# On airplane now, large woman spilling onto me!



## heathpack

Ok, y'all, I've tried to be tolerant. Right now I am in an aisle seat on a transcontinental flight.

Literally wedged into the middle seat is a young woman of considerable size. She is about 4 inches wider than the seat, cannot just sit down, must force her derrière between the armrests.  

Because of her size, the dynamics of her body posture is that her arms do not hang straight down from her shoulders, they protrude out at a 45 degree angle into the "airspace" over my seat.  This means either her elbow is two inches from my right eye, or her shoulder and upper arm are resting on mine, depending on whether she has her arm in an "up" versus "down" position.  Her left arm and shoulder have been rubbing against me for the entirety of the flight.

Now she is playing a video game on her phone, causing her elbows to jut out even more to the side.  I have politely asked her to stop, pointing out that when she plays the game her arm rests on top of mine, which is touching the inside of (but not on top of) the armrest.  My request was met with a strange mute blinking silence, somewhat like the response one might expect from, say, a over-large goldfish.  She then went right back to playing her game.

To add insult to injury, she has also been farting up a storm.  

There, I feel better already, just writing this post.  But seriously, how many inches wider than the seat does one need to be to be required to purchase a second seat?!

H


----------



## spencersmama

I'm sorry for your pain right now, but I'm sure you'll see the humor in this post after the fact!


----------



## Ken555

Ouch. I assume the flight is full, and the flight attendants are unable to move you (or her)?

I am reminded of the circus revolving around Kevin Smith being booted from a Southwest flight... It certainly seems as though some standards are needed in order to guarantee the comfort of all, hopefully done in a respectful and thoughtful manner.


----------



## pjrose

Sorry, Heath, really sorry for your misery.  I'd send {HUGS} but you probably don't want any claustrophobic physical contact, virtual or otherwise, at the moment.  I'm sure you'll let us know if/how you survived the flight.


----------



## klpca

I feel for you - there's nothing worse than being uncomfortable on a long flight. And the game playing/blank look were the toppers, I'm sure. My husband calls that behavior, "life without boundaries".

Btw, many on flyertalk file complaints with the airlines about the oversize issue. I know that many do it in anticipation of receiving "compensation" but I would do it just to get them to acknowledge the issue. If enough people complain, maybe they will come up with some type of solution that can accommodate everyone.


----------



## heathpack

klpca said:


> I feel for you - there's nothing worse than being uncomfortable on a long flight. And the game playing/blank look were the toppers, I'm sure. My husband calls that behavior, "life without boundaries".
> 
> Btw, many on flyertalk file complaints with the airlines about the oversize issue. I know that many do it in anticipation of receiving "compensation" but I would do it just to get them to acknowledge the issue. If enough people complain, maybe they will come up with some type of solution that can accommodate everyone.



I actually think there is justification for a complaint letter, we were in an exit row seat and this lady could not readily get up out of her seat because of the wedging in.  Good lord, though, the last thing I would want is some sort of compensation!  This was a Delta flight & I've been trying to shake myself free of their FF program for years.  Every time I use up my miles, I somehow earn some more and get sucked back in.  I _really_ do not like Delta Airlines.

I did eventually learn what the blank goldfish stare was all about- passive-aggressive hostility at being asked to not play the video game.  This later evolved into aggressive-aggressive hostility over my bumping her arm (yes, the one in my airspace, it seems her feeling was that because her arms could not retract into the column of space that defined by her seat, that I was not to occupy the areas of _my_ column of space that _she_ needed to intrude upon.  Logical, isnt it?).  Mr. H, who was across the aisle from me, took one for the team & swapped seats with me, I really needed out of that seat at that point.

I don't know what the solution to this issue is, but agree it is something that should be addressed by the airlines- its only going to become more of a problem as our nation's waistband continues to expand.

H


----------



## Ken555

If you're still on the flight... Get your camera and take a picture of the entire row. Nothing better than proof when you send that letter to Delta.


----------



## vacationhopeful

I would go be a ROYAL PEST (but pleasant) in the flight attendants' space. I would make it a non-issue with them, saying my breasts and upper arms had been elbowed, poked and used as armrests for the last 2+ hours and I needed a break.


----------



## dioxide45

Did she require a seatbelt extender? Someone of the size you describe seems like they would. If that is the case, they should not have been seated in an exit row. You can't be in an exit row if you require a seat belt extender.


----------



## dioxide45

heathpack said:


> its only going to become more of a problem as our nation's waistband continues to expand...
> 
> H



...and as the seats continue to get narrower. The seats are already too narrow for those that are considered average size.


----------



## dougp26364

The entitlement attitude shown by some really gets the best of me at times. When a gravitationally challanged person feels they have the right to intrude on another person paid for space, just because they're a big person, it really ticks me off. I guess this flyer feels that because they're big, they simply deserve more space.  

I once witnessed a man I would estimate at 400 lbs thow a fit on a NWA flight because he had a coach seat and they refused to bump him up to first class. He was throwing a temper tantrum and threatening legal action because he couldn't fit in a standard seat so it was NWA's responsiblity to put him in first class. He didn't seem to understand that first class was already full. He was demanding they bump someone back to his rear of the plane coach seat so he could have the seat they paid for or earned with their FF miles. 

We have become an entitlement society. Nothing is our fault and if something goes wrong, someone else must pay.


----------



## MommaBear

If people occupy two seats because of their size, they should pay for two seats. I don't think that is discrimination, I think it is logical. Sorry for your experience Heathpack.


----------



## theo

*Sorry --- but also THANKS...*



heathpack said:


> Ok, y'all, I've tried to be tolerant. Right now I am in an aisle seat on a transcontinental flight.
> 
> Literally wedged into the middle seat is a young woman of considerable size. She is about 4 inches wider than the seat, cannot just sit down, must force her derrière between the armrests.
> 
> Because of her size, the dynamics of her body posture is that her arms do not hang straight down from her shoulders, they protrude out at a 45 degree angle into the "airspace" over my seat.  This means either her elbow is two inches from my right eye, or her shoulder and upper arm are resting on mine, depending on whether she has her arm in an "up" versus "down" position.  Her left arm and shoulder have been rubbing against me for the entirety of the flight.
> 
> Now she is playing a video game on her phone, causing her elbows to jut out even more to the side.  I have politely asked her to stop, pointing out that when she plays the game her arm rests on top of mine, which is touching the inside of (but not on top of) the armrest.  My request was met with a strange mute blinking silence, somewhat like the response one might expect from, say, a over-large goldfish.  She then went right back to playing her game.
> 
> To add insult to injury, she has also been farting up a storm.
> 
> There, I feel better already, just writing this post.  But seriously, how many inches wider than the seat does one need to be to be required to purchase a second seat?!
> 
> H



I am genuinely sorry for your "flight plight", but I am also very grateful for the belly laugh you've provided; I almost wet my pants at your descriptions. If you're not a humor writer, you should be. :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: 

Seriously, after wiping away tears of laughter, I wholeheartedly agree with the observations above regarding the sorry state of our "entitled" society. The "oversize" issue entirely aside, the *behavior* so artfully described is symptomatic of a complete lack of awareness or *any* consideration for impact on others.


----------



## Tia

I am guessing this problem is most of our fears come true. It's not in your control but you get to suffer because of the large person and the airlines seat size  . 

I recall sitting next to a larger lady recently who leaned into the aisle to avoid coming into my chair space.


----------



## siesta

it is easy to criticize a large/obese person and say its their lifestyle and diet, but unfortunately sometimes it is not just personal neglect, but it could be something genetic, or a disability that has caused them to gain weight, or even a medical condition like something to do with adrenal glands or Prader-Willi syndrome(in fact 1% of obese people are due to medical causes, not because they are "american slobs"). My guess is the OP doesnt have a personal experience regarding this type of issue, or maybe they would be more understanding and forgiving of the situation. Especially considering he posted this just after Easter/Passover (christian/jewish spirit??) I'm sure she was just as uncomfortable as you, and your comment about her phone .. Should she sit there with her arms crossed for you?

Sure its not an ideal situation, but you can always buy the seat next to you to ensure it doesnt happen again... or fly private.


----------



## akp

*How did you do?*

I'm curious how the rest of the flight went?

If you're unlucky enough to have this happen again, put this in the hands of the flight attendent. Politely but firmly refuse to take your seat because you do not fit.  Remain standing (and remain very very polite!)

The POS (person of size) should be re-seated, or you should be moved to another seat.  

I'm a regular over at Flyertalk and have read several threads about this issue, though it has never happened to me.  I'll try to find the thread and link it if I can, but the above is my recollection from the thread. There is also some airline legalese about being invoking IDB ("involuntarily denied boarding") but that was debated hotly and I don't remember the conclusion.  

I hope you are having a better day today!

Anita

Edited to add:  There is no judgment implied about why the person is larger than the seat.   It does not matter whether this person is heavy because she over indulges or because her genes are coded that way.  The issue is that the OP did not receive the seat he paid for.


----------



## ronparise

There is another post somewhere here on TUG, where the op was complaining about some injustice that she should be compensated for. and the consensus was "stuff happens"  It may not be right, but you just have to accept it

I see airplane travel in much the same way. Vacations start and end with a miserable uncomfortable day...with any luck the time in between made it worthwhile

When I compare the size of the people I see  on any city street, to the size of the typical airplane seat; its clear that your problem has to be a common problem. When I fly, I assume that it will be a miserable experience, and if its not..thats the surprise...I see airplane travel as no better than than an old greyhound bus. I have come to accept that Im not paying for a seat...Im paying for transport. If they get me to my destination...Im happy.  

Be happy its only farts...You know she wont fit into the toilet

My last trip I sat next to a young mother holding a baby  on her lap. Why her carry on didnt have to be shoved under the seat or in the overhead bin  is a mystery to me.


----------



## dougp26364

siesta said:


> it is easy to criticize a large/obese person and say its their lifestyle and diet, but unfortunately sometimes it is not just personal neglect, but it could be something genetic, or a disability that has caused them to gain weight, or even a medical condition like something to do with adrenal glands or Prader-Willi syndrome(*in fact 1% of obese people are due to medical causes, not because they are "american slobs"). *My guess is the OP doesnt have a personal experience regarding this type of issue, or maybe they would be more understanding and forgiving of the situation. Especially considering he posted this just after Easter/Passover (christian/jewish spirit??) I'm sure she was just as uncomfortable as you, and your comment about her phone .. Should she sit there with her arms crossed for you?
> 
> Sure its not an ideal situation, but you can always buy the seat next to you to ensure it doesnt happen again... or fly private.



1% is a pretty low number. 

Yes there are some that can't help it but, there are many more who haven't learned that eating 5,000 calories per day is a bad idea. 

Regardless of the cause, if you're big, you still do not have the right to another persons space. Regardless of the reason for being large you should be considerate of others. It's obvious the person being talked about in this thread cares not for the discomfort she's causing another person. She's big and that's just to bad for everyone else. Suck it up because she's taking your space. 

Who cares why she's big. I only care about the indiference shown to others.

And why should I have to buy two seats or fly private? Shouldn't the person who can't fit into the seat be the one buying the second seat or fly private? After all it's their condition and not mine. Again, entitlement. I'm large so I'm entitled to do nothing. Everyone else must pay for my condition. Sorry, I don't think so.


----------



## IngridN

siesta said:


> it is easy to criticize a large/obese person and say its their lifestyle and diet, but unfortunately sometimes it is not just personal neglect, but it could be something genetic, or a disability that has caused them to gain weight, or even a medical condition like something to do with adrenal glands or Prader-Willi syndrome(in fact 1% of obese people are due to medical causes, not because they are "american slobs"). My guess is the OP doesnt have a personal experience regarding this type of issue, or maybe they would be more understanding and forgiving of the situation. Especially considering he posted this just after Easter/Passover (christian/jewish spirit??) I'm sure she was just as uncomfortable as you, and your comment about her phone .. Should she sit there with her arms crossed for you?
> 
> Sure its not an ideal situation, but you can always buy the seat next to you to ensure it doesnt happen again... or fly private.


You've got to be kidding...


----------



## dougp26364

ronparise said:


> There is another post somewhere here on TUG, where the op was complaining about some injustice that she should be compensated for. and the consensus was "stuff happens"  It may not be right, but you just have to accept it
> 
> I see airplane travel in much the same way. Vacations start and end with a miserable uncomfortable day...with any luck the time in between made it worthwhile
> 
> When I compare the size of the people I see  on any city street, to the size of the typical airplane seat; its clear that your problem has to be a common problem. When I fly, I assume that it will be a miserable experience, and if its not..thats the surprise...I see airplane travel as no better than than an old greyhound bus. I have come to accept that Im not paying for a seat...Im paying for transport. If they get me to my destination...Im happy.
> 
> Be happy its only farts...You know she wont fit into the toilet
> 
> My last trip I sat next to a young mother holding a baby  on her lap. Why her carry on didnt have to be shoved under the seat or in the overhead bin  is a mystery to me.



The other thread is about liablity, which is not the case here. In this case, someone has paid for space on a plane but can not enjoy that space because of someone else. Many airlines have rules. Rules can be enforced. This is a different situation all together.


----------



## theo

*Well said!*



dougp26364 said:


> <snip> Regardless of the cause, if you're big, you still do not have the right to another persons space. Regardless of the reason for being large you should be considerate of others. It's obvious the person being talked about in this thread cares not for the discomfort she's causing another person. She's big and that's just to bad for everyone else. Suck it up because she's taking your space.
> 
> Who cares why she's big. I only care about the indiference shown to others.



Beautifully and succinctly stated. 

I would only add my personal opinion that if *anyone* has to consider buying a "second seat" or "fly private" in such a situation, it should *ONLY* be the individual who can't fit into just one seat (for _whatever_ reason, medical or otherwise, it matters not one bit) --- NOT any other paying customer who *can* fit into a single seat and has paid full freight for the indisputable right to occupy their own assigned space --- *ALONE*!


----------



## mav

I sorry to read of your plight! I am sure you are miserable but I could not help but chuckle as I read your post. I have been in your place before and it is NOT a nice flight. Try this, go to the galley and very nicely explain your plight to the stewardess/steward. If there is an empty seat even if it is in an upgraded seat they just might move you. It worked for me. But the key is being polite and tactful. The flight crews are often over worked and stressed because there are a lot of changes going on in their jobs. I have found if you are polite they can be VERY helpful. Good luck.


----------



## IngridN

So far DH and I have been fortunate when flying together. DH not so lucky on biz travel, although not to this extent. Many stories where he tries to be accommodating by oozing out into the aisle only to be whacked by the food cart! I agree with others who have suggested taking it up with the flight attendant. I can't imagine going thru what you have. There's a difference between a very large sized person and such a large sized person that clearly should have purchased 2 seats.

Ingrid


----------



## Ridewithme38

To be fair, while i may not be obese, at almost 6'3 and 210lbs, these airline seats are a tight fit, if i'm not in an exit row, my knees are sore for hours after the flight, if someone reclines, its all over and yes, even though i'm not 'large' the seats widths are tight also

I don't get how the Airlines can get away with the seat dimensions they use on flights...


----------



## presley

That should be filmed and sent in to America's Funniest Videos.


----------



## IngridN

Ridewithme38 said:


> To be fair, while i may not be obese, at almost 6'3 and 210lbs, these airline seats are a tight fit, if i'm not in an exit row, my knees are sore for hours after the flight, if someone reclines, its all over and yes, even though i'm not 'large' the seats widths are tight also
> 
> I don't get how the Airlines can get away with the seat dimensions they use on flights...



Ride...you're tiny compared to H's seat-mate!

Ingrid


----------



## dougp26364

Ridewithme38 said:


> To be fair, while i may not be obese, at almost 6'3 and 210lbs, these airline seats are a tight fit, if i'm not in an exit row, my knees are sore for hours after the flight, if someone reclines, its all over and yes, even though i'm not 'large' the seats widths are tight also
> 
> I don't get how the Airlines can get away with the seat dimensions they use on flights...



I feel you pain. I'm not nearly as tall as you but, I have issues fiting into the assigned space in the economy cabin. To that end, we often look for airlines with "stretch" seating for our longer flights. I prefer to pay for that little bit of extra space because I know that those in front of me are bound the recline their seats (as far as I'm concerned this is acceptable behavior since the seats are designed to recline). 

However, I don't feel I should be forced to pay for the addtional room because I'm flying next to someone who can't possibly fit in their assigned seat. I do so for my own comfort and so that I don't annoy someone else when I want to recline to sleep. Besides, in the economy section, if you recline and the person behind you needs to get up, it's the back of my seat they must grab in order to unwedge themselves from their seat. I've had my hair inadvertanly pulled more than once because there just isn't enough room.


----------



## siesta

IngridN said:


> You've got to be kidding...


 semi kidding, but some valid points of tolerance and understanding in there. But at least he wasnt on a spirit flight, she would have been on his lap.


----------



## theo

*Not at all funny, really...*



presley said:


> That should be filmed and sent in to America's Funniest Videos.



Some offended "plus size" lawyer somewhere would just *love* to see *that* happen, lawsuit at the ready... 

I don't actually find much about the reality of the situation *at all* amusing, personally. My laugh was solely at heathpack's artful choice of words and images in describing an otherwise thoroughly "not funny" dilemma.


----------



## Rose Pink

Someone once mentioned weighing the passenger as well as his luggage when charging for baggage.   Perhaps, we should be required to have our derriere's measured with calipers and charged for seating accordingly. Afterall, do any of us have any dignity left after being irradiated, stripped nearly naked and patted down?  

