# New Poll in Parade Magazine



## mpls_girl26 (Jul 1, 2008)

In a recent issue of Parade Magazine there is a poll to vote whether or not "obese" passengers should have to buy two seats. So far, 67% yes, 33% no. Care to vote? Click here. 

The whole idea disturbs me....even more so because I can unfortunately foresee this happening in the near future. I know this topic has been talked about ad nauseum. I don't know want to see it happen and can't see how they will determine who has to and who doesn't. It's all bullshit to me.


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 2, 2008)

> People should be able to breathe a little without their neighbor encroaching.



I found that offensive. Not because I might possibly have to buy two seats to disband myself from 'encroaching' on my neighbor, but because that's the only comment we've been presented with. Why could they not replace that quote with, or simply just add to it: "People should also not be squeezed into their seats, uncomfortable and possibly unsafe. We want all of our passengers comfortable."
It bothers me when they're so myopic... (But, that's the habit...)

It would be so much easier if airlines designed planes with some much larger seats. It would be even more ideal if said larger seats _were not_ more expensive than the smaller seats. No one here or anywhere else should have to pay more because they're larger. Everyone should pay the same rate. If they're going to raise the rates because of fuel costs, don't weight people at the time of ticket purchase, charge everyone the same flat rate. (That's my opinion and I am aware that many people will not / do not agree)


... It's kind of like the amphitheater and movie theater seating. They're making so much money as it is they should have seating available for larger customers. They can afford to lease a seat or two here and there...


----------



## TropicalFish (Jul 2, 2008)

It's not like "normal" sized people are so comfortable and have so much space in those stupid airplane seats anyway. And since according to reports all over the place America is getting fatter, why don't the airlines evolve with it and learn to accomodate bigger people?


----------



## pdgujer148 (Jul 2, 2008)

Of course it is BS. 

A couple random thoughts:

1. If Southwest is going to charge double fair do they intend to retrofit their airplane so that the passenger can utilize both seats (i.e. removable armrests)? I'm guessing not. That would cost money. Actually, I'm thinking that quite a few SSBBWs and SSBHM would be willing to pay a reasonable fee (not double, but say an extra $100) to have comfortable seating. The fact that they are trying to charge you twice AND are cramming you into seats that are tight for average sized people is absurd. 

2. Are they going to do this to tall people too? I took a red-eye back from Vegas in April. I was able to fit all 278 manly pounds of me neatly in one window seat--a tight but neat fit. The guy to my immediate right was about 6'9". He sat down and fell asleep before the plane took off. His legs splayed and pushed into my space to the point where I was riding the seat sidesaddle. His arms went akimbo and kept poking into my ribs. It was a constant struggle to keep this guy out of my space. Am I advocating the same treatment for tall people? Nope. I'm saying that the criteria is unfair. It isn't about comfort for all passengers. It is about greedy airlines picking on fat people because they can.

As an aside: 67% of those polled for the Parade article thought that it was OK to charge fat people twice. Huh. I thought that 60% of America was supposedly obese. Are we voting against ourselves our is Parade only read by skinny folk?


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 2, 2008)

Chimpi said:


> ... It's kind of like the amphitheater and movie theater seating. They're making so much money as it is they should have seating available for larger customers. They can afford to lease a seat or two here and there...



But they aren't making money, lots of airlines are going out of business.



pdgujer148 said:


> Of course it is BS.
> 
> A couple random thoughts:
> 
> 1. If Southwest is going to charge double fair do they intend to retrofit their airplane so that the passenger can utilize both seats (i.e. removable armrests)? I'm guessing not.




Most aircraft have armrests that go up to fit between the seatbacks.


----------



## pdgujer148 (Jul 3, 2008)

Ella Bella said:


> Most aircraft have armrests that go up to fit between the seatbacks.



Huh. That's not my experience on Northwest Airlines. Perhaps I just couldn't find the latch.


----------



## Ned Sonntag (Jul 3, 2008)

PARADE has always been viciously anti-fat, actually quite racist too... Google up and find out who 'Walter Scott' of "Personality Parade" really is and check out his track record.


----------



## Violet_Beauregard (Jul 3, 2008)

yeah... US Airways definitely has arms that fold up between the seats.



Ella Bella said:


> Most aircraft have armrests that go up to fit between the seatbacks.


----------



## olwen (Jul 3, 2008)

I was on a continental flight and also a delta flight a couple weeks ago - sure the arms come up but when you go to push the seat back, the arm is still in the way. I ended up sitting with the armrest halfway up and halfway down. Just uncomfortable.


----------



## FatAndProud (Jul 3, 2008)

I totally voted no. Why should fat people be put at an inconvience? Sure, skinny people that sit with us *may* be put into an inconvinence with our rolls on them...but it doesn't cost them anything!

Skinny people are mean


----------



## Fat Brian (Jul 5, 2008)

If they are going to charge by weight, they should weigh you and all of your luggage. That way if you are fat but travel light you still won't pay as much as the Barbie bitch who weighs a buck five but brings twenty bags of crap with her on the plane for her "beauty" needs. That way its the total weight you bring to the plane, not just you yourself.

In the airline industry it really is all about weight, they should have done something long ago but when fuel is cheap and revenues are high its hard to justify drastic changes. The airlines fly containers of mail and other things inside the plane with the passenger flights and how is the cost of these crates determined ? By weight.

In a system like this they could have all of the big seats they need since you're not paying for the seat like now.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 5, 2008)

Fat Brian said:


> If they are going to charge by weight, they should weigh you and all of your luggage. That way if you are fat but travel light you still won't pay as much as the Barbie bitch who weighs a buck five but brings twenty bags of crap with her on the plane for her "beauty" needs. That way its the total weight you bring to the plane, not just you yourself.
> 
> In the airline industry it really is all about weight, they should have done something long ago but when fuel is cheap and revenues are high its hard to justify drastic changes. The airlines fly containers of mail and other things inside the plane with the passenger flights and how is the cost of these crates determined ? By weight.
> 
> In a system like this they could have all of the big seats they need since you're not paying for the seat like now.





