Wait....are they serious? Southwest Airlines making offensive calls on passenger's "offensive" attire
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.

Ohh, Southwest Airlines. We all love them don't we? Cheap flights, sarcastic pilots over the intercom...? They offer seemingly friendly service don't they? Well - not if you are female wearing a tank top with anything bigger than an A cup. Apparently, flight attendants on Southwest Airlines have taken it upon themselves to make judgment calls on young women's attire aboard their flights. So much so that they have harassed and humiliated multiple young women on their "inappropriate" and "offensive" attire and almost kicked one of them off her flight. The only response the young woman received when asking which part of her outfit was "offensive" was simply - "all of it." 

 "All of what," exactly? Kyla Ebbert, 23, was the first to receive wide national attention for her incident with Southwest earlier this month. She was told to "cover up" for wearing, what I would say, is a regular mini skirt and for showing the natural amount of cleavage one would see on any woman who has breasts. But apparently, Ebbert is not the only victim. In fact, Setara Quassim and at least one other woman also encountered similar “offensive” humiliation with Southwest flight attendants.  All I have to say is this - Did seeing cleavage serve as the horrid reminder that women have breasts? It is hard to understand what people are so offended by, when in fact, it's these Southwest employee's actions that should be deemed offensive. Anyone?



Why were these young women targeted as being "lewd and offensive" and how did their attire in any way excuse thier differential treatment from other paying customers?  Customers alike should be able to wear whatever they want in a business environment where the only goal is to get them from point A to point B. A passenger's outfit, within reasonable limits, should have no bearing on a customer's freedom to ride the airplane as long as it does not infringe on the basic freedom of others to do the same. Not to mention that Southwest has NO known dress code policy with any real guidelines that don’t lend themselves to unfair discretion.

As far as I am concerned, this is classic sexism. It seems more accurate that they were basing their judgments on unfair sexist stereotypes indicating that women dressing in a particular way implies that they are "slutty." Whatever that means.... To mention a point made by the brilliant Jessica Valenti on Feministing.com, it is puzzling that the victims to this harassment have all been attractive and not lacking in the "boobie department." It seems to me that the mere fact that these women are well endowed and attractive, and the fact that they probably look that way in almost anything they wear, would deem them "offensive" to the average man or woman. (Yes, women can be sexists too...). The fact of the matter is that we live in a society that still demonizes the idea of pronounced female sexuality. And to make matters worse, capitalism has framed women's sexuality as expressed through the shape of her natural born body (her breasts!!) and clothing. Better known as the bimbo-with-big -tits stereotype. So I think it’s fair to say that it was not these women's outfits that were truly offensive in and of themselves, but it was the fact that a seemingly sexual young woman presents an ideological threat to our classic constructions of what women should be. Women are threatened because we are trained to compete for "beauty" (aka male desirability) and men are taught to justify their sexual impulses as "natural" and uncontrollable. Therefore, the impulse is always to blame the women. Sexual women, not men, are deemed offensive, and so it is discrimination.

I am not denying that people should be aware of potential responses to their appearance; but people should not be punished for other’s unfounded discomfort with varying forms of self expression. These young women deserve the right to wear and do as they please without judgment. Women are too often blamed for men's responses to their attire or attractiveness, which diverts the fact that men, and women, should also be held responsible for their reactions to such situations. Women have the right to be treated with respect and feel safe no matter how short the skirt. This is important especially because it is too often that men justify incidents of rape and abuse with the idea that their women victims were “asking for it” with their attire. 

But back to Southwest – the behavior of their sexist flight attendants should serve as proof that women are still being held to ridiculous stereotypes that many claim no longer hurt women. These girls deserve equal customer service, and the fact of the matter is that they were unjustly humiliated because stereotypes placing such importance on physical appearance still exist. If someone is wearing something they didn’t like, the employees should not have assumed that these women would offend other customers. And if there was a complaint, then the OFFENDED customer should have been moved to make both them and the women more comfortable. That would have been REAL customer service. Treating these innocent passengers like this is sickening and should be inexcusable. Much less a joke.


Reader Comments

Comments are closed for this post.

  
When in rome.
By Guy Sep 18th 2007 at 9:12 am EDT
"All I have to say is this - Did seeing cleavage serve as the horrid reminder that women have breasts? It is hard to understand what people are so offended by, when in fact, it's these Southwest employee's actions that should be deemed offensive. Anyone?"

It wasn't the cleavage that she got in trouble for, it was the length of her skirt. I'll just get in trouble again with this but as a company they have the right to "refuse service to anyone" as long as it is not against what is written in the constitution...

But really if you think about it, it's okay because SouthWest said sorry and is now offering a "miniskirt fare sale." I kid you not.

Link
  
This is the right way to go about things.
By Superduperficial Sep 18th 2007 at 1:16 pm EDT
A company made a judgment call we don't like, consumers voted with their wallets and their eyeballs, the company backed down, nobody had to regulate anything.

Being a sex-positive feminist and all, I find SouthWest's reaction rather silly, too (especially considering their origins as the "Hot Pants" airline) -- though you are about a week or two late on blogging this. :)
True
By Jamie Friedman Sep 19th 2007 at 10:09 am EDT
And considering I just got access to this blog about 48 hours ago, I'm sorry I couldn't keep up to speed with you on that.
  
Flight Attendants think safety
By srogers Nov 27th 2007 at 6:39 am EST
Luckily for the traveling public, Flight Attendants think safety. That is why every year they have to evacuate and do emergency drills. Skimpy outfits are a safety hazard for passengers because they offer no protection from the multitude of injuries that can arise from an evacuation, especially the velcrose on the shoots,or hot metal on wings. Of course everyone is in denyal that it will ever happen to them. Give crew members a break. Skimpy means danger to all passengers and crew.
  
Campus Progress

Please remember that Campus Progress' terms of use do not allow promoting or endorsing any particular political party or candidate for office. Posts or comments that do this will be deleted.

Campus Progress