I found myself being very irritated once when I had paid for premium front row seating for a play.  The woman next to me was in her seat and mine.  I literally had to sit on my side. At intermission she moved to some empty seats in the second row.  If she hadn't, I would have.  

Seriously, you know when you are thaaaat big.  You know you need more than one seat.  You should buy two to accomodate yourself.  You should not expect someone else to pay for your extra width.


----------



## heathpack

This particular passenger did not need a seatbelt extender that I could tell.  I would say she was maybe 300 lbs?

The biggest issue was her body shape.  She carried her weight all over her body, including her back, her chest, her armpit region and her arms.  This forced her into a constant "arms akimbo" posture, with her arms/elbows jutting into my seat by about 4 inches.  If she held her arms low, her arms would press down on top of my arm.  If she held her arms high, she threatened to elbow me in the head.

When the plane would move ever so slightly up and down (which, I had never noticed before, planes do pretty much constantly), her sweatshirted arm would rub against my bare are- after several hours, this became pretty uncomfortable.  It was too warm to put on a jacket or cover up with a blanket.

But the worst thing was that shewas determined to fully entertain herself- play on her phone, watch the inboard TV (pushing on-screen buttons every minute or two).  So she was constantly moving around, which made her elbowing very irritating.  I felt like I was in a hockey game.

I am not totally heartless.  Would have felt a little badly for her if she seemed to care that she was all over my personal space, if she recognized that her body shape forced her elbows into the space occupied by my seat and sat relatively still reading a book or listening to music.  If she expressed even a whiff of regret when I asked her to stop playing her video game.

Later we saw her in the terminal- she could/did not walk normally-very slowly, her body moving from side to side when she walked.  It really was a safety issue to have her in an exit row seat. She could not get out of her seat quickly, she could not move easily through the exit row.

Ah, well, such is life.  I will try to find time to write a letter to Delta. The airlines need to come up with a good, palatable solution to this.

H


----------



## Elan

I bet the offending passenger ate too many mini pies...........


----------



## presley

Rose Pink said:


> I found myself being very irritated once when I had paid for premium front row seating for a play.  The woman next to me was in her seat and mine.  I literally had to sit on my side.
> 
> Seriously, you know when you are thaaaat big.  You know you need more than one seat.  You should buy two to accomodate yourself.  You should not expect someone else to pay for your extra width.



That has happened to me twice at Cirque du Solei.  I paid big bucks for a good seat only to have someone taking up their own seat plus half of mine.  

After the second time, I decided that I would only attend another show like that if I bought myself 2 seats, so that I could at least have one whole seat.  However, that makes me feel punished for not being obese.


----------



## Ridewithme38

presley said:


> That has happened to me twice at Cirque du Solei.  I paid big bucks for a good seat only to have someone taking up their own seat plus half of mine.
> 
> After the second time, I decided that I would only attend another show like that if I bought myself 2 seats, so that I could at least have one whole seat.  However, that makes me feel punished for not being obese.



This is why its so great doing things with a 6yr old, if i'm sitting next to a 'larger' person, i can still use up some of my daughters seat.


----------



## MomoD

*Can't stop laughing*

:hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: 

I have not laughed this much in ages. Not the because of the OP, but all the comments that have been posted since. I am sitting with tears running down my face. Ron you should be on the stage. 

I see airplane travel in much the same way. Vacations start and end with a miserable uncomfortable day...with any luck the time in between made it worthwhile


I so agree with the above statement.

When I compare the size of the people I see  on any city street, to the size of the typical airplane seat; its clear that your problem has to be a common problem. When I fly, I assume that it will be a miserable experience, and if its not..thats the surprise...I see airplane travel as no better than than an old greyhound bus. I have come to accept that Im not paying for a seat...Im paying for transport. If they get me to my destination...Im happy.  

Be happy its only farts...You know she wont fit into the toilet

My last trip I sat next to a young mother holding a baby  on her lap. Why her carry on didnt have to be shoved under the seat or in the overhead bin  is a mystery to me.[/QUOTE]


----------



## Passepartout

I feel your pain. Air travel today is no fun. Cramped seats, overloaded storage, overweight passengers, small children on laps. Planes are simply buses with wings. There is none of the 'glamour' of earlier air travel.

Heath, I understand your strategy of you and Mr. H taking cross-aisle seats on an intercontinental flight. Perhaps, though, in view of the circumstances, one or the other of you might have offered the overstuffed offender an aisle seat and you and your DH could have seated together and 'miss Piggy' (sorry, we saw the Muppets this weekend) would have spilled into the aisle so everyone could have enjoyed jostling her as they passed by.

It's all water under the bridge now, but just a possible solution to a difficult problem.

Wherever you are traveling, enjoy it!

Jim


----------



## PStreet1

One time when this situation happened to me, I complained to the flight attendants and was told "Regardless of what you think, he is a human being and deserves his seat."  I didn't think I had implied he wasn't a human being, but I had said that I deserved the seat I had paid for.  Finally, they moved me to another seat and my husband and the large man shared that row.  I felt like I was the one punished:  I was moved away from my husband and the large man got another seat to spill out into.

The last time it happened, the man was pleasant, polite, and cheerful.  He made every effort possible not to intrude into my seat, and I was not nearly as offended as I was the time before.  

It has happened often enough to us that we've abandoned our practice of having aisle seats across from each other.  We decided that increased the chances one of us would have a seat next to a person "of size" or with a lap child, etc.  Now, I take the middle seat or the window seat, figuring that most people "of size" won't take the window seat (there's no give at all there) if they can avoid it.  Obviously, there's no way to tell whether being the middle passenger has saved me from inconvenience or has merely increased my inconvenience by being in the middle. 

As to the seat belt extender rule, the last man didn't even ask for one.  He simply pretended to use the belt given by lifting his fat and passing the belt under it.  There would be no way to challenge him without really embarassing everyone by asking him to lift his fat and show a fastened seat belt--which he could not have done, but who would ask?  I suppose one could say that he wasn't a safety hazzard because there was no way he was coming out of the seat on an air bump.


----------



## slomac

Thanks for a good belly laugh. sorry you had to endure this but look at all the laughs you gave us all


----------



## sail27bill

Ridewithme38 said:


> This is why its so great doing things with a 6yr old, if i'm sitting next to a 'larger' person, i can still use up some of my daughters seat.



Ride this is why I love sitting next to my daughter! I am 5 feet 108 pounds and my 11 year old daughter is 52 inches and 70 pounds (if that).  The only time we appreciate being small is on airplanes.  We have sat next to big and tall guys, severely overweight women, etc. and we have just cuddled giving up the room to the other people who obviously needed it.  I have to say though, each of these people were always considerate and polite to me, even though they were squished like sardines.  I guess this is why I didn't mind.   That said, however, I would probably have been upset with the constant elbowing and lack of consideration shown by Heathpack's seatmate.  I understand that flying is tough, but that does not mean people should lack basic manners.  Couple this with the small seat size and people who love to lean back and it is a recipe for disaster.  My kids have been trained to be respecful, so flying with them is great.  My issue is the little monsters who love to kick our seats where the parent is there and does nothing. I have turned around and said something twice only to be ignored by the parent.  

Heathpack, I totally feel for you.  Hopefully your vacation makes up for the unpleasant flight and the rest of your time is spent pleasantly.

Anita


----------



## hypnotiq

dioxide45 said:


> ...and as the seats continue to get narrower. The seats are already too narrow for those that are considered average size.



Exactly. Not ignoring the fact that the OP has a legitimate gripe but this part is especially frustrating to me.

I'm 6'2, 208lbs. I don't even "fit in the seats" in coach (first/business is different). 

Even if I sit with my ass as far back as I can. My knees are in the seat in front of me, god forbid if they recline their seat (sorry if you're ever seated in front of me )  Not to mention my shoulders exceed the width of the seat.

It works out OK when my gf is flying with me, since she is 5'0 and tiny, so I can spill over her into her seat in comfort. However, if im flying by myself, I simply take an aisle seat and lean in the aisle and just get battered by the cart as it goes by. 

I did one flight from Philly to Milan in coach. NEVER AGAIN. I don't care what it costs, Im not sitting in coach ever again. Most miserable trip Ive EVER taken.


----------



## hypnotiq

Ridewithme38 said:


> To be fair, while i may not be obese, at almost 6'3 and 210lbs, these airline seats are a tight fit, if i'm not in an exit row, my knees are sore for hours after the flight, if someone reclines, its all over and yes, even though i'm not 'large' the seats widths are tight also
> 
> I don't get how the Airlines can get away with the seat dimensions they use on flights...



I already posted then read your post, which is pretty much exactly what I posted (Im 6'2 and 208).

I don't know who they use to measure these seats but it must be the oompa loompas (sp?) :rofl:


----------



## Patri

PStreet1 said:


> As to the seat belt extender rule, the last man didn't even ask for one.  He simply pretended to use the belt given by lifting his fat and passing the belt under it.  There would be no way to challenge him without really embarassing everyone by asking him to lift his fat and show a fastened seat belt--which he could not have done, but who would ask?  I suppose one could say that he wasn't a safety hazzard because there was no way he was coming out of the seat on an air bump.



Ahh, all these posts have me laughing too. Makes me look forward to our June flight!


----------



## pjrose

Rose Pink said:


> Someone once mentioned weighing the passenger as well as his luggage when charging for baggage.   Perhaps, we should be required to have our derriere's measured with calipers and charged for seating accordingly. Afterall, do any of us have any dignity left after being *irradiated*, stripped nearly naked and patted down?
> 
> I found myself being very *irritated* once when I had paid for premium front row seating for a play.  . . .



Rose, I had to read this three times before I realized my eyes were tricking me, and you weren't being *irradiated* when you paid for front row seating for the play... 



Elan said:


> I bet the offending passenger ate too many mini pies...........


  I was going to post that too....but didn't want to be offensive about the offender.   



MomoD said:


> :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:
> 
> I have not laughed this much in ages. Not the because of the OP, but all the comments that have been posted since. I am sitting with tears running down my face. . . . .
> 
> 
> 
> 
> My last trip I sat next to a young mother holding a baby  on her lap. Why her carry on didnt have to be shoved under the seat or in the overhead bin  is a mystery to me.
Click to expand...


Especially that last one! 

On a more serious note, just the other night we had front-row seats for a performance, and the man next to DH was disabled such that he had little control over arm and leg movements.  He didn't, but might well have been inadvertently elbowing/nudging/kicking DH during the whole performance.  Hmmm....what if he had been the passenger in the next seat?  Just food for thought.


----------



## justnosy

*how about this?*

Sorry to read about your uncomfortable flight.

I'm in the midst of planning a vacation to Universal Studios Florida. I've been reading the forums and there are plenty of threads about how initially the seats on the Forbidden Journey ride (Harry Potter World) prevented "oversize" individuals from riding (currently there are extended size seats available on the ride). There was a "trial" seat outside the ride that one can sit in and see if you "fit" - maybe the airlines should have two trial rows of seats available (two rows required so you can see how much room you'll have in front of you.)

But then I guess it can't be done since anyone singled out to "try" a seat will probably sue the airline...


----------



## rickandcindy23

I feel for you, truly I do.  I was in the middle seat once between a married couple.  They told me they are both too heavy to sit next to one another, it makes them uncomfortable.  All seats left on that flight were middle seats.  It was only a 1K mile flight, so it went quickly.


----------



## scrapngen

justnosy said:


> Sorry to read about your uncomfortable flight.
> 
> I'm in the midst of planning a vacation to Universal Studios Florida. I've been reading the forums and there are plenty of threads about how initially the seats on the Forbidden Journey ride (Harry Potter World) prevented "oversize" individuals from riding (currently there are extended size seats available on the ride). There was a "trial" seat outside the ride that one can sit in and see if you "fit" - maybe the airlines should have two trial rows of seats available (two rows required so you can see how much room you'll have in front of you.)
> 
> But then I guess it can't be done since anyone singled out to "try" a seat will probably sue the airline...



I am sure that would work, since everyone already uses the "trial" bag bin to make sure their carry-on will fit...:hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:


----------



## "Roger"

dioxide45 said:


> ...and as the seats continue to get narrower. The seats are already too narrow for those that are considered average size.


The room between seats (front to back) is definitely getting smaller (by about three inches when it was never that great to begin with).  Thus, the problems for taller people.  

I'm not sure that they are getting narrower.  (Someone can correct me if I am wrong.)  The very newest jets have been built slightly wider so that their seats are about one inch wider, not narrower.  With an older jet, taking a six across seating pattern as an example, there would be no advantage to making the seats narrower.  Two inches narrower would only widen the aisle by twelve inches, not provide enough room for a seventh seat.

The sad truth is that Americans are just getting wider.


----------



## MommaBear

ronparise said:


> My last trip I sat next to a young mother holding a baby  on her lap. Why her carry on didnt have to be shoved under the seat or in the overhead bin  is a mystery to me.



:rofl: 
You all have convinced me to pay for the upgrade to economy plus on the overnight flight back from Hawaii.


----------



## PStreet1

Obviously, lots of people have experienced this problem, and lots of people are talking about it.  The following ABC news item points out that the obese people's argument is that airlines are public conveyors and therefore all have a right to use them.  The other side is that everyone has a contract with the airlines for 100% of the space their purchase entitles them to.

http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/overwe...e-airlines-debate-continues/story?id=12932980

The Everyone-Is-Entitled-To-His-Or-Her-Whole-Seat Position: Those on the other side of the problem – travelers who find themselves squeezed by oversized seatmates – claim they shouldn't suffer because someone else is obese. Their contract with the airline entitles them to 100 percent of a seat, not the 90 percent or 80 percent or maybe 70 percent of a seat left after an obese traveler spills over into their limited space. An airline's failure to protect them against the encroachment is a violation of their contract of carriage.

My original call – confirmed after booth review – is that the most fundamental "right" here is the right of a traveler to 100 percent of the seat space he or she occupies. That's the contract a traveler has with an airline, and the airline should honor it. It trumps any claims that oversize travelers have to intrude on someone else's seat. Oversize travelers have the right to an equitable solution, but not necessarily one that doesn't cost more.


----------



## ampaholic

ronparise said:


> My last trip I sat next to a young mother holding a baby  on her lap. Why her carry on didnt have to be shoved under the seat or in the overhead bin  is a mystery to me.



Reminds me of a funny one:

_The flight attendant watched a passenger try to stuff his hopelessly overloaded bags into the overhead bin. 

Finally she informed him that he would have to check the oversized luggage. "When I fly other airlines," he said irritably, "I never have this problem!"

She smiled and said, "Sir, when you fly other airlines, I don't have this problem either."_

This whole thread reminds me of why "drive to" timeshares are a good idea! :hysterical:


----------



## Phydeaux

Just serves to wonder when airlines will begin charging fares based on the weight of the passenger and their baggage. I just don't understand why they haven't yet adopted this considering fuel costs are their primary expense. What are they waiting for?


----------



## Ridewithme38

Phydeaux said:


> Just serves to wonder when airlines will begin charging fares based on the weight of the passenger and their baggage. I just don't understand why they haven't yet adopted this considering fuel costs are their primary expense. What are they waiting for?



Thank you! I've often wondered what it would take for me to go on a diet....Turns out, that would work!


----------



## DebBrown

I would have a problem with this person being in the exit row.  If she is not capable of getting out of her seat or possibly through the emergency exit, then she is a danger to everyone.  As someone else mentioned, this comes up alot on FlyerTalk.  No one wants to share their seat with the large person in the next seat.  In our family, we have a healthy fear of being the one seated by a stranger.

Deb


----------



## fillde

Well, Heathpack, that was me sitting next to you. For your information, I don't have a weight problem, I have a height problem.


----------



## squeeze

theo said:


> I am genuinely sorry for your "flight plight", but I am also very grateful for the belly laugh you've provided; I almost wet my pants at your descriptions. If you're not a humor writer, you should be. :hysterical:
> 
> Seriously, after wiping away tears of laughter, I wholeheartedly agree with the observations above regarding the sorry state of our "entitled" society. The "oversize" issue entirely aside, the *behavior* so artfully described is symptomatic of a complete lack of awareness or *any* consideration for impact on others.




I completely agree!  

I sure hope Ms. Heatpack had a pair of nose plugs with her.:rofl: :hysterical: :hysterical: 

Sorry, Ms. Heatpack, but I can't imagine being in your position. Maybe you should have asked her if she was aware there was a bathroom on the plane.:annoyed: 

Being squeezed out of your seat is one thing, but being stunk out is sure another.:hysterical: You gave me such a giggle that I was nearly in tears.:hysterical:   

I sure hope you do write your letter and let us know what happens. At the very least, you deserve an apology.


----------



## squeeze

fillde said:


> Well, Heathpack, that was me sitting next to you. For your information, I don't have a weight problem, I have a height problem.





...........and maybe you should get your colon checked.  :ignore:  (ha!)


----------



## ScubaKat

:hysterical:   I loved your description of the situation.. I am sure it is not as funny sitting through it! :rofl:  I can't stand flying these days..  We were stuck on a full flight with a 2 year old for 15 hours.. she had her own seat and the agent had booked us taking up 3 seats out of 4 in the middle of the plane so dd can sleep... it was booked so the middle seat between us was taken...  The flight attendants offered the woman in the middle of us another seat and she turned it down?!     I guess she hasn't had experience with a toddler moving non stop..  it was a long 15 hours.. :annoyed:


----------



## vacationhopeful

squeeze said:


> ... Maybe you should have asked her if she was aware there was a bathroom on the plane.:annoyed: ..