So say it costs $1000 to operate a flight. That includes fuel and peoples wages. If they had a plane with 10 big seats on it those seats would need to cost $100 a seat just for the airline to break even, not even turning a profit. Take that same plane and instead of 10 seats put 50. Those seats would then cost $20 for the airline to break even. Lots more people clamoring to buy those $20 seats. Then after all of that, jack up the price of fuel and figure out where you're gonna get the extra money to pay for the extra gas you need to fly around those same 10 or 50 people. You can't, its not happening and that's why airlines are going out of business right now.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 5, 2008)

Ella, I know this is kind of a weird question but I'm asking you because you've said you work for an airline.

Is there any safety related reason that the armrests need to be down?

In other words, lets say I was flying with my BHM boyfriend. He'd take up more than one seat, but I wouldn't. Would it work for us to book two adjoining seats if we just planned to keep the armrest up so he could use the 'extra room' on my seat? Could we argue to the airline that we are two customers who are paying for 2 seats and just apportioning them differently?


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 5, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> Ella, I know this is kind of a weird question but I'm asking you because you've said you work for an airline.
> 
> Is there any safety related reason that the armrests need to be down?
> 
> In other words, lets say I was flying with my BHM boyfriend. He'd take up more than one seat, but I wouldn't. Would it work for us to book two adjoining seats if we just planned to keep the armrest up so he could use the 'extra room' on my seat? Could we argue to the airline that we are two customers who are paying for 2 seats and just apportioning them differently?



Only the aisle armrests need to be down, the others they just keep down on for purely comfort related reasons. Both myself and my fiance are large people and when we travel together the armrests are up. 

If you were flying with your boyfriend you could certainly bring up the fact that he's sitting next to you and that you could just put the armrest up if someone approached him about buying a second seat. Every airline and every airlines agent handles it differently so whether or not they would say "oh ok" I couldn't tell you. 

For me personally, when I'm in charge of a flight and I see someone that I'm concerned with needing a second seat I will upgrade them to first class whenever possible.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 5, 2008)

When I read all this stuff, I feel incredibly lucky that I've never been forced to buy a seat. Can they actually make you do that? Once or twice, I've been asked if I'd like to as the flight is not full, but I always declined with no resistance.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 5, 2008)

Tooz said:


> When I read all this stuff, I feel incredibly lucky that I've never been forced to buy a seat. Can they actually make you do that? Once or twice, I've been asked if I'd like to as the flight is not full, but I always declined with no resistance.




Yup they can insist that you purchase a second seat. It gets to be pretty tricky especially on a full or oversold flight. Because you've got 200 people trying to get on a plane with 180 seats. So if one person takes up two seats that's revenue for one seat that's lost if the person isn't charged for it. 

I fly for free but when I didn't, I hadn't ever been charged for two seats. That's because I did my research, tried to fly on the least full flight of the day and communicated lots! I would always approach the agent asking them if there was any way possible for the to keep the seat next to me open to please do so. Most times they will, but they wont know you need that little extra room if you dont ask for it.


----------



## Violet_Beauregard (Jul 5, 2008)

Ella which airline do you work for, and what do you do? I think this is a fascinating thread, and you seem to have a lot of valuable information. You mentioned upgrading people when possible. I have never gotten upgraded to first class, though I'd love the opportunity...LOL


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 5, 2008)

Violet_Beauregard said:


> Ella which airline do you work for, and what do you do? I think this is a fascinating thread, and you seem to have a lot of valuable information. You mentioned upgrading people when possible. I have never gotten upgraded to first class, though I'd love the opportunity...LOL




I work for a west coast based airline and I'm the trainer here. I make sure that the agents and management know the policies and procedures as they come down from the company as well as the FAA, and make sure that they are implemented in a timely manner, and I make sure that everyone is within compliance with all the training and recurrent training that is mandated.


----------



## Violet_Beauregard (Jul 5, 2008)

Wow....you really need to keep up on a lot of information then. I'm sure you're quite good at it too. Thanks for the valuable information! 





Ella Bella said:


> I work for a west coast based airline and I'm the trainer here. I make sure that the agents and management know the policies and procedures as they come down from the company as well as the FAA, and make sure that they are implemented in a timely manner, and I make sure that everyone is within compliance with all the training and recurrent training that is mandated.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 5, 2008)

Ella Bella said:


> I fly for free



omg I need to fly for free.

Or for super discounted.


----------



## 1300 Class (Jul 5, 2008)

Actually I think if a person is to big to fit into a single seat in a safe and comfortable manner (not just for them but for the potential paying customer next to them) and the flight is full, busy or is expected to be fully booked, then yes you should purchase two seats when a second seat is not freely available through the previously mentioned causes. Thats the only fair option here. I'm sorry, but this is the view I have always held and continued to hold in this debate. 

As a large guy both, tall and weighty, and having just completed a flight back from Liverpool and not long before that a flight from Australia to Dublin, this comment gauls me:


> I totally voted no. Why should fat people be put at an inconvience? Sure, skinny people that sit with us *may* be put into an inconvinence with our rolls on them...but it doesn't cost them anything!


Its not "fat people" that are being put at an inconvience its other people. If your sitting on a flight, whether its 30minutes or 30 hours, and there is someone, (to hate myself for using this phrase) "spilling over" or whatever into your seat for whatever reason then you should have every right to complain and ask they have some sort of accommodation made (either freely on a non-busy flight or through the booking of a second seat). You have to think of it from the perspective of the other person in the seat next to you. It might be alright to laugh and joke or read or write a erotic story about it, but that situation on a long or short haul flight, no bloody way thats for sure, you'll change your tune quick smart. 

Basically, it boils down to selfishness or not. If the flights not busy, fair enough, you shouldn't need to pay for a second seat when ones are otherwise freely available. However should it be full or no free seats, it then I believe fairs fair. If you fill more than one seat, then you pay for a second. Thats tough, but fair. And if thats against the principals of Size Acceptance, well thats a bullet that cannot be dodged and just have to pucker up and live with it, no matter how unjust people may think it is.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 5, 2008)

Australian Lord said:


> Its not "fat people" that are being put at an inconvience its other people. If your sitting on a flight, whether its 30minutes or 30 hours, and there is someone, (to hate myself for using this phrase) "spilling over" or whatever into your seat for whatever reason then you should have every right to complain and ask they have some sort of accommodation made



Fat people fly uncomfortably all the time, with seat belts that barely fit and with arm rests digging into hips. Or feeling claustrophobic because of being forced to fit in seats designed not at all with larger customers in mind.

