbed my boob" type of thing. Once again- almost never on the news; but that doesn't mean that I think it almost never happens in Calgary.

[Flames in 07]

So just to summarize, you can't sit beside a kid on a plane because there's such a huge problem of men taking advantage of kids on planes, but no problem sitting beside a kid at a catholic church?

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I am impressed. You actually found at least one. Serious question. How long did it take to search for that?

First link on my first google search.

I used 'fondled' and 'on an airplane'.

There are actually a number of other ones... man plays with sleeping woman's breasts, man masturbates while putting his fingers through the hair of the woman beside him.... kinda wish I hadn't done that search....

[FireFly]

Originally Posted by jolinar of malkshor

I am impressed. You actually found at least one. Serious question. How long did it take to search for that? Where there many others that you came across or did you stop looking when you found this one.

Just the other day I was listening to the radio and there were reports of some dude groping people on the bus. One would think that this kind of activity would be much more prevalent on a bus where it is easy to get on and off (the bus that is). Is there any bus authorities that have the same policy as BA?

Isn't it Japan that has women only train cars because of the rampant sexual harassment and groping by the men who ride said trains?