Come on ,,,, she could NOT have fit into the bathroom. She must have been wearing adult diapers.:ignore:


----------



## laurac260

Phydeaux said:


> Just serves to wonder when airlines will begin charging fares based on the weight of the passenger and their baggage. I just don't understand why they haven't yet adopted this considering fuel costs are their primary expense. What are they waiting for?



When a plane falls from the sky because the completely full flight is completely full of obese people and their obese clothes and all the stuff they must drag on to the plane that the plane has exceeded it's load capacity....

THEN.... they will address the issue.   


Until then......:deadhorse:


----------



## easyrider

heathpack said:


> If she expressed even a whiff of regret when I asked her to stop playing her video game.
> 
> 
> 
> H





heathpack said:


> Ok, y'all, I've tried to be tolerant.
> 
> To add insult to injury, she has also been farting up a storm.
> 
> 
> 
> H



Wouldn't the farting be a wiff of regret ???    :rofl: Thanks for the laugh !!

Bil


----------



## DianeG

*Blame the airlines*

Actually, I feel for all passengers in sardine class. Airlines have been relentlessly shrinking the space each of us occupies, reducing both seat pitch (down to 29"-31" from 31"-34") and seat width (down to 16"-17" from 17"-19"). So it's not just us getting bigger...

And the airlines are not being fair to the passengers who need two seats either... even if two seats are bought, there's no garantee that two seats *together* will be made available (or remain available), speaking from personal experience. I tried this once and will never go through that hassle again! To add insult to injury, I had a hard time getting reimbursed for the extra seat too, as I did have two boarding passes issued.  

I don't need a seat belt extender, but I really do need a min. of 31"/17". And if I'm seated next to a guy, I also "automatically" lose the use of the armrest. So I try as best I can to book an aisle seat and/or a premium seat. I recently heard of an airline (in Europe, I think) that will let two people book and pay for the 3 seats in a 3/3 configuration. Yeahhh - that DH & I would be willing to do!

There's no easy answer on our end, except being civil and respectful to our fellow sardines. As Ron said, flying has become the most difficult and unpleasant part of our vacations.


----------



## Courts

dougp26364 said:


> The entitlement attitude shown by some really gets the best of me at times. *When a gravitationally challanged person feels they have the right to intrude on another person paid for space, just because they're a big person, it really ticks me off*. I guess this flyer feels that because they're big, they simply deserve more space.
> 
> I once witnessed a man I would estimate at 400 lbs thow a fit on a NWA flight because he had a coach seat and they refused to bump him up to first class. He was throwing a temper tantrum and threatening legal action because he couldn't fit in a standard seat so it was NWA's responsiblity to put him in first class. He didn't seem to understand that first class was already full. He was demanding they bump someone back to his rear of the plane coach seat so he could have the seat they paid for or earned with their FF miles.
> 
> We have become an entitlement society. Nothing is our fault and if something goes wrong, someone else must pay.


I totally agree. 

The space *you pay for *is your own personal space and if another person tries to "take" part of your space it is IMO "stealing" from you.   

THAT person needs to purchase his /her own *extra space *if they need more. :annoyed: 

.


----------



## dioxide45

Courts said:


> I totally agree.
> 
> The space *you pay for *is your own personal space and if another person tries to "take" part of your space it is IMO "stealing" from you.
> 
> THAT person needs to purchase his /her own *extra space *if they need more. :annoyed:
> 
> .



The problem with the whole setup is that to purchase more space, one must buy twice as much when they only need 10% more. Perhaps the airlines could add wider seats and charge more for these. Perhaps two seats where there are normally three, or four where there are normally five. This way a passenger of size could buy a wider seat or two could buy them separately. The problem is that skinny people would buy them up for more space too. Everyone wants more space.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

dioxide45 said:


> The problem with the whole setup is that to purchase more space, one must buy twice as much when they only need 10% more. Perhaps the airlines could add wider seats and charge more for these. Perhaps two seats where there are normally three, or four where there are normally five. This way a passenger of size could buy a wider seat or two could buy them separately. The problem is that skinny people would buy them up for more space too. Everyone wants more space.


The reason that doesn't work is because unless there is some kind of mechanism to require that more amply sized people buy those seats, most of the people who need the extra room will still buy the cheaper seat and squeeze themselves into that seat.

Most of those seats that offer more room would simply be purchased by travelers of all kinds who are willing to pay more to have more room.  You wind up with something similar to business class.


----------



## am1

dioxide45 said:


> The problem with the whole setup is that to purchase more space, one must buy twice as much when they only need 10% more. Perhaps the airlines could add wider seats and charge more for these. Perhaps two seats where there are normally three, or four where there are normally five. This way a passenger of size could buy a wider seat or two could buy them separately. The problem is that skinny people would buy them up for more space too. Everyone wants more space.



I believe that is first class.  

But yes the airlines could do more to accommodate.  Different sized seating for different pricing.  There should be no need for someone to have to pay full fare for two seats.  Full fare for one seat and then a lessor amount for the second seat.  

Thankfully I have never had an issue with someone stealing my space.


----------



## PStreet1

am1 said:


> I believe that is first class.
> 
> But yes the airlines could do more to accommodate.  Different sized seating for different pricing.  There should be no need for someone to have to pay full fare for two seatsI don't think there is any justification for asking the airline to accept less money for a seat simply because the person purchasing the seat is "of size."  The airlines are selling seats at a specific price because that's what works for their business model.  They aren't in business to provide charity..  Full fare for one seat and then a lessor amount for the second seat.
> 
> Thankfully I have never had an issue with someone stealing my space.


There's no question that the issue is a difficult one--and when you are the one being intruded upon, it is more than irritating.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

am1 said:


> I believe that is first class.
> 
> But yes the airlines could do more to accommodate.  Different sized seating for different pricing.  There should be no need for someone to have to pay full fare for two seats.  Full fare for one seat and then a lessor amount for the second seat.
> 
> Thankfully I have never had an issue with someone stealing my space.


But unless the airline actually forces people to buy the seat with more space it won't work.  Many large passengers will simply continue to buy the lowest price ticket they can and wedge themselves into the seat.

Certainly there are some who will pay extra, but not that many.


----------



## dioxide45

am1 said:


> I believe that is first class.



The problem is that first class is priced far more than twice the price. So purchasing two seats, where only one and a quarter is needed is a waste.



T_R_Oglodyte said:


> The reason that doesn't work is because unless there is some kind of mechanism to require that more amply sized people buy those seats, most of the people who need the extra room will still buy the cheaper seat and squeeze themselves into that seat.
> 
> Most of those seats that offer more room would simply be purchased by travelers of all kinds who are willing to pay more to have more room.  You wind up with something similar to business class.



I agree, the problem is that those that don't need the space would buy those seats for the extra room and those that do would still try to buy the cheapest seat and squeeze in. There is no perfect solution.

The problem with economy plus type arrangements is all they provide is more legroom when really it is width that is also needed in many cases. The problem is that the setup of many aircraft is not conducive to having three or four classes of seating where width rules. You can put five across where six would normally go, but when you switch to the class where it is six across, the isles don't line up and it becomes a hazard in event of emergency.

We could go the route that Canada did where it is a one person one seat rule and the airlines have to accommodate for the customers of size. The problem with that is that everyone's airfare goes up, not just those needing the extra room.


----------



## am1

Expenses are a lot less if someone is just needing the second seat for more space.  Plus the other passengers will enjoy it.  More likely the people that need a second seat will purchase one.  It is better than the current system.


----------



## Ridewithme38

am1 said:


> Expenses are a lot less if someone is just needing the second seat for more space.  Plus the other passengers will enjoy it.  More likely the people that need a second seat will purchase one.  It is better than the current system.



Capitalism is an economic system, not a government system, so i hope this is ok to say...

This is the Main problem with Capitalism...The Airlines will continue to down size the seats as long as they can raise their profits...there's no thought to the comfort or the care of the actual people, just the profit line...

Expenses maybe less for someone just buying the seat for comfort and it will help all the other people be more comfortable...But if they reduce the cost of that seat, thats money off their bottom end....This can't happen in a Capitalistic system, money comes before everything with Capitalism


----------



## Patri

Beats socialism.


----------



## pjrose

Ridewithme38 said:


> ...But if they reduce the cost of that seat, thats money off their bottom end....



Uhhh.....did you mean to say bottom LINE, or bottom END?  Bottom END is of course particularly relevant to this conversation....




Ridewithme38 said:


> Capitalism is an economic system....This can't happen in a Capitalistic system, money comes before everything with Capitalism





Patri said:


> Beats socialism.



I'm not going to TOUCH that one.....


----------



## ronparise

Patri said:


> Beats socialism.



maybe so... but if you you dont like socialism, what are you doing with timeshares?

Here is a definition of Socialism from Wikipedia

Socialism  /ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm/ is an economic system characterised by social ownership and control of the means of production and cooperative management of the economy,[1] and a political philosophy advocating such a system. "Social ownership" may refer to any one of, or a combination of, the following: cooperative enterprises, common ownership, direct public ownership or autonomous state enterprises

common ownership;  cooperative enterprise; cooperative management....sounds an awful lot like timeshares to me

The PCCs.... they do capitalism right


----------



## PStreet1

am1 said:


> Expenses are a lot less if someone is just needing the second seat for more space.  Plus the other passengers will enjoy it.  More likely the people that need a second seat will purchase one.  It is better than the current system.


What expenses are reduced?  One can of coke and one package of some sort of snack?  The gasoline required to haul a 200 pound person plus 50 pounds of luggage?  I don't see a reduction of any size for them, and requiring them to sell a seat at a loss is totally unfair to the corporation.  They are profit making entities, not charities.

For the airlines, it is definitely not better than the current system.  For the passengers, maybe--only if the "of size" passenger is willing to pay more, and I, like others who have posted, would bet money that most wouldn't.  The people who might pay more are the more normally sized persons who have a bit of extra cash.


----------



## Courts

One airline is doing something about the situation - Southwest

http://www.southwest.com/html/customer-service/extra-seat/index-pol.html


These rules are controversial, but Southwest has stood by its policy *despite several unsuccessful lawsuits *against it.  

.


----------



## fillde

Ridewithme38 said:


> Capitalism is an economic system, not a government system, so i hope this is ok to say...
> 
> This is the Main problem with Capitalism...The Airlines will continue to down size the seats as long as they can raise their profits...there's no thought to the comfort or the care of the actual people, just the profit line...
> 
> Expenses maybe less for someone just buying the seat for comfort and it will help all the other people be more comfortable...But if they reduce the cost of that seat, thats money off their bottom end....This can't happen in a Capitalistic system, money comes before everything with Capitalism



Wow. I guess this is the definition of "hijacking" a thread.


----------



## PStreet1

Courts said:


> One airline is doing something about the situation - Southwest
> 
> http://www.southwest.com/html/customer-service/extra-seat/index-pol.html
> 
> 
> These rules are controversial, but Southwest has stood by its policy *despite several unsuccessful lawsuits *against it.
> 
> .


I was on a Southwest flight in the situation I posted earlier when the person "of size" was cheerful and polite; he was the one who lifted his fat and tucked the seat belt under the fat--didn't ask for a seat belt extension, and as I said, who is going to ask him to prove the seat belt is fastened.  Not me.  And I don't see the attendant asking either.  Southwest MAY do something if someone really makes a scene about it, but as a general policy?  I say no.


----------



## am1

PStreet1 said:


> What expenses are reduced?  One can of coke and one package of some sort of snack?  The gasoline required to haul a 200 pound person plus 50 pounds of luggage?  I don't see a reduction of any size for them, and requiring them to sell a seat at a loss is totally unfair to the corporation.  They are profit making entities, not charities.
> 
> For the airlines, it is definitely not better than the current system.  For the passengers, maybe--only if the "of size" passenger is willing to pay more, and I, like others who have posted, would bet money that most wouldn't.  The people who might pay more are the more normally sized persons who have a bit of extra cash.



All the junk taxes, the cost of check in, liability/life insurance, sales cost, lost/damaged bag expense among many others.  

I have never said the airline should lose money.


----------



## MuranoJo

DianeG said:


> And if I'm seated next to a guy, I also "automatically" lose the use of the armrest.



I think the armrest thing is an interesting struggle.  Frankly, I willingly give it up for any poor person stuck in the middle. But if I happen to be in the middle, I'll assertively fight for armrest space, regardless if it's a guy or gal. And I admit, guys tend to automatically claim the armrest. Just elbow them off.


----------



## dougp26364

muranojo said:


> I think the armrest thing is an interesting struggle.  Frankly, I willingly give it up for any poor person stuck in the middle. But if I happen to be in the middle, I'll assertively fight for armrest space, regardless if it's a guy or gal. And I admit, guys tend to automatically claim the armrest. Just elbow them off.



The armrest thing never really bothers me on short flights. On longer flights, I look for 767's or 777's and try to get us into the two seat isle. Of course, the issue for us is I book early and airlines keep changing equipement, making it tough to get a flight on the equipement we want. 

AA and Delta us to be our favorites because most of our shorter routes they flew using MD-80's. We could almost always get on the two seat isle. But now they're cutting back on the aging and inefficient MD-80 fleet, Delta's FF program stinks and who knows what will happen with AA being in bankruptcy.


----------



## zcrider

I agree, this is a problem on flights.  I can't stand being trapped next to a large person on a flight either, but since I figure I am stuck for the duration of the flight if it is full, I take the lesser of the two evils and just move my own body.   It doesn't matter at that point if it is "fair" or not, it is about comfort.  I would rather tilt away then "fight for the space" the whole flight.  I will turn sideways in my seat or lean out into the isle when I can rather then have the large person rubbing on me and making me all hot the whole flight from being smashed against their side.  Yuck.  If you are not a large person yourself then I think this is much easier then fighting for space.  They can not shrink themselves on the spot, so it is really pointless at that point.  I am no skinny Minnie, but I do fit in my seat and can "make room" when I have to.  I choose to lean away rather then have them touching and rubbing on me.  
   I love how you describe the goldfish stare.  Lol.  Classic passive aggressive person saying f*** you without saying a word.  Yep, if they are hogging up extra space they should be polite and pull their arms in best they can for the duration of the flight.  That is only good manners.  People can be so selfish and it is getting worse with the generations.  I see a big deterioration since my grandparents generation.  There is a large lack in work ethic, morals, honesty, and manners.  Very sad.


----------



## dioxide45

am1 said:


> Expenses are a lot less if someone is just needing the second seat for more space.  Plus the other passengers will enjoy it.  More likely the people that need a second seat will purchase one.  It is better than the current system.



If that were the case, the OP wouldn't have had an issue, the passenger next to her would have bought the extra seat but they didn't. People will rarely buy a second seat, it doubles their cost. But if the option existed to pay for the extra inches at a cost that was inline with the original cost of the seat, then they might. Business and first class don't qualify since their costs of the extra inches is not in line with the cost of a coach seat.



PStreet1 said:


> What expenses are reduced?  One can of coke and one package of some sort of snack?  The gasoline required to haul a 200 pound person plus 50 pounds of luggage?  I don't see a reduction of any size for them, and requiring them to sell a seat at a loss is totally unfair to the corporation.  They are profit making entities, not charities.



While gas costs similar, their administrative costs are lower. Also if the average person is 200# with a 50# bag that is 500# for two people. If the passenger of size is 350# with a 50# bag, then there is only 400# to carry for one passenger instead of 500# for two.


----------



## Sandi Bo

On a recent (Delta) flight a very large woman was in the middle seat next to my window seat. The plane was not full, maybe 75% of the seats were taken.

To me it was very obvious that getting to my seat and then being comfortable would be challenging.

I asked the flight attendants if I could sit in one of the empty seats. They acted oblivious to what I thought was an obvious situation. They said it was a full flight and suggested I take my seat. They chose to ignore what I thought was incredibly obvious.  

I did squeeze in to my seat. The flight was not full, and the woman moved over once the doors closed.  Thankfully there were no other side affects (as mentioned my OP).


----------



## Elan

I think the solution is pretty obvious:  a long u-shaped sofa to replace the traditional seating.  Once seated, the flight attendant comes by and measures how much of the sofa your a$$ is occupying, and collects a surcharge or distributes a rebate, based on your measurements relative to accumulated statistical data.  Pretty simple, no?


----------



## lvhmbh

We use our credit cards for FF miles almost always.  I give cash to the 15 year old but otherwise it is CC's that we pay off.  This way we can upgrade with miles after buying the cheapest seats in coach.  If we fly Jet Blue we pay the upcharge for the larger seat and hope that most people didn't.


----------



## AKE

siesta said:


> it is easy to criticize a large/obese person and say its their lifestyle and diet, but unfortunately sometimes it is not just personal neglect, but it could be something genetic, or a disability that has caused them to gain weight, or even a medical condition like something to do with adrenal glands or Prader-Willi syndrome(in fact 1% of obese people are due to medical causes, not because they are "american slobs"). My guess is the OP doesnt have a personal experience regarding this type of issue, or maybe they would be more understanding and forgiving of the situation. Especially considering he posted this just after Easter/Passover (christian/jewish spirit??) I'm sure she was just as uncomfortable as you, and your comment about her phone .. Should she sit there with her arms crossed for you?
> 
> Sure its not an ideal situation, but you can always buy the seat next to you to ensure it doesnt happen again... or fly private.