Where is our recourse? Who do we complain to when we're uncomfortable? Or is it only thinner folks who have a right to fly comfortably? If so, what is it that entitles thinner folks to "rights" to fly comfortably that fat people don't seem to enjoy. 

I really would love to know.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 5, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Fat people fly uncomfortably all the time, with seat belts that barely fit and with arm rests digging into hips. Or feeling claustrophobic because of being forced to fit in seats designed not at all with larger customers in mind.
> 
> Where is our recourse? Who do we complain to when we're uncomfortable? Or is it only thinner folks who have a right to fly comfortably? If so, what is it that entitles thinner folks to "rights" to fly comfortably that fat people don't seem to enjoy.
> 
> I really would love to know.



NOBODY is comfortable on an airplane seat. Not fat, skinny, tall, short, old, or young. The space is small and everyone is crammed in there. Nobody's comfortable, unless maybe you're up in first class.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 5, 2008)

Ella Bella said:


> NOBODY is comfortable on an airplane seat. Not fat, skinny, tall, short, old, or young. The space is small and everyone is crammed in there. Nobody's comfortable, unless maybe you're up in first class.



Would you say that a 115-lb woman is as uncomfortable as a 400-lb man, Ella?


----------



## Tooz (Jul 6, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Would you say that a 115-lb woman is as uncomfortable as a 400-lb man, Ella?



It depends, actually. I think for some this might be true. I've never met anyone who is the least bit comfy.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 6, 2008)

Fascinita said:


> Would you say that a 115-lb woman is as uncomfortable as a 400-lb man, Ella?



A different kind of discomfort, but discomfort all the same.


I dont understand the thinking of many people that America is getting bigger so why not just have airplanes with bigger seats? Airplanes cost tens of millions of dollars, with many planes having been in service for 10 years or more. Its not cost effective for an airline to order a new plane built every few years so that the seats can fit the ever widening asses of the American public. 

If someone wants a bigger seat for a more comfortable flight there are seats available. Its called first class.


----------



## Fascinita (Jul 6, 2008)

Ella Bella said:


> Its not cost effective for an airline to order a new plane built every few years so that the seats can fit the ever widening asses of the American public.
> 
> If someone wants a bigger seat for a more comfortable flight there are seats available. Its called first class.



Well, when you put it that way... 

Gotcha.

No new planes for ever-widening asses.  

EOF


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (Jul 6, 2008)

I've been upgraded to first class more than once by very kind gate agents. However, those seats are not that much wider, in my experience. Definitely not enough to make a difference for me. And I've even found, twice, that the armrests didn't go up like they did in coach, so it was actually worse.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jul 6, 2008)

BigBeautifulMe said:


> I've been upgraded to first class more than once by very kind gate agents. However, those seats are not that much wider, in my experience. Definitely not enough to make a difference for me. And I've even found, twice, that the armrests didn't go up like they did in coach, so it was actually worse.



I agree. I flew first class to London and it was terribly tight. Never again.

Personally I buy two seats when I can, especially when I suspect the plane is going to be packed. a time or two I've had other passengers ask if they could use my empty space or put something inder the seat in front and I tell them flat out no. If they want extra room they should pay for it like I have to. Two carry-ons, twice the luggage weight, two snacks = a perfect trip.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 6, 2008)

BigBeautifulMe said:


> I've been upgraded to first class more than once by very kind gate agents. However, those seats are not that much wider, in my experience. Definitely not enough to make a difference for me. And I've even found, twice, that the armrests didn't go up like they did in coach, so it was actually worse.



Yeah I dont know of any airline who's armrests in first class go up. I know with us in first you get about 4 inches more width and 5 inches more legroom. I actually prefer to fly coach if I have an empty seat next to me. My ankles and feet swell pretty badly when I fly so the little bit of extra room to stretch out helps.


----------



## fa_foo (Jul 6, 2008)

pdgujer148 said:


> 2. Are they going to do this to tall people too? I took a red-eye back from Vegas in April. I was able to fit all 278 manly pounds of me neatly in one window seat--a tight but neat fit. The guy to my immediate right was about 6'9". He sat down and fell asleep before the plane took off. His legs splayed and pushed into my space to the point where I was riding the seat sidesaddle. His arms went akimbo and kept poking into my ribs. It was a constant struggle to keep this guy out of my space. Am I advocating the same treatment for tall people? Nope. I'm saying that the criteria is unfair. It isn't about comfort for all passengers. It is about greedy airlines picking on fat people because they can.



As a tall person (196 cm), I have noticed two things about airlines lately. 
1. They have begun pushing the seats closer together, so the legroom is shorter. When sitting all the way back in my seat, I was afraid that when the person in front of me leaned the seat back, it would crush my knees. True.

2. They already do charge tall people extra on some airlines, because they've found that the exit row seating and bulkhead seats are something they can charge extra for. Because of #1 above, I always try to get the seats with extra distance. And by the way, on air trips, I never fall asleep onto people and splay across them because how can you sleep when the headrest is pushing against your upper back??

Its all quite sad really for both the tall people and the fat people.

Perhaps its time for us to get a good system of bullet trains that go 400kph?

By the way, it looks like the poll results on Parade's site have shifted, now its 57 to 43, so let's keep voting.


foo


----------



## 1300 Class (Jul 7, 2008)

I have nothing against having bigger seats, however you therefore shouldn't expect to pay the same price as before. If a seat is 1/3 bigger than before, expect to pay 1/3 more on the ticket price. Hey, those skinny and normal people won't complain at having bigger seats in economy class then! You can't expect the world to bend to you because you demand it. Unfortunatly it doesn't quite work like that.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 7, 2008)

Australian Lord said:


> I have nothing against having bigger seats, however you therefore shouldn't expect to pay the same price as before. If a seat is 1/3 bigger than before, expect to pay 1/3 more on the ticket price. Hey, those skinny and normal people won't complain at having bigger seats in economy class then! You can't expect the world to bend to you because you demand it. Unfortunatly it doesn't quite work like that.



Well, I agree, but on some level it's unfair (I can't shake that I feel this way and can't put my finger on why) that fat people get the short straw on THIS issue, too. I might not care so much if everything else wasn't short strawsville, too.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 7, 2008)

Tooz said:


> Well, I agree, but on some level it's unfair (I can't shake that I feel this way and can't put my finger on why) that fat people get the short straw on THIS issue, too. I might not care so much if everything else wasn't short strawsville, too.



I think it's bothersome because you're not _asking_ for more resources than another passenger. You're just asking to get on a plane and be flown from Point A to Point B. You don't want special accomodations or to be upgraded to first class for free, you just want to get to your destination.

I have super thick and coarse hair. When I go the hairdresser to have it blown out I have to pay like $10 or $20 more. Intellectually I understand why, it's because my hair won't get dry in the average amount of time so they have to expend more time getting it dried and they can not work on another customer in that time. I'm not asking them to spend more time on me or to have a specially trained stylist work on my hair or to use special styling tools, it's just my hair is naturally thick and coarse.

I understand it, but it still bothers me.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 7, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> I think it's bothersome because you're not _asking_ for more resources than another passenger. You're just asking to get on a plane and be flown from Point A to Point B. You don't want special accomodations or to be upgraded to first class for free, you just want to get to your destination.
> 
> I have super thick and coarse hair. When I go the hairdresser to have it blown out I have to pay like $10 or $20 more. Intellectually I understand why, it's because my hair won't get dry in the average amount of time so they have to expend more time getting it dried and they can not work on another customer in that time. I'm not asking them to spend more time on me or to have a specially trained stylist work on my hair or to use special styling tools, it's just my hair is naturally thick and coarse.
> 
> I understand it, but it still bothers me.



Yes, I understand. Again, I generally apparently make it just under the cut for two seat land, but it's still ridiculous. Ultimately it is not my fault that the seats are as small as they are.


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 7, 2008)

moneymoneymoneymoneymoneymoney


babies should be kenneled, because they annoy people with their crying
kids too
old people shouldn't be allowed to sit by young people because they have nothing in common
no perfume allowed!
no blue eyes next to brown eyes!


I think I should demand NOT to be seated next to an average or 'skinny' person to begin with. I think it would damage my delicate emotional brain to have to put up with all that perfect. Maybe THEY should have to buy another seat as to not upset ME.


I think the first person to implement a 'fat' airline might actually save the world.


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 7, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> I have super thick and coarse hair. When I go the hairdresser to have it blown out I have to pay like $10 or $20 more.



are you serious? you need to find a new hairdresser, girl


haha


----------



## Tooz (Jul 7, 2008)

Surlysomething said:


> babies should be kenneled, because they annoy people with their crying
> kids too



I hate kids/babies (cargo hold?), especially when they cry on flights. Ahahdgshdgjsdfkdv



Surlysomething said:


> Maybe THEY should have to buy another seat as to not upset ME.



Hahahahahaaaaaaa.


Yessssss.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 7, 2008)

Surlysomething said:


> are you serious? you need to find a new hairdresser, girl
> 
> 
> haha



Every one I have ever been to charges me more.

And yes +1000 on the babies. Put them in the cargo hold and let the puppies sit in the main cabin.


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 7, 2008)

LoveBHMS said:


> Every one I have ever been to charges me more.
> 
> And yes +1000 on the babies. Put them in the cargo hold and let the puppies sit in the main cabin.



That is so weird. I have hair that is so long that my hairdresser often has to kneel to trim it. She has never asked me to pay more or buy her kneepads.


----------



## ThatIsThat (Jul 7, 2008)

Australian Lord said:


> Actually I think if a person is to big to fit into a single seat in a safe and comfortable manner (not just for them but for the potential paying customer next to them) and the flight is full, busy or is expected to be fully booked, then yes you should purchase two seats when a second seat is not freely available through the previously mentioned causes. Thats the only fair option here. I'm sorry, but this is the view I have always held and continued to hold in this debate.
> 
> As a large guy both, tall and weighty, and having just completed a flight back from Liverpool and not long before that a flight from Australia to Dublin, this comment gauls me:
> 
> ...


 I think you articulated a very good point. The issue goes both ways and you can't just think about it from one perspective. That said, no one should be humiliated in the process through public weighings before boarding or other rubbish.

Moreover, pretend for a second that plane tickets are buying real-estate, but instead of property it's the airline seat. If someone tries to build on your property, you'll sue, because it's yours and you paid for it. Likewise, if someone "spills over" (hell, ti could even be a tall person or bodybuilder with grotesque shoulders) into your purchased seat, you should be able to complain. 

Furthermore, though I know much of the media always talks about the fat airlines and such, as someone else mentioned in this thread, the airlines can't pop out a new plane, especially when ticket buyers already are shrinking from rising prices. It wouldn't make sense. Seems like to me, would you rather pay 2 tickets or have really horrible flying times, no snacks, and other pitfalls to a decrease in revenue to the airlines? 

And someone mentioned in this thread charging people for their make-up, etc. When I flew to London the other week, I bought another seat for my violin so I could have a carry-on of underwear, make-up, clothes, etc. (the luggage people always seem to lose mine so I like to be careful), so I think that few would find it unreasonable to charge people for excess carry-ons.


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 7, 2008)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> I think you articulated a very good point. The issue goes both ways and you can't just think about it from one perspective. That said, no one should be humiliated in the process through public weighings before boarding or other rubbish.
> 
> Moreover, pretend for a second that plane tickets are buying real-estate, but instead of property it's the airline seat. If someone tries to build on your property, you'll sue, because it's yours and you paid for it. Likewise, if someone "spills over" (hell, ti could even be a tall person or bodybuilder with grotesque shoulders) into your purchased seat, you should be able to complain.
> 
> ...