Why should I buy an extra seat?  I paid for my seat and am not using more than what I bought.  If a person needs more than one seat then THEY should be paying for it.  Go to Europe, the far east or almost any other place in the world and you do not see the obeisity that is in North America. From the studies that I have seen, the large majority of oversize people OVEREAT. Look in Wal-Mart, MacDonalds, or just about any other restaurant or fast food place and the ones that are oversize almost always OVERSIZE their portions and have multiple portions.  From my readings it is usually easy to tell the difference between over-eating and a glandular or other medical issue.  Look at their leg from the knee to the ankle.  People with medical issues tend  to have this part in proportion to the rest of their body (i.e. it will also be big) whereas overeaters will tend to have a generally slim leg when compared to the rest of their body. I undestand medical issues but these are minimal. If I have a large person sitting on me in a plane I push back with all my weight and especially my bony elbows.  It almost always has some degree of success. -


----------



## Ridewithme38

The simple solution is you enlarge the seats for everyone...when even the slightly above average like me is uncomfortable on a long flight, there is obviously a problem

But that would cut into the airlines profit, why cut profit when you can stuff people in like sardines, causing situations like this thread and get away with it?


----------



## pwrshift

Elan said:


> I bet the offending passenger ate too many mini pies...........



Good line.  If so, Heathpack and she could talk about making diet pies for the whole trip.  

I doubt the heavy person enjoys being so overweight.  People can be very cruel to the obese and the stress of that probably makes her seek a donut or mini pie to feel better.  America is obese and there's no instant cure...fast food is too cheap and too available.  Banning drive throughs could help as large people don't like ordering donuts in public.  'Desserts' spelled backwards is 'Stressed'.

The airlines are at fault too.  Would you want to sit in a 16 inch wide office chair with arms all day at work?  I haven't sat in economy for perhaps 15 years as I prefer the comfort and can (usually) afford business class.  Two months ago we had to fly across Canada for a funeral and because last minute return business class seats were priced at $5700 each I asked about buying three economy seats for the two of us instead, and paid $2100 for them...a huge saving from the $11,400 for two biz class.

It is a different world in economy.  With our seat arms up and the middle seat empty the flight was only marginally comfortable...and we had to pay for our drinks, food, pillows, blankets, suitcases, etc.  Tough life.  I can't imagine sitting with 3 normal sized flyers in those seats.


----------



## geekette

If people keep buying the product, why should the airline change anything??


----------



## Ridewithme38

geekette said:


> If people keep buying the product, why should the airline change anything??



People HAVE to purchase the product, in alot of cases there is no other way

With certain products the government protects the people, i don't see why airline travel should be different than things like milk and beef, in a worldwide economy many many people depend on airline travel daily just to do their jobs, without the ability to fly to places like Europe and Hong Kong, a large portion of our businesses would suffer severely


----------



## vacationhopeful

Stop allowing the Congress to fly in private jets and First Class ==> then if will change VERY QUICKLY. 

Stop allowing businesses to deduct as a business expense more than a coach ticket by including the excess cost as INCOME to the flyer.


----------



## geekette

Ridewithme38 said:


> People HAVE to purchase the product, in alot of cases there is no other way
> 
> With certain products the government protects the people, i don't see why airline travel should be different than things like milk and beef, in a worldwide economy many many people depend on airline travel daily just to do their jobs, without the ability to fly to places like Europe and Hong Kong, a large portion of our businesses would suffer severely



You are never FORCED to buy the product.  We will likely disagree on that all day.  

If your job depends on daily air travel, you have the ability to change jobs, encourage your employer to purchase their own plane, etc.  The business created teh dependency and if an employee is chronically smushed by large seatmates, pop for 1st class.  Why should an airline change when your own employer could make things better for you?

You are not FORCED to sit in coach.  You are not FORCED to board a plane.  It is ALWAYS a choice, even if required by job, you chose that situation.  

I do not see "I don't have enough space" as an issue meriting gov't "protection."  I would reserve that rally cry for when they start stuffing us in cargo.  See how many want to be first in line to board when that happens!


----------



## pwrshift

vacationhopeful said:


> Stop allowing the Congress to fly in private jets and First Class ==> then if will change VERY QUICKLY.
> .



Very true.  Same for healthcare.


----------



## heathpack

zcrider said:


> I love how you describe the goldfish stare.  Lol.  Classic passive aggressive person saying f*** you without saying a word.  Yep, if they are hogging up extra space they should be polite and pull their arms in best they can for the duration of the flight.  That is only good manners.  People can be so selfish and it is getting worse with the generations.  I see a big deterioration since my grandparents generation.  There is a large lack in work ethic, morals, honesty, and manners.  Very sad.



You know, it was the "f*** you" attitude and the constant moving around that really pushed me over the edge. You could not just move yourself out of her way, the elbows were flailing.

You are so right though about people becoming increasingly selfish & rude in public. I ride a train to work, the seating is pairs of seats facing each other, resulting in groups of 4 seats.  There is also a quiet car which I ride in- supposed to be no phone calls, no conversations, no children.  Frequent announcements are made asking folks to occupy only 1 seat & reminding what the quiet car is about.  Every train trip, people just blatantly disregard these rules.  Yesterday, there was a lady occupying one seat, while she had her purse on yet another and a grocery bag on another.  All in a crowded car. I frequently just ask people to move their bags, nice about it, but thinking "what's wrong with you?". The conductors don't want to deal with this, no one wants to hear the sqwaking on social media or the 6:00 news, I guess.

However, the day someone starts repeatedly shoving their purse or briefcase into my shoulder, ribs and face is the day I start driving my car to work for sure!

H


----------



## Tia

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/26184891/vp/47002954#47002954

Anyone see it today? Todays Professionals started out w/talking about Ashely Judd and the NEXT topic  'Obese Need not Apply'   health care jobs bmi over 35. Starr Jones part was particularly interesting re.

Totally agree on the effects it has on health care!


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

Ridewithme38 said:


> People HAVE to purchase the product, in alot of cases there is no other way
> 
> With certain products the government protects the people, i don't see why airline travel should be different than things like milk and beef, in a worldwide economy many many people depend on airline travel daily just to do their jobs, without the ability to fly to places like Europe and Hong Kong, a large portion of our businesses would suffer severely



You picked bad examples to illustrate your point, because it is almost exactly the same with milk and beef vs. travel.  In each case there is a government agency that regulates the safety of the item.

But the government leaves it to the market place to sort out what grades of meat will be available and the demand and pricing for those grades of meat. In addition, the government doesn't (yet) require that you purchase any particular type, grade, or quantity of any foodstuff.   

Same thing with the airlines - the government leaves it to the market place to decide the grades of service that will be available and the demand and pricing for those grades.  The government also does not require that any person fly.

******

This is a topic, by the way, on which the public has voiced it's opinions loudly and clearly. Over the years there have been airlines that have tried to provide a higher quality flying experience - more room in the seats, better food, etc, for an added price.  They have all failed in the mass market. (There may be some niche carriers still operating that way.)

The traveling public has stated clearly that the main thing it wants is low fares. Given the choice between low fares + crummy service vs. higher fares + better service, the vast majority of the traveling public will select low fares + crummy service, and then voice their complaints about how crummy the service is.

*****

We have the situation that we have with airline roominess for the simple reason that every time an airline has tried to provide more room they haven't been able to attract enough people willing to pay for the extra room to make it viable.


----------



## PStreet1

I'm interested in the criticism of airlines' pricing policies.  Since every major airline we have (other than Southwest) has been or is dealing with bankruptcy, it's difficult for me to see that they are making a huge grab for excess profits at their customer's expense.  Every seat they sell contributes to their bottom line, and the bottom line, obviously, hasn't been doing well or they would not have needed to restructure through bankruptcy.  That's why we have "the incredible shrinking seat."  That need to make enough money to keep flying plus Americans' increasing girth is causing the problem.  For everyone, Americans' increasing lack of manners compounds everything.


----------



## GeraldineT

They should charge by weight just like they do my kids at the chinese buffet!!!


----------



## hypnotiq

For those of you clamoring on that people that don't fit in the sit should pay more really need to check yourselves. That's an easy answer when the person is truly morbidly obese and doesn't fit into the seat beyond reason.

However, when you have guys like Ride + myself who are 6'2+ and 210lbs (I don't know about Ride but my BF% is around 11%!) *we don't fit either and we aren't obese!*

This is a problem with the airlines making the seats too small for even normal people.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

PStreet1 said:


> I'm interested in the criticism of airlines' pricing policies.  Since every major airline we have (other than Southwest) has been or is dealing with bankruptcy, it's difficult for me to see that they are making a huge grab for excess profits at their customer's expense.  Every seat they sell contributes to their bottom line, and the bottom line, obviously, hasn't been doing well or they would not have needed to restructure through bankruptcy.  That's why we have "the incredible shrinking seat."  That need to make enough money to keep flying plus Americans' increasing girth is causing the problem.  For everyone, Americans' increasing lack of manners compounds everything.


Another factor is the cost of fuel.  If seat width were increased by 20%, six-across seating would require a plane with a bigger fuselage.  Bigger fuselage means an airplane that is both heavier. More weight means more fuel required.  Also, larger airplane means more aerodynamic drag, which also increases fuel consumption.

So from a practical standpoint, increasing seat spacing means going to five across seating, which would be about a 17% decrease in seating capacity. On routes where planes now routinely fly at near capacity that would mean adding more planes to the route, which is a less efficient way to fly.  Meaning higher fares not just because of fewer seats on the plane but because serving the overall demand on that routing would require more planes on the route (or using longer planes on the route).  Or the airlines increase fares on the route to bring the demand into balance with the supply.


----------



## geekette

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Another factor is the cost of fuel.  If seat width were increased by 20%, six-across seating would require a plane with a bigger fuselage.  Bigger fuselage means an airplane that is both heavier. More weight means more fuel required.  Also, larger airplane means more aerodynamic drag, which also increases fuel consumption.
> 
> So from a practical standpoint, increasing seat spacing means going to five across seating, which would be about a 17% decrease in seating capacity. On routes where planes now routinely fly at near capacity that would mean adding more planes to the route, which is a less efficient way to fly.  Meaning higher fares not just because of fewer seats on the plane but because serving the overall demand on that routing would require more planes on the route (or using longer planes on the route).  Or the airlines increase fares on the route to bring the demand into balance with the supply.



so, basically, "careful what you ask for ..."


----------



## Ridewithme38

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Another factor is the cost of fuel.  If seat width were increased by 20%, six-across seating would require a plane with a bigger fuselage.  Bigger fuselage means an airplane that is both heavier. More weight means more fuel required.  Also, larger airplane means more aerodynamic drag, which also increases fuel consumption.
> 
> So from a practical standpoint, increasing seat spacing means going to five across seating, which would be about a 17% decrease in seating capacity. On routes where planes now routinely fly at near capacity that would mean adding more planes to the route, which is a less efficient way to fly.  Meaning higher fares not just because of fewer seats on the plane but because serving the overall demand on that routing would require more planes on the route (or using longer planes on the route).  Or the airlines increase fares on the route to bring the demand into balance with the supply.



Or they could just cut their yearly bonuses to the top executives to under 100 trillion a year...


----------



## Passepartout

*Hand raised, waving!*

I know, I know! Eliminate the seats altogether and just have bolsters to strap into while standing. Tilt-a-Whirl style. They oughtta be able to put 20% more of us cattle in the flying culverts. Think of the profits! Finally a way for the airlines to be profitable.

Jim


----------



## PStreet1

Ridewithme38 said:


> Or they could just cut their yearly bonuses to the top executives to under 100 trillion a year...



Cutting executive bonuses is an easy solution to offer, but it, too, fails to address the real problem:  the American public does not want to pay for bigger seats and better service.  The bonuses are a miniscule portion of the airline's operating budget and eliminating them altogether wouldn't do much for the price of a seat on the airline; I have no idea how much would be gained, but I'd bet it would be under a quarter per seat.  Of course, employees who don't get bonuses, and in fact, have taken pay reductions resent the executive bonuses, but the bottom line really would not be affected much if the bonuses were eliminated--and of course, if the executive bonuses weren't part of the pay package, those people would find other jobs (and even in this job market, for people at that level, other jobs are available).  Less capable managers would probably result in less efficient management--though of course, one never knows.


Mike Boyd, an airline industry analyst with Boyd Group International Inc. in Evergreen, Colo., said he doesn’t begrudge airline executives’ compensation.
“If you’re prepared to take on American Airlines, you have to be prepared not to have any personal life,” Boyd said. “I can go skiing tomorrow. Gerard Arpey and (United Airlines CEO) Glenn Tilton cannot. They’re on call 24 hours a day.

“You have employee relations you have to work with, vendor relations you have to work with, financing relations you have to work with. You always have constituencies clamoring at you. You can’t be home with your kids. You don’t have time to take a two-week vacation in the summer.

“There is certain personal satisfaction with running an airline. But there’s a hell of a price to pay.”

http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=298&articleid=20100419_298_0_severa636294

http://www.consumertraveler.com/today/ceo-2010-pay-at-major-and-regional-airlines/

The bottom line is that if Americans want better service and bigger seats, they have to pay more--and lots of people do:  business class and first class are usually full or close to it.  Those who don't want the difference in service enough to pay for it, don't get it.


----------



## kenie

Passepartout said:


> I know, I know! Eliminate the seats altogether and just have bolsters to strap into while standing. Tilt-a-Whirl style. They oughtta be able to put 20% more of us cattle in the flying culverts. Think of the profits! Finally a way for the airlines to be profitable.
> 
> Jim



Hasn't Ryanair proposed selling this type of seating(standing)?  

I have to vote with Hypnotiq and Ride. 
I'm 6'3" and about 230lbs.
I fit in the seats, but the leg-room is an absolute killer.


----------



## heathpack

hypnotiq said:


> For those of you clamoring on that people that don't fit in the sit should pay more really need to check yourselves. That's an easy answer when the person is truly morbidly obese and doesn't fit into the seat beyond reason.
> 
> However, when you have guys like Ride + myself who are 6'2+ and 210lbs (I don't know about Ride but my BF% is around 11%!) *we don't fit either and we aren't obese!*
> 
> This is a problem with the airlines making the seats too small for even normal people.



But I can hardly imagine that at 6'2" you are spilling over into your neighbors seat?  I think the only scenario in which anyone suggests two seats should be purchased is for folks whose body extends into the neighboring passenger's personal space. 

H


----------



## Tia

Last flight I was on one guy reclined his seat into the guys knees behind him. The guy behind him asked the guy ahead of him to pull it back up because he was 6'6" and his knees needed the room. My other half is 6'3" not over 200lb yet and has suffered with the limited  leg room for which you must pay, same should be with width...


----------



## hypnotiq

heathpack said:


> But I can hardly imagine that at 6'2" you are spilling over into your neighbors seat?  I think the only scenario in which anyone suggests two seats should be purchased is for folks whose body extends into the neighboring passenger's personal space.
> 
> H



My shoulder blades exceed the width of the seats. If I fly alone (w/out my tiny GF), I have to either roll my shoulders in the entire flight (not comfortable) or lean into the aisle (and get abused by the cart) so that I dont spill over to my neighbors. 

Well forget about the poor person that has to sit in front of me and gets my knees for the entire flight.


----------



## pwrshift

*Air Canada's policy*

*Extra seating for passengers with special needs*

MONTRÉAL, January 8, 2009 - Air Canada is making available extra seating free of charge to passengers travelling within Canada who require additional space due to their disabilities, including obesity, or to accommodate an attendant.

The new services, available for customers booking domestic itineraries (wholly within Canada) beginning January 9, 2009, will be provided on Air Canada, Air Canada Express (operated by Jazz only) and Air Canada-coded flights operated by Tier 3 carriers (where aircraft type and configuration allow). The new policy is designed to meet the “One Passenger, One Fare” requirements of the Canadian Transportation Agency.

For bookings made before January 9 for travel after that date, customers are advised to contact Air Canada Reservations. If customers qualify for extra seating and their flight is after January 9, Air Canada will make the proper adjustments and either refund money or provide extra seating as required.

Passengers requesting extra seating will require a doctor’s certificate of their disability or need for an attendant when travelling, as well as medical approval for travel. If the passenger's special requirement is limited to extra seating due only to obesity, the authorisation will be valid for two years in order to facilitate repeat travel.

Eligible customers requiring additional space for their own use will be assigned a single reservation and ticket. Their seats will be assigned in advance of their flight by the Air Canada Medical Services desk so that their disabilities can be best accommodated. Additionally, such passengers should be aware that extra seating is not available on Beech aircraft and in Executive Class, and may be restricted on CRJ regional jet and Embraer aircraft.

For more information customers should consult the Air Canada website at http://www.aircanada.com/en/travelinfo/before/specialneeds.html or contact Air Canada Reservations or their travel agent. Air Canada will require 48 hours’ notice in advance of travel (in certain situations 72 hours’ notice) but will make every reasonable effort to accommodate bookings made within that time period. No advance seat selection is permitted when requesting extra seating.

For flights to and from the United States, Air Canada will continue to offer a 50 per cent discount off certain fares for attendants.


----------



## Timeshare Von

*Amtrak can be an option*

I recently took an Amtrak trip and was very impressed with the size, spaciousness and comfort of their coach seats.  More and more as air travel continues to be challenging, for some trips Amtrak may be a viable option.


----------



## Ridewithme38

edited....


----------



## PStreet1

My husband's shoulders exceed the seat width, also--another reason I've decided that taking the middle is a good solution for us; that way, he intrudes only on me when he isn't intruding on the aisle.  From time to time, we consider first or business, but generally decide that "for the relatively small amount of time we're on the plane" we're being paid pretty well to suffer rather than ride in comfort.  Clearly, we could decide otherwise.


----------



## MomoD

*I Love this idea*

Can you just see the passengers faces with this one !! :hysterical: 

I think the solution is pretty obvious:  a long u-shaped sofa to replace the traditional seating.  Once seated, the flight attendant comes by and measures how much of the sofa your a$$ is occupying, and collects a surcharge or distributes a rebate, based on your measurements relative to accumulated statistical data.  Pretty simple.


----------



## Rose Pink

Elan said:


> I think the solution is pretty obvious:  a long u-shaped sofa to replace the traditional seating.  Once seated, the flight attendant comes by and measures how much of the sofa your a$$ is occupying, and collects a surcharge or distributes a rebate, based on your measurements relative to accumulated statistical data.  Pretty simple, no?


Like I said previously: calipers.


----------



## geekette

MomoD said:


> Can you just see the passengers faces with this one !! :hysterical:
> 
> I think the solution is pretty obvious:  a long u-shaped sofa to replace the traditional seating.  Once seated, the flight attendant comes by and measures how much of the sofa your a$$ is occupying, and collects a surcharge or distributes a rebate, based on your measurements relative to accumulated statistical data.  Pretty simple.



Ok by me!!!  One might call me a petite lady, and I will be happy to be the recipient of "proportional seating refunding".  Measure me, announce the numbers, whatever, I don't care.  But the more vain among us would likely rather hoof it than have their butts measured so I fear unpleasant scuffles, maybe even cheating.  

and from this thread, seems butts aren't teh biggest problem, it's the upper body doing the expanding to personal space.  I know that I rarely win the armrest battle, but I do fight back in my sweet little unassuming innocent way.  Oh, was that your rib my elbow finally jabbed?  golly, I'm sorry, after having my boob poked so much my arm was just naturally sticking out to protect it while I sit here in my own seat ....   seemed that I had not fully protected my personal space and I thought if it was fair for your arm to come over to graze my boob that it would be equally ok for my arms to come visit your person...


----------



## dwojo

I am a large man and overweight as well. Due to my size I always get 2 adloining seats to be comfortable or I fly firstclass.





heathpack said:


> Ok, y'all, I've tried to be tolerant. Right now I am in an aisle seat on a transcontinental flight.
> 
> Literally wedged into the middle seat is a young woman of considerable size. She is about 4 inches wider than the seat, cannot just sit down, must force her derrière between the armrests.
> 
> Because of her size, the dynamics of her body posture is that her arms do not hang straight down from her shoulders, they protrude out at a 45 degree angle into the "airspace" over my seat.  This means either her elbow is two inches from my right eye, or her shoulder and upper arm are resting on mine, depending on whether she has her arm in an "up" versus "down" position.  Her left arm and shoulder have been rubbing against me for the entirety of the flight.
> 
> Now she is playing a video game on her phone, causing her elbows to jut out even more to the side.  I have politely asked her to stop, pointing out that when she plays the game her arm rests on top of mine, which is touching the inside of (but not on top of) the armrest.  My request was met with a strange mute blinking silence, somewhat like the response one might expect from, say, a over-large goldfish.  She then went right back to playing her game.
> 
> To add insult to injury, she has also been farting up a storm.
> 
> There, I feel better already, just writing this post.  But seriously, how many inches wider than the seat does one need to be to be required to purchase a second seat?!
> 
> H


----------



## pwrshift

http://www.geekabout.com/2008-04-21-446/ranked-the-most-comfortable-airline-economy-seats.html

Here's what they say about Virgin America... 21" seats sound great!

*Virgin Atlantic* –  Flying Virgin Atlantic offers two choices for economy passengers: Economy, and Premium Economy.  Economy passengers can expect their seats to have a pitch of about 31”, while Premium Economy customers can expect a tad bit more leg room and a wider seat at 21”, compared to 17.5”.  Economy seats also feature seatback TVs, video on-demand, and some seats feature video game consoles with up to 35 different games.

http://www.virginamerica.com/home.do?tab=singleInstance


----------



## Ridewithme38




----------



## Ubil

*Way back when airlines did weigh passengers*

http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Then--Now-A-Weighty-Matter.htmlhttp://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Then--Now-A-Weighty-Matter.html


----------



## Phydeaux

Ubil said:


> http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Then--Now-A-Weighty-Matter.htmlhttp://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Then--Now-A-Weighty-Matter.html



Bring it back!! They had it right!!


----------



## dougp26364

Timeshare Von said:


> I recently took an Amtrak trip and was very impressed with the size, spaciousness and comfort of their coach seats.  More and more as air travel continues to be challenging, for some trips Amtrak may be a viable option.



Unless the Amtrack service is like ours and has only one departure at 03:00 AM. The other issue is having to spend the night in Chicago on trips east because the schedules don't match up or taking 2 days to travel to the west coast. And then there's the cost. The last time I looked (and it's been awhile), the cost wasn't a lot cheaper than flying. 

Amtrack from the midwest is only an option for relatively short trips and, in our case, only if you don't mind the inconvenience of boarding the train at 3 in the morning. Talk about an early wake up call!


----------



## dougp26364

Ubil said:


> http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Then--Now-A-Weighty-Matter.htmlhttp://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Then--Now-A-Weighty-Matter.html





> And in November, airlines began slimming the size of carry-ons with new rules, fees, *and the installation of sizing frames at security machines to block oversized items*. Since weight increases costs, passengers and airlines are partners in the bottom line.



Really? I haven't seen any sizing frames at security machines? We try to be careful and purchase/carry on only luggage that fits the size frames provided by the airlines. Partly in anticipation of such a scenario as the airlines cracking down and partly out of respect for the other passengers who also need to use overhead bin space. 

I would LOVE to see airlines crack down on the rules and stop the oversized and or overstuffed expanded carry on bags that get crammed into the overhead bins. I know it will tick some people off and they'll make a seen, stamping their foot and swearing to never fly that airline again but, we all know it's more or less a show than reality.


----------



## dougp26364

Ridewithme38 said:


>



I can see it now. Just like at the amuesment park they'll have a cardboard flight attendent with a stick and a sign "You must be this tall to board the aircraft." A side benefit to the stand up seat may be no more screaming children or babies on flights.


----------



## Ridewithme38

Timeshare Von said:


> I recently took an Amtrak trip and was very impressed with the size, spaciousness and comfort of their coach seats.  More and more as air travel continues to be challenging, for some trips Amtrak may be a viable option.



I'm actually considering Amtrak for my August Trip to Williamsburg, with gas prices it may actually be cheaper then driving


----------



## rickandcindy23

Why do people put their overcoats into overheads?  I don't get it.  Keep your coat in your seat and stop hogging the overhead compartments.  I went to put my carryon, a small one, into the overhead and piled three coats together, because the stupid people had them lining the entire area of that overhead.  Made me nuts!  Hey, I just want one spot for my small bag.


----------



## dioxide45

dougp26364 said:


> Really? I haven't seen any sizing frames at security machines? We try to be careful and purchase/carry on only luggage that fits the size frames provided by the airlines. Partly in anticipation of such a scenario as the airlines cracking down and partly out of respect for the other passengers who also need to use overhead bin space.
> 
> I would LOVE to see airlines crack down on the rules and stop the oversized and or overstuffed expanded carry on bags that get crammed into the overhead bins. I know it will tick some people off and they'll make a seen, stamping their foot and swearing to never fly that airline again but, we all know it's more or less a show than reality.



Not sure how security would be able to install sizing machines. Different airlines have different size requirements for their carry on luggage. For years AirTran had very large size limitations, much more than any of the other airlines. Another thing to note also is that those sizers at the gates and checkin counters are much smaller than the actual sizes permitted when you look at the airline websites.

The article was also from February 2009, so that would mean that those sizing frames were installed in the fall of 2008. If that were the case, all security locations would now have them. Just not true.


----------



## Tia

"...For passengers,  the FAA now figures an average man in summer clothes weighs 200 pounds and the average woman, 179 pounds. ..."

Wow I am less then average and glad of it :ignore: ! 



Ubil said:


> http://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Then--Now-A-Weighty-Matter.htmlhttp://www.airspacemag.com/history-of-flight/Then--Now-A-Weighty-Matter.html


----------



## sjuhawk_jd

siesta said:


> it is easy to criticize a large/obese person and say its their lifestyle and diet, but unfortunately sometimes it is not just personal neglect, but it could be something genetic, or a disability that has caused them to gain weight, or even a medical condition like something to do with adrenal glands or Prader-Willi syndrome(in fact 1% of obese people are due to medical causes, not because they are "american slobs"). My guess is the OP doesnt have a personal experience regarding this type of issue, or maybe they would be more understanding and forgiving of the situation. Especially considering he posted this just after Easter/Passover (christian/jewish spirit??) I'm sure she was just as uncomfortable as you, and your comment about her phone .. Should she sit there with her arms crossed for you?
> 
> Sure its not an ideal situation, but you can always buy the seat next to you to ensure it doesnt happen again... or fly private.



Clapping


----------



## PStreet1

I just want 100% of the space I paid for.  Others are entitled to their 100%--but they aren't entitled to any of mine, nor am I entitled to theirs.


----------



## heathpack

siesta said:


> it is easy to criticize a large/obese person and say its their lifestyle and diet, but unfortunately sometimes it is not just personal neglect, but it could be something genetic, or a disability that has caused them to gain weight, or even a medical condition like something to do with adrenal glands or Prader-Willi syndrome(in fact 1% of obese people are due to medical causes, not because they are "american slobs"). My guess is the OP doesnt have a personal experience regarding this type of issue, or maybe they would be more understanding and forgiving of the situation. Especially considering he posted this just after Easter/Passover (christian/jewish spirit??) I'm sure she was just as uncomfortable as you, and your comment about her phone .. Should she sit there with her arms crossed for you?
> 
> Sure its not an ideal situation, but you can always buy the seat next to you to ensure it doesnt happen again... or fly private.



I have found this to be the oddest post on this thread, as I passed no value judgement on the issue of my neighbors obesity.  I don't care one iota why the woman is obese, that is none of my beeswax.  The only issue that I have is that her obesity infringed upon my personal space.  I would have felt the same way about someone sitting next to me on a plane who was say wearing a sombrero or carrying a broadsword or perhaps wearing David Byrnes big suit from _Stop Making Sense_.  If something associated with you impinges on the reasonable comfort of others, it is up to you to mitigate that effect on others.

So my feeling is first, she should have purchased two seats.  But if she could not afford that, she should have tried to be as unobtrusive as possible by minimizing movement and, yes, sitting quietly and not playing video games on her phone. If by some chance you do not realize how your fiddling and back & forth to the touchscreen TV and playing the video game worsens your infringement onto your neighbors personal space, a simple "I'm so sorry" when it is pointed out to you would do wonders.

Sorry but being obese even if due to a medical condition does not exempt you from considerate behavior when you are in a public situation.

H


----------



## CarolF

dougp26364 said:


> Really? I haven't seen any sizing frames at security machines? We try to be careful and purchase/carry on only luggage that fits the size frames provided by the airlines. Partly in anticipation of such a scenario as the airlines cracking down and partly out of respect for the other passengers who also need to use overhead bin space.
> 
> I would LOVE to see airlines crack down on the rules and stop the oversized and or overstuffed expanded carry on bags that get crammed into the overhead bins. I know it will tick some people off and they'll make a seen, stamping their foot and swearing to never fly that airline again but, we all know it's more or less a show than reality.



I first used one of the sizing machines last year, it isn't a frame, it is a large electronic machine which I suspect uses laser to check dimensions.  Luggage is scanned individually for size and weight and the info is displayed on a screen.  I chose my brand new bag because it was exactly the dimensions required by the airline (not wishing to lose a single centimetre ).  I was very surprised when the scanner rejected my bag as oversize, then I realised I had left an expander zip open.  Once closed, the bag was accepted, it was literally about 1 1/2 cm (less than 1 inch) oversize with the zip open.

If the bag is rejected, the screen says to present it to staff at a counter.  I hate hold-ups (even more than having to pay excess baggage charges) so I spend a lot of time avoiding them.  I didn't get to find out how long it takes to process oversize or overweight luggage.


----------



## caterina25

I think she should have sat in aisle seat,in that way she would over flowed into the aisle.Maybe the servers and other passengers would have realized that she should be moved.There is nothing better than having people that are inconvenienced coming to there own conclusion and doing the right thing.Thank heavens you didn't have the window seat.You would have been trapped.Good story.


----------



## geekette

dougp26364 said:


> Really? I haven't seen any sizing frames at security machines? We try to be careful and purchase/carry on only luggage that fits the size frames provided by the airlines. Partly in anticipation of such a scenario as the airlines cracking down and partly out of respect for the other passengers who also need to use overhead bin space.
> 
> I would LOVE to see airlines crack down on the rules and stop the oversized and or overstuffed expanded carry on bags that get crammed into the overhead bins. I know it will tick some people off and they'll make a seen, stamping their foot and swearing to never fly that airline again but, we all know it's more or less a show than reality.



You hit my pet peeve - what is with the GIANT carry-ons that get gate-checked?  If it were my airline, I would charge more for that because it should have been checked with other luggage.  Yes, I would put a punitive fee on it.

I don't see the frames at security, I see them at teh gate.  They look brand new from lack of use...

I am generally a rules-follower and that one steams me.  It is meant for crutches, strollers, wheelchairs, musical instruments that shouldn't be checked and other delicate items.  Not for someone's hoggy insistence that they are special and do not need to check their oversize bags.  grrrrrr

And certainly more than a carryon + personal bag comes on A LOT.  Which I don't care about if it all fits under the seat, but if you have too much, no, you should have checked some of it.  Yes, it costs money to check baggage.  But that was known before it was brought to the airport.

Amtrack - inconvenient.  I would do it for the train trip but not to actually try to get somewhere in a timely manner.  Routes from here are wacky.  Sleeper compartments are more expensive than flying.


----------



## MOXJO7282

PStreet1 said:


> Cutting executive bonuses is an easy solution to offer, but it, too, fails to address the real problem:  the American public does not want to pay for bigger seats and better service.  The bonuses are a miniscule portion of the airline's operating budget and eliminating them altogether wouldn't do much for the price of a seat on the airline; I have no idea how much would be gained, but I'd bet it would be under a quarter per seat.  Of course, employees who don't get bonuses, and in fact, have taken pay reductions resent the executive bonuses, but the bottom line really would not be affected much if the bonuses were eliminated--and of course, if the executive bonuses weren't part of the pay package, those people would find other jobs (and even in this job market, for people at that level, other jobs are available).  Less capable managers would probably result in less efficient management--though of course, one never knows.
> 
> 
> Mike Boyd, an airline industry analyst with Boyd Group International Inc. in Evergreen, Colo., said he doesn’t begrudge airline executives’ compensation.
> “If you’re prepared to take on American Airlines, you have to be prepared not to have any personal life,” Boyd said. “I can go skiing tomorrow. Gerard Arpey and (United Airlines CEO) Glenn Tilton cannot. They’re on call 24 hours a day.
> 
> “You have employee relations you have to work with, vendor relations you have to work with, financing relations you have to work with. You always have constituencies clamoring at you. You can’t be home with your kids. You don’t have time to take a two-week vacation in the summer.
> 
> “There is certain personal satisfaction with running an airline. But there’s a hell of a price to pay.”
> 
> http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=298&articleid=20100419_298_0_severa636294
> 
> http://www.consumertraveler.com/today/ceo-2010-pay-at-major-and-regional-airlines/
> 
> The bottom line is that if Americans want better service and bigger seats, they have to pay more--and lots of people do:  business class and first class are usually full or close to it.  Those who don't want the difference in service enough to pay for it, don't get it.



Its a good place to start. I don't begrudge the top few money makers because usually they're the creative thinkers, but its the dozens and sometimes hundreds of empty suits that make way too much money.


----------



## "Roger"

Deleted . ......


----------



## "Roger"

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> .....
> This is a topic, by the way, on which the public has voiced it's opinions loudly and clearly. Over the years there have been airlines that have tried to provide a higher quality flying experience - more room in the seats, better food, etc, for an added price.  They have all failed in the mass market. (There may be some niche carriers still operating that way.)
> 
> The traveling public has stated clearly that the main thing it wants is low fares. Given the choice between low fares + crummy service vs. higher fares + better service, the vast majority of the traveling public will select low fares + crummy service, and then voice their complaints about how crummy the service is.
> 
> *****
> 
> We have the situation that we have with airline roominess for the simple reason that every time an airline has tried to provide more room they haven't been able to attract enough people willing to pay for the extra room to make it viable.


You hit the nail on the head. I watched a local airline that provided quality seating (both breath and depth) for a small premium go down the drain. As soon as a low cost airline entered the market (poor seating) it was good bye to quality.

Just today I flew on a 1200 mile flight. For an extra $20 I purchased an exit row seat.  Put differently, a 14% increase in my ticket price added at least that much more leg room.  My estimate is that about 80% of the people on the flight could have done the same. (Parents with kids and a few very elderly people were ineligible.) Ten such seats were available. My wife and I took two of them.  One other was taken.  Seven sat empty on a nearly full plane. People voted with their wallets. They would rather sit in seats with a 31" inch pitch then pay $20 for decent legroom.

Airlines are cramming us in because that is what they need to do in a competive environment.  

Look in the mirror. I have met the enemy and it is us.