I think it's extremely unfair to offer one size seating. The world is NOT made up of one size only people. It is blatant discrimination not having seats for everyone. Plain and simple. They don't make bigger seats because they won't be able to fit more onto the plane and make more money, that's what it boils down to. It's bogus and should be out-lawed. You're talking about underwear? Compared to the dignity of how many 'overweight' people? Hello, the world is made up of thin people, average people, and big people. Not one should be left out. Period. Make a row of bigger seats!! Problem solved. 

The airlines need to suck it up and get with the real world. The average size is 12/14. Tickets go up when fuel goes up. Such is life.


----------



## ThatIsThat (Jul 7, 2008)

Surlysomething said:


> I think it's extremely unfair to offer one size seating. The world is NOT made up of one size only people. It is blatant discrimination not having seats for everyone. Plain and simple. They don't make bigger seats because they won't be able to fit more onto the plane and make more money, that's what it boils down to. It's bogus and should be out-lawed. You're talking about underwear? Compared to the dignity of how many 'overweight' people? Hello, the world is made up of thin people, average people, and big people. Not one should be left out. Period. Make a row of bigger seats!! Problem solved.
> 
> The airlines need to suck it up and get with the real world. The average size is 12/14. Tickets go up when fuel goes up. Such is life.


 These airline companies aren't some unfeeling beings, they are rational people trying to keep a business alive. Creating bigger planes would cost millions not only to make, but also because there would be fewer tickets to sell and thus a loss of potential revenue. It'd be suicide! What's so wrong with making more money when they have to break even in order to stay in business (and even then some airlines haven't been breaking even). They are not asking you to change, or saying that your lifestyle is wrong, they are asking, as a courtesy to other fliers as well as to cover additional fuel costs that you pay a little more because your physical size is too big, pure and simple. To me it's similar to many rides at Disney where there are "size limitations" as they put it; they could *possibly* make rides to support those who are obese, but it would cost so much extra money, money that would lose them a lot of revenue in ticket sales (when the prices inevitably rise) that losing obese customers is worth it, because they are in the minority. (I should note even quite overweight people are able to ride most of the rides at Disney - just not bordering on morbidly obese).
To use a non-"size" example, which might seem funny, but people with big feet have to buy more expensive shoes. It's not the shoe manufacturers trying to hate on the big footed people, it's the fact that it physically requires more fabric to cover their foot, and since they are in the minority of "typical" sizes, it would not make sense, economically, for the shoe manufacturer to make molds or whatever they do in the factory to make those sizes in bulk, as most of those shoes would be wasted.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 7, 2008)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> These airline companies aren't some unfeeling beings, they are rational people trying to keep a business alive. Creating bigger planes would cost millions not only to make, but also because there would be fewer tickets to sell and thus a loss of potential revenue. It'd be suicide! What's so wrong with making more money when they have to break even in order to stay in business (and even then some airlines haven't been breaking even). They are not asking you to change, or saying that your lifestyle is wrong, they are asking, as a courtesy to other fliers as well as to cover additional fuel costs that you pay a little more because your physical size is too big, pure and simple. To me it's similar to many rides at Disney where there are "size limitations" as they put it; they could *possibly* make rides to support those who are obese, but it would cost so much extra money, money that would lose them a lot of revenue in ticket sales (when the prices inevitably rise) that losing obese customers is worth it, because they are in the minority. (I should note even quite overweight people are able to ride most of the rides at Disney - just not bordering on morbidly obese).
> To use a non-"size" example, which might seem funny, but people with big feet have to buy more expensive shoes. It's not the shoe manufacturers trying to hate on the big footed people, it's the fact that it physically requires more fabric to cover their foot, and since they are in the minority of "typical" sizes, it would not make sense, economically, for the shoe manufacturer to make molds or whatever they do in the factory to make those sizes in bulk, as most of those shoes would be wasted.



Hate to say this, but I take what you are saying with a grain of salt as you are a thin person (and probably have always been). I guess the concept of people being penalized because they are too big in any sense (height, weight, or even feet as you mentioned) is wrong to me. Some things you can't help.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jul 7, 2008)

Surlysomething said:


> I think it's extremely unfair to offer one size seating. The world is NOT made up of one size only people. It is blatant discrimination not having seats for everyone. Plain and simple. They don't make bigger seats because they won't be able to fit more onto the plane and make more money, that's what it boils down to. It's bogus and should be out-lawed. You're talking about underwear? Compared to the dignity of how many 'overweight' people? Hello, the world is made up of thin people, average people, and big people. Not one should be left out. Period. Make a row of bigger seats!! Problem solved.
> 
> The airlines need to suck it up and get with the real world. The average size is 12/14. Tickets go up when fuel goes up. Such is life.



The airlines, as with any other industry, are in the business to make a profit for shareholders. Period. 

I am anywhere from an 8-12, so I suppose I fit into the "average" size, and I am of average height. I fly a lot, and I am very comfortable in an airplane seat. The experience of flying itself is uncomfortable for me -- crying babies, children kicking the back of my seat, my own little guy acting up, unpleasant body odors, etc. But the airline seat itself is not a problem. It *was* a problem, when I was much heavier than I am now. 

A few years ago, my husband was seated next to a very large man who was occupying more than half of my husband's seat. When my husband attempted to sit down, he found that he couldn't, because the aisle armrest was fixed in place. The stewardess noticed that my husband was struggling, and she told the man that since the flight was fully booked, he would have to leave the plane and take the next flight. He became outraged, and made a huge scene. My husband was mortified. He hadn't even made a complaint -- he was simply trying to find a way to get into the seat that he'd paid for. What should have been done, then? We can argue that the airlines are entirely at fault, but again ... they are simply doing what we allow all other businesses to do: capitalize on their profits in a manner that the market will allow. 

I think that the problem really is with us (society in general). We want to pay rock bottom prices, and we're willing to give up a lot to get things as cheaply as possible. Personally, I will suffer a lot of inconvenience and give up all of the so-called "frills" (such as meals and free beverages) in order to pay the very least amount possible. This is obviously true for most of us, since airlines *are* cutting back on frills, they *do* make the experience incredibly unpleasant for most of us ... and yet, we continue to fly.


----------



## ThatIsThat (Jul 7, 2008)

Tooz said:


> Hate to say this, but I take what you are saying with a grain of salt as you are a thin person (and probably have always been). I guess the concept of people being penalized because they are too big in any sense (height, weight, or even feet as you mentioned) is wrong to me. Some things you can't help.