----------



## Timeshare Von

*Amtrak Travel Comparison*

Since I brought it up, I see there is another thread discussing it.  I thought I would also share here the travel report/journal that I wrote after my Amtrak trip from Milwaukee to Whitefish, MT (roundtrip) last month.

While admittedly not for everyone, I can make a case that for that trip in particular, the math works to show the train is a viable option to driving or flying.


----------



## Rose Pink

heathpack said:


> ...
> 
> Because of her size, the dynamics of her body posture is that her arms do not hang straight down from her shoulders, they protrude out at a 45 degree angle into the "airspace" over my seat.  *This means either her elbow is two inches from my right eye, or her shoulder and upper arm are resting on mine, depending on whether she has her arm in an "up" versus "down" position.  Her left arm and shoulder have been rubbing against me for the entirety of the flight.*
> 
> Now she is playing a video game on her phone, *causing her elbows to jut out even more to the side.  *I have politely asked her to stop, pointing out that when she plays the game her arm rests on top of mine, which is touching the inside of (but not on top of) the armrest.  *My request was met with a strange mute blinking silence, somewhat like the response one might expect from, say, a over-large goldfish*.  She then went right back to playing her game.
> ....
> 
> H


Oh, how I wonder what her reaction would have been if those flying elbows had knocked your drink into her lap?


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

"Roger" said:


> You hit the nail on the head. I watched a local airline that provided quality seating (both breath and depth) for a small premium go down the drain. As soon as a low cost airline entered the market (poor seating) it was good bye to quality.



Precisely. If airlines could fill seats that provide extra room at an added price, they would do so in a heartbeat.  

Do folks really think that airlines haven't thought about creating roomier seats and charging a premium??????  With all of the scrounging that airlines are doing to generate added fees, there is no doubt that they have considered this. 

But over the last 30 years the traveling public has voted loudly and clearly with their pocketbooks - gives us cheap fares and service be damned.

*****

I'm old enough to remember a time when airlines did compete on service. That was in the days when the Federal government set minimum air fares on each route, and the fares were set at a level where even the most inefficient carriers could turn a profit.  Since an airline couldn't undercut the fare of a competitor, the only way to generate more profit was to attract more travelers.  Which they did by provided better service.  Those are the good old days of flying that people talk about.

Those were also the expensive days of flying.  How expensive was it?????

Let me illustrate.  In the early 1970's I was going to school in St. Louis and my family lived in Minneapolis.  Braniff and Ozark were the two airlines that had the franchise to fly between St. Louis and Minneapolis, and only Braniff was non-stop.  As a student I could fly on Braniff for two-thirds fare, confirmed seat.  (With most airlines student fare was half-off, standby only).  I paid about $80 each way.  Sounds cheap in todays dollars, but at the time that was still pretty expensive.  My dad made $4/hour, so a round trip ticket was the same as one week of pay for him, pre-tax.  Needless to say, I didn't fly home from school very often. In the four years I was in St. Louis I flew home three times, and two of those I paid for myself.  (I was lucky enough to have a decent job and lived with a vegetarian roommate and we got by on $5/week for food, so I could scrounge the money for a couple of tickets.) More often I caught a ride with someone and shared gas - then I could get home for about $10.  That's why the kiosks at colleges in those days were filled with ads for people looking for rides and riders to various locales.

In 1974 I moved to San Francisco, where there was this airline called PSA that flew only within California. By staying within California it was not subject to fare regulation by the Federal government; it's fares were regulated by the California PUC and the PUC let PSA (and AirCal, another local carrier) set fares wherever they wanted.  I was stunned to learn that PSA was flying SFO to LAX for $19 each way.

***

So yeah, you want to go back to the good old days when airlines competed on service???  Would you feel that way if that meant that airfares doubled or tripled over where they are now???

The result of airlines competing on price is that flying has become a direct competitor with the automobile for longer trips.  

Here at TUG there are so many of us who go to Mexico every year. Or Hawaii. Or the Caribbean. Or .... wherever.  We've gotten to a point where we think that making all of these trips is almost as natural as breathing.  

But when people pine for the good old days, they don't realize that in those days they couldn't travel like they do now. At that time flying was only done by the wealthy and the elite, not the plebes.


----------



## pjrose

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> . . .
> But when people pine for the good old days, they don't realize that in those days they couldn't travel like they do now. At that time flying was only done by the wealthy and the elite, not the plebes.



And students flying at half or a third off


----------



## ampaholic

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> That's why the kiosks at colleges in those days were filled with ads for people looking for rides and riders to various locales.



I remember getting a ride from Berkeley all the way to Daytona for $13.75 in gas contribution and 1/4 of the driving chores - we slept under the stars.

The good old days for sure :rofl:


----------



## artringwald

We don't mind the small seats as much for flights shorter than 2-3 hours, but for longer flights, it's worth it to us to pay more for larger seats. We're flying to London in May, and booked Icelandair because they have an economy comfort class. It has bigger seats than coach, but no free booze, and a much smaller price tag than 1st class. For Hawaii we hunt and forage for deals on first class. We long for the days when Delta flew DC-10's to Hawaii. If you reserved seats early enough, you could get a window and isle next to each other, and not have some stranger falling asleep on your shoulder on the red eye flights.


----------



## easyrider

I now realize that I have been very lucky on most flights with a pretty woman occupying the seat next to me.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

pjrose said:


> And students flying at half or a third off



Even at a third to a half off it was still darn expensive. Only the kids from rich families got to fly home every break.  For the working class students - if we couldn't find a ride home we stuck it out in the dorms or we took Greyhound or we couch-surfed.


----------



## pjrose

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Even at a third to a half off it was still darn expensive. Only the kids from rich families got to fly home every break.  For the working class students - if we couldn't find a ride home we stuck it out in the dorms or we took Greyhound or we couch-surfed.



I used money from my job in the dishroom at the college cafeteria to buy student half-price tickets home from Wisconsin to Colorado.


----------



## jlr10

I am slightly oversized to me anyway.I fit comfortably in my seat but have been known to hog the armrest.  When we travel I sit by the window and lean against the window so I can stay in my own space. If travelling with DH we will put the arm rest up to share those few inches. If I am traveling alone I will roll my arms across my chest to be sure I stay in my space. When I (hopefully never) get bigger i will buy the extra ticket. But my peeved is all the carryon luggage. People who carry on everything so the don't have to pay baggage fees passing the.cost on to others. Holding up boarding and then brag about how much time and money they saved. They did but also at the expense of others. Their carryons are not weightless and cost money to transport take up room and encroach on the room others have paid for to store their one bag.  I have had people move my bag so they could store all their luggage together.  But since the bags don't elbow anyone I may be the only one who sees the similarity here. That and the bags don't fart. But some of them do smell.


----------



## Phydeaux

jlr10 said:


> I am slightly oversized to me anyway.I fit comfortably in my seat but have been known to hog the armrest.  When we travel I sit by the window and lean against the window so I can stay in my own space. If travelling with DH we will put the arm rest up to share those few inches. If I am traveling alone I will roll my arms across my chest to be sure I stay in my space. When I (hopefully never) get bigger i will buy the extra ticket. But my peeved is all the carryon luggage. People who carry on everything so the don't have to pay baggage fees passing the.cost on to others. Holding up boarding and then brag about how much time and money they saved. They did but also at the expense of others. Their carryons are not weightless and cost money to transport take up room and encroach on the room others have paid for to store their one bag.  I have had people move my bag so they could store all their luggage together.  *But since the bags don't elbow anyone I may be the only one who sees the similarity here*. That and the bags don't fart. But some of them do smell.



If we're talking about flying pet peeves, that would definately require an entire new thread


----------



## ampaholic

Phydeaux said:


> If we're talking about flying pet peeves, that would definately require an entire new thread



My pet peeves don't usually take wing - they just wander around the house unsatisfied.


----------



## ScoopKona

I think we mollycoddle the tubbies.

Sure -- a very small percentage are morbidly obese because of a medical condition they have no control over. 

Most of them are morbidly obese because they consume too many calories and don't exercise enough. And almost everyone in this category will blame their morbid obesity on a bogus medical condition. When in fact, if they'd go for a freakin' walk and lay off the buckets of extra crispy and ice cream, that fat would melt away quick.

We're so afraid of offending the first group of people, that we let the second group make our lives miserable. 

You know what's worse than being stuck next to one of these lard-asses? Getting crammed in between two of them. Luckily, I am very good at talking the gate personnel into giving me better seats. So getting shoehorned in between two advanced sufferers of morbid biscuit toxicity is a rarity.

What I don't understand are the people who suggest that heathpack buy an additional seat. If a passenger fits in his or her assigned seat, why should he or she need to buy another?  It's the morbidly obese passenger who needs more room. Let him or her buy a second ticket. They already spend more on food and healthcare. Why should they pay the same rate for air travel? For most of them, obesity is a choice. And for the ones who really do suffer from a medical condition, they should still understand why they have to pay more. 

Like I said, we mollycoddle 'em.


----------



## ampaholic

ScoopLV said:


> I think we mollycoddle the tubbies.
> 
> Sure -- a very small percentage are morbidly obese because of a medical condition they have no control over.
> 
> Most of them are morbidly obese because they consume too many calories and don't exercise enough. And almost everyone in this category will blame their morbid obesity on a bogus medical condition. When in fact, if they'd go for a freakin' walk and lay off the buckets of extra crispy and ice cream, that fat would melt away quick.
> 
> We're so afraid of offending the first group of people, that we let the second group make our lives miserable.
> 
> You know what's worse than being stuck next to one of these lard-asses? Getting crammed in between two of them. Luckily, I am very good at talking the gate personnel into giving me better seats. So getting shoehorned in between two advanced sufferers of morbid biscuit toxicity is a rarity.
> 
> What I don't understand are the people who suggest that heathpack buy an additional seat. If a passenger fits in his or her assigned seat, why should he or she need to buy another?  It's the morbidly obese passenger who needs more room. Let him or her buy a second ticket. They already spend more on food and healthcare. Why should they pay the same rate for air travel? For most of them, obesity is a choice. And for the ones who really do suffer from a medical condition, they should still understand why they have to pay more.
> 
> Like I said, we mollycoddle 'em.



I just today watched in awe as a 440 - 450 pound man served himself 4 *massive* plates full of chow at the Mongolian BBG - I was awestruck. 25 pounds of food in one setting !!!!!!!!!

Of course I mollycoddled him by getting out of his way :hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical:


----------



## timeos2

Why not have three that may find the need for more room in the same three seat row? Then the problem would be obvious and they can decide to sit and bear it or make other arrangements.


----------



## glypnirsgirl

heathpack said:


> You know, it was the "f*** you" attitude and the constant moving around that really pushed me over the edge. You could not just move yourself out of her way, the elbows were flailing.
> 
> You are so right though about people becoming increasingly selfish & rude in public. I ride a train to work, the seating is pairs of seats facing each other, resulting in groups of 4 seats.  There is also a quiet car which I ride in- supposed to be no phone calls, no conversations, no children.  Frequent announcements are made asking folks to occupy only 1 seat & reminding what the quiet car is about.  Every train trip, people just blatantly disregard these rules.  Yesterday, there was a lady occupying one seat, while she had her purse on yet another and a grocery bag on another.  All in a crowded car. I frequently just ask people to move their bags, nice about it, but thinking "what's wrong with you?". The conductors don't want to deal with this, no one wants to hear the sqwaking on social media or the 6:00 news, I guess.
> 
> However, the day someone starts repeatedly shoving their purse or briefcase into my shoulder, ribs and face is the day I start driving my car to work for sure!
> 
> H



I just move the stuff. I will look right at the person and ask, "is this yours?" and hand it to them. 

If they say anything, I say, "Oh, did your purse pay for that seat?" It is amazing to me how many of those blank stares that I get. Ian is always horrified when I do this.  




.


----------



## glypnirsgirl

timeos2 said:


> Why not have three that may find the need for more room in the same three seat row? Then the problem would be obvious and they can decide to sit and bear it or make other arrangements.



I think that this is a great idea. Then the fat people can just rub up against each other. Keeping fat to themselves won't be an issue.


----------



## dioxide45

I think *some* of the posts in this thread are proving one thing. That discrimination toward the obese is for some reason one of the last still acceptable forms of discrimination in America, rather sad.

_Edited to add: This isn't directed at the original post, just some of the responses I have read._


----------



## Ridewithme38

The problem is because of the arm rests people think they own the seat they are sitting in and that there is some defined area that is 'theirs', get rid of the arm rests and make it a bench seat, that'll solve all the complaints


----------



## Passepartout

dioxide45 said:


> I think *some* of the posts in this thread are proving one thing. That discrimination toward the obese is for some reason one of the last still acceptable forms of discrimination in America...



Yup. But you could also say in the context of the OP, that they *hold it against the rest of us*, too.  

Jim


----------



## glypnirsgirl

glypnirsgirl said:


> I think that this is a great idea. Then the fat people can just rub up against each other. Keeping fat to themselves won't be an issue.



And just to be clear. I am fat. I know enough to keep my fat to myself.


----------



## laurac260

dioxide45 said:


> I think *some* of the posts in this thread are proving one thing. That discrimination toward the obese is for some reason one of the last still acceptable forms of discrimination in America, rather sad.
> 
> _Edited to add: This isn't directed at the original post, just some of the responses I have read._


I dunno, you can't control the color of your skin, you can't control the sex you were born with, or what your face looks like, or what religion you were born into, but you sure can control how much gravy you put on your potatoes, how many times you go to McDonald's, whether you get the large fries or the salad, and how many times you get that Big Gulp at 7Eleven.  


Just sayin'.....


----------



## ampaholic

dioxide45 said:


> I think *some* of the posts in this thread are proving one thing. That discrimination toward the obese is for some reason one of the last still acceptable forms of discrimination in America, rather sad.
> 
> _Edited to add: This isn't directed at the original post, just some of the responses I have read._



Sorry to inform you - fat is not a "protected group" - so they can't be *"discriminated"* against.


----------



## Ridewithme38

laurac260 said:


> I dunno, you can't control the color of your skin, you can't control the sex you were born with, or what your face looks like, or what religion you were born into, but you sure can control how much gravy you put on your potatoes, how many times you go to McDonald's, whether you get the large fries or the salad, and how many times you get that Big Gulp at 7Eleven.
> 
> 
> Just sayin'.....



Shh! Your making me hungry! Thank genetics i'm tall and have a high metabolism!!  I can pig out anytime i like and won't gain (much) Weight!


----------



## Rose Pink

Watch this slide show from the CDC on the obesifying of America.  (Click on play above the map.) http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html

We live in an obesogenic environment with few people truly understanding the addictive nature of the "food" we consume.  One of the biggest culprits to the excess calories in our diets are sugar sweetened beverages.  It's estimated they contribute half of our excess calories.  

Remember the scandal when cigarette companies were found to add extra nicotine to cigarettes to increase their addictive potential--thus ensuring repeat customers?  Well, the same thing is happening in our food industry.  They aren't adding nicotine of course, but they are designing foods that induce the "bliss point" to ensure repeat customers.  These hyperpalatable foods can quite literally change our brain chemistry in the same fashion as other addictions such as drugs, gambling, shopping, etc.  They all converge on a shared pathway in the mesolimbic system to motivate behavior.  Eating a hyperpalatable food induces a potent release of dopamine.  It's been called the "twinkie circuit."  Eating these foods provides a dopamine reward and that can lead the brain to want more reward. And it takes more and more to induce that dopamine response. Done often enough, the brain gets rewired.  

As a society, we would be wise to address what has happened to our food choices.  Why is it cheaper to buy junk food than fruits and vegetables?  Why do we still allow schools to sell junk food to our children in vending machines?  Sure the schools need money but that is a terrible way to profit off the health of our nation.

And now, I better shut up before this veers into political/social commentary that will get me banned.:ignore:


----------



## Rose Pink

Ridewithme38 said:


> Shh! Your making me hungry! Thank genetics i'm tall and have a high metabolism!!  I can pig out anytime i like and won't gain (much) Weight!


Oh, just wait a decade or so.  It _will_ catch up with you.


----------



## jlr10

ampaholic said:


> Sorry to inform you - fat is not a "protected group" - so they can't be *"discriminated"* against.



It is coming. Look at all the wellness programs businesses are developing. Employers claim theyj just want their employees to be healthy and happy. Maybe partially but it is bottom line about trying to find cheaper rates on healthcare insurance. Many employers are passing the rate increases onto the employeess without ideal biometrics. Those that are not most likely will in the future. Although they can't be blatantly discriminated against many are passing on hiring the chubbiest in this economy (I. Just got lucky) because they can't afford increasing costs. They can afford to do that. Airlines cannot.

Sorry to get off track.  I agree to. special chubby row ideal. Since they don't mind squishing others I am sure they are willing to share their space as well.


----------



## Ken555

As I read this thread, I can only think of this...


----------



## pjrose

timeos2 said:


> Why not have three that may find the need for more room in the same three seat row? Then the problem would be obvious and they can decide to sit and bear it or make other arrangements.



I was thinking that too....



glypnirsgirl said:


> I just move the stuff. I will look right at the person and ask, "is this yours?" and hand it to them.
> 
> If they say anything, I say, "Oh, did your purse pay for that seat?" It is amazing to me how many of those blank stares that I get. Ian is always horrified when I do this.
> .



Hee hee....I say things like that all the time..."Oh, do you need some help picking up that *** you dropped?" "You might not have noticed, but there's a trash can right over there for your ****"  and so forth.  



dioxide45 said:


> I think *some* of the posts in this thread are proving one thing. That discrimination toward the obese is for some reason one of the last still acceptable forms of discrimination in America, rather sad.
> 
> _Edited to add: This isn't directed at the original post, just some of the responses I have read._



I agree.   Some are focusing more on the obese than on the issue of having one's space invaded while on a plane.


----------



## ScoopKona

If I were made dictator, I'd institute a rule that anyone who needs one of those seat belt extenders should buy an extra ticket. That's my barometer for who is too fat. If they don't want to pay double, they can lay off the donuts until they fit in the seat.

And it has to be across the board. If we excuse the unfortunate people who have Prader-Willi syndrome, every numbnuts morbidly-obese passenger will run to get a note from their doctor saying they're exempt. 

And the doctors will give the permission slips, just like they do for the numbnuts pet owners who can't bare to be separated from "Woogums the incontinent cat" for a few hours. They'll make the entire cabin suffer so they can have their pet with them, urinating and voiding the entire transcontinental flight.


----------



## dioxide45

laurac260 said:


> I dunno, you can't control the color of your skin, you can't control the sex you were born with, or what your face looks like, or what religion you were born into, but you sure can control how much gravy you put on your potatoes, how many times you go to McDonald's, whether you get the large fries or the salad, and how many times you get that Big Gulp at 7Eleven.
> 
> Just sayin'.....



See below. Just because it is something that someone can control, it doesn't mean it isn't discrimination.



ampaholic said:


> Sorry to inform you - fat is not a "protected group" - so they can't be *"discriminated"* against.


_
Definition:dis·crim·i·na·tion  - treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit._

Your statement is ridiculous, you don't have to be a "protected group" to be discriminated against. Your statement only applies to people applying for employment. Any time someone has a negative attitude toward a group of people for the way they look, where they are from, etc, it is discrimination. People have negativities toward people with big noses, blond hair, short, tall, people living in shabby houses, people living in nice big houses, the rich, the poor. It doesn't have to be a protected group under employment law or hate crime to be considered discrimination. Thus why I said it is still one of the last *acceptable* forms of discrimination, it isn't illegal.

If saying they aren't a "protected group" makes you feel better about some of the attitudes displayed here, more power to you.


----------



## dioxide45

jlr10 said:


> It is coming. Look at all the wellness programs businesses are developing. Employers claim theyj just want their employees to be healthy and happy. Maybe partially but it is bottom line about trying to find cheaper rates on healthcare insurance. Many employers are passing the rate increases onto the employeess without ideal biometrics. Those that are not most likely will in the future. Although they can't be blatantly discriminated against many are passing on hiring the chubbiest in this economy (I. Just got lucky) because they can't afford increasing costs. They can afford to do that. Airlines cannot.



Those wellness programs have come along because many of the companies have received government grants that cover most of the costs. I think some of it is more about negotiating power with the insurance companies. If they can show that they are offering these services and the employees as a whole are healthier than average, they can perhaps get better rates on group coverage.

Right now if a company offers group health insurance, everyone's cost is the same, it doesn't matter if they have good biometrics or bad ones.


----------



## dioxide45

pjrose said:


> I agree.   Some are focusing more on the obese than on the issue of having one's space invaded while on a plane.



I think that some people need to remember that those obese that they are referring to are very well also fellow Tuggers. Keep it to the original issue, where I also agree that there is an issue.


----------



## vacationhopeful

dioxide45 said:


> ...Right now if a company offers group health insurance, everyone's cost is the same, it doesn't matter if they have good biometrics or bad ones.



*Many, many large companies are SELF-INSURED*. If you eliminate the unhealthy life-styles (not just the over-sized, but smokers, drinkers, risk-takers, etc), they will IMPROVE their bottom line directly. They do have backup policies for extremely large claims (kidney failure, new age cancer drugs, etc), but joint replacement, heart bypass, etc are self-insured with rates negociated with large care providers.

They pay a Blue Cross or Horizon or Amerihealth to PROCESS claims (administration fees).


----------



## dioxide45

vacationhopeful said:


> *Many, many large companies are SELF-INSURED*. If you eliminate the unhealthy life-styles (not just the over-sized, but smokers, drinkers, risk-takers, etc), they will IMPROVE their bottom line directly. They do have backup policies for extremely large claims (kidney failure, new age cancer drugs, etc), but joint replacement, heart bypass, etc are self-insured with rates negociated with large care providers.
> 
> They pay a Blue Cross or Horizon or Amerihealth to PROCESS claims (administration fees).



While self insured, they are still providing group coverage, not individual coverage. Right now Health Assessments and biometrics are not required by all employees, these programs are voluntary. You can't charge one person more money because they are obese when you may have another one that sits in the cube next to them that didn't voluntarily take the screening to prove they are or are not obese.


----------



## Ridewithme38

Since this has turned into a discussion on health and insurance premiums:

Personally i hate that health is defined just by someones weight, i know a lot of people who, if just going by their BMI are considered Obese, but they are literally gym rats, one i know actually competes in yearly triathlons.  If the ACTUAL health of these people was put up against 90% of those with BMI's in the 'normal weight' section, they'd wipe the flow with them

If i spent a year at the gym i could easily hit the 240lbs(25-30 more pounds) required to be in the 'obese' catagory with a BMI above 30, but with my frame and family medical history, i'd look fine and still be healthy


----------



## dbmarch

What a funny thread...Feel for you as I have been there a number of times flying for work.

Isn't it as simple as this?

You pay good money to rent the space (seat).  (Remember you are not allowed to stand or be in the aisle)   This is what was sold to you.  So someone else should not take it!   There isn't much comfort left these days on planes.

I would have first asked the individual to keep to their space and nudged a little back.

If still not resolved, I would have gotten up and spoken to the attendant to let the attendant know this was happening.   ( a quick photo would be a good idea.  if the 'big' person sees you , tell them you are sending it to the airlines).

Finally if it wasn't resolved by the time I landed, I would have spent my time on the plane writing a letter to the airlines with all the details and the photo.  The letter would go out as soon as I had internet!  

No matter how you look at it, the person that does not fit in their seat is at fault and should either buy another seat, move to another seat or not fly in the seat next to me! 

It doesn't matter why they are big.


----------



## timeos2

Now "Woogums the IC" can't travel anymore? He hardly wet your backpack (& the sandwiches you packed) at all! That's it! Back to Greyhound for us.


----------



## K&PFitz

rickandcindy23 said:


> Why do people put their overcoats into overheads?  I don't get it.  Keep your coat in your seat and stop hogging the overhead compartments.  I went to put my carryon, a small one, into the overhead and piled three coats together, because the stupid people had them lining the entire area of that overhead.  Made me nuts!  Hey, I just want one spot for my small bag.



This reminded me of our last trip.  A woman in front of us had been one of the first in our section to board, and had laid a nice jacket in the overhead, covering the bottom of the overhead.  As others started to put luggage in the overhead, she started yelling, "watch my jacket!"  I think she thought the overhead belonged to only her.  One passenger misunderstood, and handed her the jacket.  The last I noticed it was in a ball on top of the carryon bags.  

Just for the record, I'm one of those that wants the cheapest flight possible, with my other criteria being the number of connections and length of layovers.  I've given up on comfort.  Just get me to where I'm going.


----------



## Kay H

K&PFitz said:


> and had laid a nice jacket in the overhead, covering the bottom of the overhead.  As others started to put luggage in the overhead, she started yelling, "watch my jacket!"  I think she thought the overhead belonged to only her.  One passenger misunderstood, and handed her the jacket.  The last I noticed it was in a ball on top of the carryon bags.




Good for the passenger for handing the coat to the 1st lady.  maybe if more people did that, they would get the message.  If she hadn't put it in the overhead to start, it wouldn't have gotten wrinkled.


----------



## ampaholic

dioxide45 said:


> See below. Just because it is something that someone can control, it doesn't mean it isn't discrimination.
> 
> 
> _
> Definition:dis·crim·i·na·tion  - treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit._
> 
> Your statement is ridiculous, you don't have to be a "protected group" to be discriminated against. Your statement only applies to people applying for employment. Any time someone has a negative attitude toward a group of people for the way they look, where they are from, etc, it is discrimination. People have negativities toward people with big noses, blond hair, short, tall, people living in shabby houses, people living in nice big houses, the rich, the poor. It doesn't have to be a protected group under employment law or hate crime to be considered discrimination. Thus why I said it is still one of the last *acceptable* forms of discrimination, it isn't illegal.
> 
> If saying they aren't a "protected group" makes you feel better about some of the attitudes displayed here, more power to you.



Your whole stance is silly because:

1. Yes, if I pick a NY Strip off the menu - then by definition I have "discriminated against" the Mahi Mahi, and the Lobster - well DUH: 
So using the "word" discrimination doesn't make it discrimination.

2. We live in a nation of LAWS - the LAWS say what is and what isn't OK. The LAWS say you are to avoid robbing my bank. The LAWS say not wanting to sit next to a fat person is not "discrimination".

*Your "opinion" is simply that* - it is not the LAWS - so it does not govern us here and we are not required to bow to your opinion - so knock off the acting like we do.

3. Fat people should be jolly not mean :hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical:


----------



## geekette

Yelling "watch my jacket"??  Ridiculous.  watch your own damned jacket.  watch it get covered up with dusty dirty luggage.  I would of course never intentionally cause harm to someone else's possessions, but, hey, that's where my carry-on goes!  Sorry my bag knocked off some of the custom Be-Dazzling ....

Jacket gets what jacket gets.  If it was so precious, she should have either kept it with her or packed it.  Or bought it its own seat.
---

Discrimination does not have to meet the legal test to be discrimination.  Some of what I read here is just plain mean.  It is not always as simple as calories in/calories out as I know several large people, my mother included, that have "food issues", where it's all tied up in mental/emotional baggage from childhood.  not so easy.  We have never been successful in getting my mother to seek counselling to deal with emotional damage done by her abusive grandmother.  and a host of other things from her youth (including gang rape at 14 - eat more, get big, men leave you alone).  

Overeating may sound like a simple "just don't do it" thing to many of you, but if it's sublimation, it's not so easy.  For many, food isn't just fuel, it's comfort, and way too central to their lives.

A little compassion and understanding goes a long way.  I'm simply lucky to have been built small.  it doesn't make me a better person than someone much larger than me.


----------



## geoand

ampaholic said:


> Your whole stance is silly because:
> 
> 1. Yes, if I pick a NY Strip off the menu - then by definition I have "discriminated against" the Mahi Mahi, and the Lobster - well DUH:
> So using the "word" discrimination doesn't make it discrimination.
> 
> 2. We live in a nation of LAWS - the LAWS say what is and what isn't OK. The LAWS say you are to avoid robbing my bank. The LAWS say not wanting to sit next to a fat person is not "discrimination".
> 
> *Your "opinion" is simply that* - it is not the LAWS - so it does not govern us here and we are not required to bow to your opinion - so knock off the acting like we do.
> 
> 3. Fat people should be jolly not mean :hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical:



I think you may be missing the point here.  The term "discrimination" was not created by the LAWS.  That word has been around for far longer than any of us on this board.  If it existed before the LAWS, then obviously, then so did the actions that discrimination describe.


----------



## Passepartout

*Waitasecondhere!* This has nothing to do with discrimination, mental issues, bad genes or simply a taste for sugar. It's all about courtesy. Anyone who doesn't know that people are getting bigger and airplane seats are getting smaller has been on another planet for the last couple of decades.

When we pay an airline to get us safely from point 'A' to point '2', we know going in that there will be 132 people in 132 seats. No one has a right to occupy more than one. Including the space above it between the armrests. While I feel for those larger than the 90th percentile of people for whom the seats are designed, it isn't my obligation to accommodate them if I choose not to.

Heathpack would have been entirely within her rights to tell her seatmate to quietly scrunch her wide shoulders in, quit flailing her arms, and not infringe on her space. It would have been a tense flight, but so be it. If the offender was so put out by H's forthrightness, let her ask the flight attendant to seat her beside a smaller person. She chose to give Heathpack the 'passive-aggressive' stare, and H. backed down. it obviously worked. 

Jim


----------



## ampaholic

geoand said:


> I think you may be missing the point here.  The term "discrimination" was not created by the LAWS.  That word has been around for far longer than any of us on this board.  If it existed before the LAWS, then obviously, then so did the actions that discrimination describe.



You didn't read my post - I said that using the word "discrimination" doesn't make it so - so *of course* I catch the point that the word predates the laws.

Just as the word "Goofy" predates WDW and Walt's usurpation of the word.

The PC element's attempt to also usurp the word "discrimination" and use it to apply to the act of *"objecting to a fat person stealing one's airspace"* is just that --- GOOFY


----------



## PStreet1

dbmarch said:


> What a funny thread...Feel for you as I have been there a number of times flying for work.
> 
> Isn't it as simple as this?Unfortunately, no it's not.  As I posted earlier, I tried that.  I nicely, and privately, asked the flight attendant to find another seat for the obese person or seat my husband and me somewhere else--there were empty seats scattered here and there throughout the plane.  That's when I was told "No matter what you think, he is a human being."  Honestly, I hadn't implied otherwise.  I had pointed out that I was very uncomfortable and was definitely not getting much over 75% of MY space." (incidently, he didn't smell good either, and I had not pointed that out.)
> 
> You pay good money to rent the space (seat).  (Remember you are not allowed to stand or be in the aisle)   This is what was sold to you.  So someone else should not take it!   There isn't much comfort left these days on planes.
> 
> I would have first asked the individual to keep to their space and nudged a little back.I had tried that--to no avail.  He wanted to raise the arm rest; I forbid it.
> 
> If still not resolved, I would have gotten up and spoken to the attendant to let the attendant know this was happening. As I said, ineffective--my problem for resenting being crowded.  Finally, they moved me--not him.  I spent the remainder of the flight in a different location from my husband, and it was a very long flight.  Definitely interferred with my enjoyment.  ( a quick photo would be a good idea.  if the 'big' person sees you , tell them you are sending it to the airlines).
> 
> Finally if it wasn't resolved by the time I landed, I would have spent my time on the plane writing a letter to the airlines After being moved, I continued to complain about the solution they had found:  not fair, etc.  They told me an airline representative would be waiting for me to complain to when we landed, and there was one.  He said "At this point, there isn't much I can do."  No kidding.  I was certainly aware that it should have been addressed IN THE AIR since a different solution would have been possible.  He said 5000 miles would be added to my account, and it was, so I suppose I gained something.with all the details and the photo.  The letter would go out as soon as I had internet! I sent a letter to management when I got home:  no response.
> 
> No matter how you look at it, the person that does not fit in their seat is at fault and should either buy another seat, move to another seat or not fly in the seat next to me!
> 
> It doesn't matter why they are big.


Sadly, the attendants don't necessarily see it that way.


----------



## Transit

heathpack;1274605

To add insult to injury said:
			
		

> This is worst than being crowded :rofl: :rofl:


----------



## rickandcindy23

Two of our kids had a first-grade teacher who always told the kids, "Please stay in your own people space."  It's very fitting in this situation.  I rarely sit in the middle of a seat, but when I was forced to sit between two married people who were so heavy they couldn't sit next to one another, I understood what that phrase meant.  

But I admit to being forty pounds over my ideal right now, and I have lost 32 pounds over the last year.  I have changed my way of eating completely over the last 16 months.  

Those mai tais and pina coladas while on Maui were way more carbs and sugar than I should have been consuming.  :rofl: I gained about four pounds in those two weeks and lost two of those in the last week.  I am being good.


----------



## geoand

ampaholic said:


> You didn't read my post - I said that using the word "discrimination" doesn't make it so - so *of course* I catch the point that the word predates the laws.
> 
> Just as the word "Goofy" predates WDW and Walt's usurpation of the word.
> 
> The PC element's attempt to also usurp the word "discrimination" and use it to apply to the act of *"objecting to a fat person stealing one's airspace"* is just that --- GOOFY



I don't recall that was how the term was applied.  What I recall was that some comments about "fat" people were.  If I am incorrect, I apologize.

Wasn't there many comments about men stealing airspace and or arm rests? None of those comments had as much negative stuff thrown out at men????

I have stayed out of this thread up until now.

Yes, I am a big guy.  Yes, I know that if I place my arms down, I will steal the arm rests.  No, I am not fat.  No, I do not steal the arm rests.

As I read your posts on this discrimination issue, I see you relying upon the LAWS, so again, I apologize for misunderstanding what you were saying.

Perhaps a better word than discrimination should have been used.  It tends to be a hot point in our society.

I have been on airplanes with fat people sitting next to me.  Some of them have been very pleasant to sit next to and some of them have been unpleasant.  My recollection of those situations was that the difference in experience was due because of the attitude of those people.  I have sat with skinny people also and the experience has been similar.  Some pleasant and some not.  Skinny people stealing space was an issue sometimes.  Again, the attitude was the difference.


----------



## ScoopKona

geoand said:


> My recollection of those situations was that the difference in experience was due because of the attitude of those people.  I have sat with skinny people also and the experience has been similar.  Some pleasant and some not.  Skinny people stealing space was an issue sometimes.  Again, the attitude was the difference.



Funny, I see the issue as one of volume. (Or, mass, if you prefer.)

The skinny person encroaching on one's personal space can be told to knock it off. The passenger who is so obese that his or her fat is spilling over the armrests and is incapable of keeping his or her elbows out of people's faces cannot be told to knock it off.