Then how do you feel about the "discrimination" on the skinny end in clothing stores? I can literally only buy normally designer clothing (which I don't necessarily have the money to spend on regularly) because I cannot find sizes small enough at regular stores. Old Navy? Smallest sizes all too big. The Gap? Too big. And unfortunately the little girls sections are not that fashionable. You could easily say that's discrimination, but I don't. Most of the people that shop at those stores are not a size 0/xxs, so why should they make those sizes? Sure, they'll lose those small customers, but having the more inflated sizes appeals more to their market. It's business sense, not discrimination or penalization. If you want to think of it that way, then likewise few the "oversized for the seats" people as penalizing the airlines, because it is driving up their costs.

Also, what alternate solution would you propose to the problem of larger seats vs. too high of prices and potentially fewer airlines? And aside from me being mostly thin all my life, what other logical flaws did you find in my argument?


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 7, 2008)

I thought this was a size acceptance site. Pretty interesting.

Like I said, why not put a row of larger seats? I don't see the big deal in that. Charge a little more for them. Whatever it takes to make up for the loss of the tiny seats.

It seams easy to me.

The airlines are also in the business of people. And they're pissing a lot off.



Up here, in Canada. We have negative sizing. You know, like -0. So maybe you should move up here. Haha. We however do NOT have plus sizes at Old Navy.


----------



## Chimpi (Jul 7, 2008)

Fat Brian said:


> If they are going to charge by weight, they should weigh you and all of your luggage.



Actually, I think that is an incredible and sensible idea.



TraciJo67 said:


> I think that the problem really is with us (society in general). We want to pay rock bottom prices, and we're willing to give up a lot to get things as cheaply as possible. Personally, I will suffer a lot of inconvenience and give up all of the so-called "frills" (such as meals and free beverages) in order to pay the very least amount possible. This is obviously true for most of us, since airlines *are* cutting back on frills, they *do* make the experience incredibly unpleasant for most of us ... and yet, we continue to fly.



I know I am probably one in a very few, but I would pay a little more money if it meant my purchased item or experience was a little more comfortable or higher quality. I'm not sure I would want to pay more for a seat just because it's a bit larger, but the whole "more labor to make such a seat" fact is true and would justify a higher price (not including the cost of replacing a row or two for larger seats). I think the issue with that is that we're comparing what we would like now with what was done in the first place. Had planes been designed for larger seats in the first place and prices were higher (in essence we would have no idea what the seating and prices would be like now as it is) there would not be as much of a problem. Then again, that's not the way it was, and we can't even use that as a validating point. 



CherchezLaFemme said:


> Then how do you feel about the "discrimination" on the skinny end in clothing stores? I can literally only buy normally designer clothing (which I don't necessarily have the money to spend on regularly) because I cannot find sizes small enough at regular stores. Old Navy? Smallest sizes all too big. The Gap? Too big. And unfortunately the little girls sections are not that fashionable. You could easily say that's discrimination, but I don't.



I do.
I know you didn't ask me, but I'm saying anyway. I think that's discrimination and it should change. Naturally I'm not going to complain for the fact that some stores cater to larger people, but I think it would be _awesome_ if all stores carried all sizes - 0 to 100. Then again, that would not leave much room for contrasting styles and differences.


----------



## LillyBBBW (Jul 8, 2008)

Surlysomething said:


> I thought this was a size acceptance site. Pretty interesting.
> 
> Like I said, why not put a row of larger seats? I don't see the big deal in that. Charge a little more for them. Whatever it takes to make up for the loss of the tiny seats.
> 
> It seams easy to me.



Because skinny people would buy them. The same kind of person who would use a handicapped stall, get a fake tag and park in a handicapped space, see an old lady get on the subway and not get up to let her sit down. The world is clogged with ignorant people like this. Or the airline could require that you line up in front of a shadowy silhouette that says, "You Must Be This Tall/Wide/Old To Perchase The Specialty Seat Upgrade," for which someone somewhere will find it descriminatory for some reason and complain. And yes, this is a size acceptance site.



Surlysomething said:


> The airlines are also in the business of people. And they're pissing a lot off.
> 
> 
> 
> Up here, in Canada. We have negative sizing. You know, like -0. So maybe you should move up here. Haha. We however do NOT have plus sizes at Old Navy.



There would be a mass exodus to Canada if you carried plus sizes, talls, petites, pear, busty, cherry belly, dwarf and badonkadonk butt sizes too. The business of pleasing them all isn't very lucrative so these chain stores deal in averages. It sucks but it means we have to keep our eyes peeled for resources, sales and alternatives like everyone else.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 8, 2008)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> Then how do you feel about the "discrimination" on the skinny end in clothing stores? I can literally only buy normally designer clothing (which I don't necessarily have the money to spend on regularly) because I cannot find sizes small enough at regular stores. Old Navy? Smallest sizes all too big. The Gap? Too big. And unfortunately the little girls sections are not that fashionable. You could easily say that's discrimination, but I don't. Most of the people that shop at those stores are not a size 0/xxs, so why should they make those sizes? Sure, they'll lose those small customers, but having the more inflated sizes appeals more to their market. It's business sense, not discrimination or penalization. If you want to think of it that way, then likewise few the "oversized for the seats" people as penalizing the airlines, because it is driving up their costs.
> 
> Also, what alternate solution would you propose to the problem of larger seats vs. too high of prices and potentially fewer airlines? And aside from me being mostly thin all my life, what other logical flaws did you find in my argument?



Forever 21. Metropark. Delia's. Abercrombie. Hell, Hot Topic. This is just off the top of my head. The mall is FULL of clothing stores for thin people. I have a hard time believing you can't find ANYTHING.

I'm simply saying you WILL view it differently as a thin person. I will view it differently as a fat person, and my argument will probably be different.


----------



## TraciJo67 (Jul 8, 2008)

Surlysomething said:


> I thought this was a size acceptance site. Pretty interesting.



So if I disagree with your opinion that people who occupy more than one seat shouldn't ever have to pay for a second one (if the flight is fully booked), I'm not into size acceptance? Are you really suggesting that?



> The airlines are also in the business of people. And they're pissing a lot off.



The airlines are an entity unto themselves. Normal business practices do not seem to apply to them. And I think that part of the problem is that they cooperate with each other (cough ... price rigging) just enough to ensure the status quo.

Years ago, I worked in customer service/inside sales. It was in an environment with heavy competition. We bent over backwards to kiss the hindquarters of our clients. Late last year, I revisited that experience by taking a part-time weekend job as a Starbucks barista. It was for far (far, far) less money, but was every bit as demanding, with the added "bonus" of being physically taxing as well. I was expected to pucker up (and sometimes bend over, at least figuratively ) while doing that job, too. Starbucks has serious competition, and they rely on creating an experience to build a loyal base of customers. I understood that, and would have been glad to keep a plastic smile plastered to my insincere face at all times (what I wasn't happy with was schlepping out toilets at 11:00 p.m., but I digress). Starbucks baristas have earned my respect, FWIW ... which is about $4.63 plus a $.37 tip.

Point here ... in an environment of heavy competition, consumers have choices, and they speak with their pocketbooks. 

With regard to the airlines, we've spoken (the general 'we'). We troll websites advertising the lowest possible fare, and we don't care which airline it is. We will purchase the cheapest ticket we can, and for most of us, getting a decent flight time without any layovers is the best we can (hope to) expect. Just yesterday, a flight crew in New York cancelled a flight because the passengers were "mean" to them (they showed up very late for the flight, and as they attempted to board the plane, they were 'booed'). This kind of abuse of authority, arrogant display of power, complete disregard for the comfort and convenience of their paying customers ... momentarily astonished me. And then I shrugged it off as yet more evidence that the airlines aren't accountable to us. We don't force them to be. We'd rather continue paying $199 for that round-trip ticket to Fort Lauderdale, comfort and convenience (and simple human dignity) bedamned.


----------



## Surlysomething (Jul 8, 2008)

TraciJo67 said:


> So if I disagree with your opinion that people who occupy more than one seat shouldn't ever have to pay for a second one (if the flight is fully booked), I'm not into size acceptance? Are you really suggesting that?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I still think it's unfortunate and harassment laws _should_ apply (in a perfect world)

I would rather drive anyway. That way I can crank my music.


----------



## ThatIsThat (Jul 8, 2008)

Tooz said:


> Forever 21. Metropark. Delia's. Abercrombie. Hell, Hot Topic. This is just off the top of my head. The mall is FULL of clothing stores for thin people. I have a hard time believing you can't find ANYTHING.
> 
> I'm simply saying you WILL view it differently as a thin person. I will view it differently as a fat person, and my argument will probably be different.


All of those places are consistently too big, except some of the premium denim at Metropark. Delia's is so big it's a joke. 
While I understand that perspectives are different, you still have yet to have pointed out a fundamental logical flaw in my prior arguments or provided a better solution to the fact that people won't be willing to pay the higher priced airline tickets and how so many people will travel (whether cross-country, abroad, etc.) if the airlines go under because no one will fly at such high prices if they add bigger seats.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 8, 2008)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> All of those places are consistently too big, except some of the premium denim at Metropark. Delia's is so big it's a joke.
> While I understand that perspectives are different, you still have yet to have pointed out a fundamental logical flaw in my prior arguments or provided a better solution to the fact that people won't be willing to pay the higher priced airline tickets and how so many people will travel (whether cross-country, abroad, etc.) if the airlines go under because no one will fly at such high prices if they add bigger seats.



I don't NEED to point a flaw out, hun.

I said I FEEL it is wrong. I mean morally. I explained why. It's simply easier for you to adopt said viewpoint because you ARE a smaller person and thus you don't have a problem with seating. That's all there is to it.

And clothing aside, I just can't muster up sympathy. Soz. Don't care if it makes me a bad person. Fat people have to deal with bullshit from every angle, not just clothing or being taken seriously. *Shrug*


----------



## ThatIsThat (Jul 8, 2008)

Tooz said:


> I don't NEED to point a flaw out, hun.
> 
> I said I FEEL it is wrong. I mean morally. I explained why. It's simply easier for you to adopt said viewpoint because you ARE a smaller person and thus you don't have a problem with seating. That's all there is to it.
> 
> And clothing aside, I just can't muster up sympathy. Soz. Don't care if it makes me a bad person. Fat people have to deal with bullshit from every angle, not just clothing or being taken seriously. *Shrug*


 Well I figured that you probably wouldn't be able to sympathize, perhaps empathize on some level, since all of my bigger friends likewise have a difficult time shopping (makes for fun hunt the strange size shopping escapades =D). 

I just _morally_ believe that if you are going to criticize and complain about a situation or problem, not being able to suggest a reasonable alternative is a failure to act; that is, your voice will never be heard if you don't offer another solution that will make the problem at least somewhat better. As in utilitarianism and John Stuart Mills' ideas, getting what you want means getting heard about a new idea that will leave our society (in this case specifically, air travelers) with the greatest good for the greatest number. Otherwise, what's the point in complaining? =/


----------



## Tooz (Jul 8, 2008)

CherchezLaFemme said:


> Well I figured that you probably wouldn't be able to sympathize, perhaps empathize on some level, since all of my bigger friends likewise have a difficult time shopping (makes for fun hunt the strange size shopping escapades =D).
> 
> I just _morally_ believe that if you are going to criticize and complain about a situation or problem, not being able to suggest a reasonable alternative is a failure to act; that is, your voice will never be heard if you don't offer another solution that will make the problem at least somewhat better. As in utilitarianism and John Stuart Mills' ideas, getting what you want means getting heard about a new idea that will leave our society (in this case specifically, air travelers) with the greatest good for the greatest number. Otherwise, what's the point in complaining? =/



I'm stating my opinion in an online forum on a thread ON the subject. This actually never comes up for me at any other point in my life-- as I said (I think), I've never needed more than one ticket, and I've flown a lot. The reality is there are no good solutions-- making new planes, making new rows, whatever-- it's just an area of life that I feel is unjust and that's that. I don't bring my opinion up unless the subject is brought up, as a result.


----------



## largenlovely (Jul 8, 2008)

I can't imagine being *forced* to buy a second seat...I've been flying quite a bit over the last number of years and have only had a couple instances where i actually had to sit next to someone. Flying to L.A. and back was horrible...completely full flights. I was smaller back then so it was sorta doable. 

Most often gate agents have been super helpful in making sure i had the seat with nobody next to me. I was upgraded to first class once even, which was really nice  When we'd book trips from Atlanta it was much easier because it was a direct flight to NY..and i could check how many seats had been sold on a particular flight and gauge whether or not it would fill up before i left. That has always worked. Though, now that i'm back in Mobile, i have to have connecting flights (which sucks ass). On my last trip, i made it up to NY fine, but on the way home when i got to Atlanta...the flight from Atlanta to Mobile was full. The gate agent was super nice and just put me on the next flight. I had to wait a number of hours longer ..i think six hours...but i didn't care. As long as i was able to have a free seat next to me i was all good. 

I have mixed opinions about the price of seating. I understand arguments from both sides, but at the same time i don't want to spend a shitload of money to fly somewhere just because i'm fat. Surely there can be a compromise that can be reached that would satisfy both parties of some kind...i mean, if you buy one seat and the flight is full and are willing to wait on the next flight...i know that's not always possible..but ...i dunno...to me, i'd be perfectly fine doing that. Though, it's not like i have a set schedule i have to keep either. I dunno... not sure what should happen in this situation.


----------



## fatgirlflyin (Jul 8, 2008)

Tooz said:


> I'm stating my opinion in an online forum on a thread ON the subject. This actually never comes up for me at any other point in my life-- as I said (I think), I've never needed more than one ticket, and I've flown a lot. The reality is there are no good solutions-- making new planes, making new rows, whatever-- it's just an area of life that I feel is unjust and that's that. I don't bring my opinion up unless the subject is brought up, as a result.



It is absoultely unfair and I hate being put in the position to have to ask someone to purchase a second seat. I avoid it at all costs.



largenlovely said:


> I have mixed opinions about the price of seating. I understand arguments from both sides, but at the same time i don't want to spend a shitload of money to fly somewhere just because i'm fat. Surely there can be a compromise that can be reached that would satisfy both parties of some kind...i mean, if you buy one seat and the flight is full and are willing to wait on the next flight...i know that's not always possible..but ...i dunno...to me, i'd be perfectly fine doing that. Though, it's not like i have a set schedule i have to keep either. I dunno... not sure what should happen in this situation.



I dont like that people are asked to pay full price for a second seat. I would feel much better if it were only a $50 charge. Especially on flights that go out with empty seats and the money is refunded anyway. It just doesn't seem right.


----------



## Tooz (Jul 8, 2008)

Ella Bella said:


> It is absoultely unfair and I hate being put in the position to have to ask someone to purchase a second seat. I avoid it at all costs.
> 
> 
> 
> I dont like that people are asked to pay full price for a second seat. I would feel much better if it were only a $50 charge. Especially on flights that go out with empty seats and the money is refunded anyway. It just doesn't seem right.



You make a good point-- discount the second seat. As it is, I can't even afford the 240 bucks it takes to go to Boston right now-- if I were to need a second seat? Almost 500 dollars? Forget it, I can drive round trip for 188 in gas.


----------



## largenlovely (Jul 8, 2008)

yeah i think i could "get on board" with that lol ...that way it's not ridiculously overpriced. and maybe they could try to exhaust other options before that too? it seems there is always someone on standby..maybe if the person only bought one seat and was willing to give it up for the next flight..a person flying standby could take that one. 



Ella Bella said:


> I dont like that people are asked to pay full price for a second seat. I would feel much better if it were only a $50 charge. Especially on flights that go out with empty seats and the money is refunded anyway. It just doesn't seem right.


----------



## TCUBOB (Jul 8, 2008)

As a big and tall guy, I've never expected anything extra from an industry that has gone from an expensive luxury to an affordable carryall to a searching-the-seat-cushions for change operation. I don't find it discriminating that their seats don't fit me; I find it to be a defensible part of the "90% rule," aka make things to fit 90% of the people....to do otherwise is to over engineer and/or waste money in many cases.

Also, I grew up in Texas, home of the no-frill airline, so I'm pretty much used to not getting much when I fly. 

Yes, as a tall person, I can try and get (or buy) into a row that has more leg room. No, as a fat person, I can't buy into a row of larger seats. Here's the problem: How many two-seat fat rows do you put on the plane? Two? Four? What if not enough people want to buy them? Do you sell them at regular price and kiss your razor-thin budget goodbye?

I haven't been able to put a tray table fully horizontal or lean back without my neck flopping over the top of the seat in years. Furthermore, I always end up behind someone who believes that their right to recline their seat is enshrined in the Constitution, and the fact that my knees are preventing that by their very existence is an affront to all that they should, nay MUST, have. I've had people complain to the flight attendants about me "preventing" their seat from reclining and either demanding that I allow them to do so or that I be moved. One guy wanted the airline to punish/fine me for his discomfort in having to sit upright.

As for clothing, I don't go to the mall expecting to find something in my size in any non big and tall store. I don't consider that discrimination; I consider it selling to the most common sizes, based on some market research or something that they have. I happily order my clothes and shoes online (which I realize isn't always practical for women), but I get what I want without being hip-deep in a bunch of people who I don't give a shit about, given bad service by clerks who don't give a damn, and having to schlep my purchases across Hell's Half Acre to get them back to my car/domicile. Color me happier.


----------



## 1300 Class (Jul 15, 2008)

> I haven't been able to put a tray table fully horizontal or lean back without my neck flopping over the top of the seat in years. Furthermore, I always end up behind someone who believes that their right to recline their seat is enshrined in the Constitution, and the fact that my knees are preventing that by their very existence is an affront to all that they should, nay MUST, have.


+1, yep, totally know all about that. 



> As for clothing, I don't go to the mall expecting to find something in my size in any non big and tall store. I don't consider that discrimination; I consider it selling to the most common sizes, based on some market research or something that they have.


Same here. +2.


----------