THAT person needs to buy two seats. He or she doesn't fit in one seat. He or she needs two. It's that simple. Being an apologist for the root causes of obesity doesn't change the fact this hypothetical passenger doesn't fit in a single seat. It's not my problem WHY. My problem is I paid for a product, and someone is taking a portion of that product because of their size. That someone paid the same price I did, yet I get less and they get more (at my expense). 

Air travel is no fun. It is less fun when sitting next to someone who needs a shower. (But you can't discriminate! That poor person has ablutophobia!). It's less fun when forced to sit next to the Michelin Tire Man. It's less fun when someone with severe separation anxiety brings a cat that makes me sneeze the whole trip (and makes the plane smell like a flying litter box).

The people who do these things are inconsiderate. And we should stop mollycoddling them.


----------



## TheTimeTraveler

ScoopLV said:


> Funny, I see the issue as one of volume. (Or, mass, if you prefer.)
> 
> The skinny person encroaching on one's personal space can be told to knock it off. The passenger who is so obese that his or her fat is spilling over the armrests and is incapable of keeping his or her elbows out of people's faces cannot be told to knock it off.
> 
> THAT person needs to buy two seats. He or she doesn't fit in one seat. He or she needs two. It's that simple. Being an apologist for the root causes of obesity doesn't change the fact this hypothetical passenger doesn't fit in a single seat. It's not my problem WHY. My problem is I paid for a product, and someone is taking a portion of that product because of their size. That someone paid the same price I did, yet I get less and they get more (at my expense).
> 
> Air travel is no fun. It is less fun when sitting next to someone who needs a shower. (But you can't discriminate! That poor person has ablutophobia!). It's less fun when forced to sit next to the Michelin Tire Man. It's less fun when someone with severe separation anxiety brings a cat that makes me sneeze the whole trip (and makes the plane smell like a flying litter box).
> 
> The people who do these things are inconsiderate. And we should stop mollycoddling them.







I agree;  a person who is taking up space for more that one seat in coach should be paying for two seats.

The alternative is to buy one seat in first class instead (since the 1st class seats are wider to begin with).




.


----------



## MOXJO7282

Rose Pink said:


> Watch this slide show from the CDC on the obesifying of America.  (Click on play above the map.) http://www.cdc.gov/obesity/data/trends.html
> 
> We live in an obesogenic environment with few people truly understanding the addictive nature of the "food" we consume.  One of the biggest culprits to the excess calories in our diets are sugar sweetened beverages.  It's estimated they contribute half of our excess calories.
> 
> Remember the scandal when cigarette companies were found to add extra nicotine to cigarettes to increase their addictive potential--thus ensuring repeat customers?  Well, the same thing is happening in our food industry.  They aren't adding nicotine of course, but they are designing foods that induce the "bliss point" to ensure repeat customers.  These hyperpalatable foods can quite literally change our brain chemistry in the same fashion as other addictions such as drugs, gambling, shopping, etc.  They all converge on a shared pathway in the mesolimbic system to motivate behavior.  Eating a hyperpalatable food induces a potent release of dopamine.  It's been called the "twinkie circuit."  Eating these foods provides a dopamine reward and that can lead the brain to want more reward. And it takes more and more to induce that dopamine response. Done often enough, the brain gets rewired.
> 
> As a society, we would be wise to address what has happened to our food choices.  Why is it cheaper to buy junk food than fruits and vegetables?  Why do we still allow schools to sell junk food to our children in vending machines?  Sure the schools need money but that is a terrible way to profit off the health of our nation.
> 
> And now, I better shut up before this veers into political/social commentary that will get me banned.:ignore:


BINGO!! We should definitely have a major fat tax applied to these corporations that make huge profits off of the consumers by creting an additive product laced with hidden sugars and carbs that are making our country obese


----------



## jlr10

dioxide45 said:


> Those wellness programs have come along because many of the companies have received government grants that cover most of the costs. I think some of it is more about negotiating power with the insurance companies. If they can show that they are offering these services and the employees as a whole are healthier than average, they can perhaps get better rates on group coverage.
> 
> Right now if a company offers group health insurance, everyone's cost is the same, it doesn't matter if they have good biometrics or bad ones.



The cost to the employer is the same but not always the employee.  Some employers offer particpstion cost reductions for those with good biometrics or who participate in the wellness programs completely. (Stated as a reward rather than the punishment it really is) If going strictly by biometrics there is supposed to be an appeals process for employees that are outside of biometrics for a legit reason. My current employer has a split of either good biometrics or participation in the program or the employer participation in health ins costs is less. My BIL works for a latge employer. The first year of wellness they did voluntary self reporting of biometrics of all employees and family members. This year it will.have to be Dr tests. He said he sees where this is headed. Live an unhealthy lifestyle and it may cost you from a health standpoint and a financial one.  If airlines could figure out how to fix the size standpoint without losing money the would do it. Until then nothing is going to change.
sseeswwhere this is headed to passing on costs.


----------



## vacationhopeful

As I posted on the Longterm Care Insurance thread, there was a base line premium, 2 levels of surcharges (higher than baseline) and only 1 discount off the base line premuim. My too healthy living RN sister who bikes yearly in 500 miles in a fund raising event - was stunned that I got the DISCOUNT rate. My salesperson was SHOCKED with giddy awe - only person in over a month of policy writing (he was hoping I would not get a surcharge premuim rate).

Yes, this a voluntary policy. But my every 3 monthly visit to the Doctor for 3 years where he weigh me EVERY TIME and a definite slow 15% weight lost, better sugar levels, lower blood presure, and active job for 25+ years --- paid off.

Or adult Americans just got soooo much worst than I in the past decade plus.

From the FAT CHART, I am pushing against the thread.


----------



## Rose Pink

Passepartout said:


> *Waitasecondhere!* This has nothing to do with discrimination, mental issues, bad genes or simply a taste for sugar. It's all about courtesy. Anyone who doesn't know that people are getting bigger and airplane seats are getting smaller has been on another planet for the last couple of decades.
> 
> When we pay an airline to get us safely from point 'A' to point '2', we know going in that there will be 132 people in 132 seats. No one has a right to occupy more than one. Including the space above it between the armrests. While I feel for those larger than the 90th percentile of people for whom the seats are designed, it isn't my obligation to accommodate them if I choose not to.
> 
> .......
> Jim


 
I agree with you, Jim.  It is about courtesy.  However, I'm not sure that airline seats accomodate all but the heaviest 10 percent.  I know they won't if the obesity trend continues.


----------



## Patri

Passepartout said:


> *
> Heathpack would have been entirely within her rights
> *


*

Heathpack is female? Doesn't matter, but I've always imagined a man.

People better not advocate for an enforced definition of obese. I had my annual physical today and in my release papers (never gotten before) my IBW (Ideal Body Weight - again, never seen before) was 130.
I was shocked. I am just shy of 5'7. I'm only a few pounds above that number, and I suppose I could make myself get down there. The dr. said 99% of people cannot meet their IBW. She said she prefers BMI and I was right on target for that.
I thought with insurance tables adjusted etc., that acceptable weights were much higher, relatively speaking. Even if only by 10 pounds. If the airlines started charging by IBW, we'd all be in trouble.*


----------



## Rose Pink

I do believe one should pay for the space he/she occupies.  The only way I know how to do this is to measure the broadest part of the body whether it be the seated derriere, the shoulders, or (as in the OP's case) the arms/elbows forced to spread out due to the girth beneath them.

I do understand flight attendants' reluctance to enforce removal of a person who is too big for his space given the bad publicity it could receive.  And, because they are just as tired and frazzled as the rest of us.  I sometimes wonder why more of them don't go postal given what they have to deal with.  My sister told me stories that made me cringe.

However, I am not sure what the solution is.  It seems obvious that those taking up more than one seat should be _required_ by law to purchase more space.  It is a safety issue and should be regulated by the FAA.  

So, if the airlines make their seats 12 inches, for example, then all but the smallest persons would have to buy more space.  The airlines could really make a profit on this--as long as the public continues to fly, that is.  There would have to be a minimum seat width mandated by the FAA.  That would most likely need to be based on the average person's width.  The average person's width just gets wider every year.  

And, yes, we could all be more sensitive to those around us.  Don't stand in the middle of the walkway or aisle.  If you need to walk slowly, move to the right and don't block those who wish to travel faster.  Be aware of what and who is around you.  Unfortunately, many people are clueless even when they don't intend to be rude.  Others don't care whether they are rude or not.  To them, everyone else is rude.

Be kind.  It is a happy way to live.


----------



## pjrose

Patri said:


> Heathpack is female? Doesn't matter, but I've always imagined a man.
> 
> . . .



I did for awhile, till she mentioned "Mr. H."  It'd be fun to be able to compare our mental pictures of each other to the real people.  In some cases we have real photos.  But with Scoop and Troggy.....if they look like their Avatars, we're in trouble!


----------



## Rose Pink

Patri said:


> Heathpack is female? Doesn't matter, but I've always imagined a man.
> 
> People better not advocate for an enforced definition of obese. I had my annual physical today and in my release papers (never gotten before) my IBW (Ideal Body Weight - again, never seen before) was 130.
> I was shocked. I am just shy of 5'7. I'm only a few pounds above that number, and I suppose I could make myself get down there. The dr. said 99% of people cannot meet their IBW. She said she prefers BMI and I was right on target for that.
> I thought with insurance tables adjusted etc., that acceptable weights were much higher, relatively speaking. Even if only by 10 pounds. If the airlines started charging by IBW, we'd all be in trouble.


 
IBW depends on who is calculating it based on which research they are studying.  When calculating IBW for my patients, I would use the standard for women of 100# for the first 5 feet plus 5 pounds for each additional inch *plus or minus 10% to account for frame size.*  That would make a 5'7" woman's IBW to be 135# +/- 10% or 121.5 to 148.5 pounds depending on whether you were small boned or large boned.  (That is measured at the wrist.)  For men, the calculation was 106# for the first 5 feet plus 6 pounds for every additional inch plus or minus 10% for frame size.

BMI just irriates me.  It is a ratio of height and weight and does not take into account frame size nor lean to fat.  It isn't any better, IMO, than IBW charts.  It has the same restrictions as far as accuracy.


----------



## Nolathyme

On long car trips my brother would put tape on the seats and have tacks come up from under the tape. If anyone crossed their side , they could get a tack on the hand or bum.

Putting up the food tray keeps some body parts from invading one's space.

I've also put my computer between my seat and my arm rest. The computer protrudes enough to hinder elbows from coming over.


----------



## Elli

pjrose said:


> I did for awhile, till she mentioned "Mr. H."  It'd be fun to be able to compare our mental pictures of each other to the real people.  In some cases we have real photos.  But with Scoop and Troggy.....if they look like their Avatars, we're in trouble!


Haven't seen any pictures of Scoop, but Troggy has posted lots of pictures.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

pjrose said:


> I did for awhile, till she mentioned "Mr. H."  It'd be fun to be able to compare our mental pictures of each other to the real people.  In some cases we have real photos.  But with Scoop and Troggy.....if they look like their Avatars, we're in trouble!



Not to worry. OY I use a portrait from my younger days, before I joined Hair Club for Men:


----------



## heathpack

Patri said:


> Heathpack is female? Doesn't matter, but I've always imagined a man.



Heathpack on the left, Mr. Heathpack on the right.  Hiking Catalina Island.






H


----------



## dioxide45

Elli said:


> Haven't seen any pictures of Scoop, but Troggy has posted lots of pictures.



I thought Scoop looked like Einstein?


----------



## dioxide45

ampaholic said:


> *Your "opinion" is simply that* - it is not the LAWS - so it does not govern us here and we are not required to bow to your opinion - so knock off the acting like we do.



Laws were created to prevent or protect against discrimination. Discrimination existed before the laws. The laws didn't create discrimination, they just made it illegal to do so in certain situations. Discrimination however doesn't have to be illegal by law to still be discrimination.

If discrimination wasn't the correct term, perhaps bias or stereotyping is? That may better describe what has occurred here by *some*, not the everyone, and nothing to do with the original topic. Whatever the term, it doesn't make it any more okay.


----------



## pjrose

Elli said:


> Haven't seen any pictures of Scoop, but Troggy has posted lots of pictures.





T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Not to worry. OY I use a portrait from my younger days, before I joined Hair Club for Men:





dioxide45 said:


> I thought Scoop looked like Einstein?



More like a zombie....


----------



## pjrose

heathpack said:


> Heathpack on the left, Mr. Heathpack on the right.  Hiking Catalina Island.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> H



How do you stay thin-loooking with all those mini-pies and zoku popsicles???  If I eat one handful of Hershey Kisses I gain two pounds.

Oh.....maybe it has something to do with that word "hiking" above your photo?  And perhaps daily wrestling with recalcitrant cats and dogs?


----------



## rickandcindy23

Ken555 said:


> As I read this thread, I can only think of this...



This was that movie by Disney, where the people drink milkshakes and ride around in some sort of chairs.  Weirdest Disney movie ever.  I think it was called Wall-E.


----------



## laurac260

rickandcindy23 said:


> This was that movie by Disney, where the people drink milkshakes and ride around in some sort of chairs.  Weirdest Disney movie ever.  I think it was called Wall-E.



Yes, Wall-e, and it was by Pixar.  It was an amazing movie, and you could almost see us heading in that direction.   One of the best movies Pixar has made so far.


----------



## ampaholic

dioxide45 said:


> Laws were created to prevent or protect against discrimination. Discrimination existed before the laws. The laws didn't create discrimination, they just made it illegal to do so in certain situations. Discrimination however doesn't have to be illegal by law to still be discrimination.
> 
> If discrimination wasn't the correct term, perhaps bias or stereotyping is? That may better describe what has occurred here by *some*, not the everyone, and nothing to do with the original topic. *Whatever the term, it doesn't make it any more okay*.



Thus spake the arbiter of what is *"okay"*? Who died and put you in charge of what is *"okay"*?

There is a lot of emerging science showing us it is not *"okay"* to be obese - so get off your high horse.

"Discrimination" as you use the word most certainly is defined by laws - just as "homicide" is a legal definition while killed is just a word.

Anyway I am at the Hotel waiting to get off to Hawaii so I won't be here much for a week or 10 days.

neener, neener, neener :hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical:


----------



## MuranoJo

pjrose said:


> How do you stay thin-loooking with all those mini-pies and zoku popsicles???  If I eat one handful of Hershey Kisses I gain two pounds.
> 
> Oh.....maybe it has something to do with that word "hiking" above your photo?  And perhaps daily wrestling with recalcitrant cats and dogs?



Same thing I was wondering.  .  But note H was the major active one on a short-lived thread about dieting.  I guess you can endulge if you combine it with exercise.


----------



## Ken555

I'm a firm believer that I should pay for whatever I use, and expect others to do so similarly. As others have already said, until this thread morphed into an obvious unfortunate discussion, if a passenger needs more than the space available within one seat then they must buy another. Period. End of story. Doesn't matter why they need more space at all. The simple fact is that they do need more space. You use it, you pay for it. 

Unfortunately, it's clear that Mrs. H got the short end of the stick on this one, and her enjoyment of the flight and seats reserved was diminished due to the thoughtless and disrespectful attitude of the individual sitting in the middle seat. 

I really don't see any other fair way to look at this. It has absolutey nothing to do with discrimination, so let's take that to another thread.


----------



## ScoopKona

muranojo said:


> Same thing I was wondering.  .  But note H was the major active one on a short-lived thread about dieting.  I guess you can endulge if you combine it with exercise.



Julia Child said it best. (She said a lot of things best. Wish I could have met her.) "It's OK to eat like a horse, as long as you also run like one, too."


----------



## dioxide45

ampaholic said:


> Thus spake the arbiter of what is *"okay"*? Who died and put you in charge of what is *"okay"*?
> 
> There is a lot of emerging science showing us it is not *"okay"* to be obese - so get off your high horse.
> 
> "Discrimination" as you use the word most certainly is defined by laws - just as "homicide" is a legal definition while killed is just a word.
> 
> Anyway I am at the Hotel waiting to get off to Hawaii so I won't be here much for a week or 10 days.
> 
> neener, neener, neener :hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical:



Good grief... This whole thread is based on opinion, as much of everything that is discussed here. I stated my opinion, I did not state it as a fact like you seem to want to believe. It is my opinion, you don't have to agree or like it, but it is what it is. It goes both ways.

Lets look at only one of the posts that caused me to post my opinion.



> I bet the offending passenger ate too many mini pies...........



An assumption was made by the poster based on the "group" that the offending flier was in. Not sure what your definition of that is, but it seems to meet that of discrimination or stereotyping. Once again, something doesn't have to be against the law to be discrimination.

Example 1: 30 people live on your block, you are having a neighborhood party but only inviting 25 because the family at the corner is obese. This isn't illegal because you are free to invite who you want to your party, it is your party. There is no law broken, you would probably be considered a jerk, but you didn't break a law. You did discriminate though based on the *group* they are in.

Example 2: You are hiring 30 people, but you didn't hire a certain 5 people because they were all women and you were only hiring men. This is against the law since the hiring decision was based on gender not individual merit and qualifications.


----------



## Twinkstarr

muranojo said:


> Same thing I was wondering.  .  But note H was the major active one on a short-lived thread about dieting.  I guess you can endulge if you combine it with exercise.



Yes you can indulge, I've lost 50+ lbs over the last 2 years and have kept it off. I eat my Xmas goodies, treat myself to dessert every so often(but I will usually share it with my DH or sister)

But I work out 6-7 days a week(45-60 minutes per session) and yes I am 48 yrs old.


----------



## Twinkstarr

laurac260 said:


> Yes, Wall-e, and it was by Pixar.  It was an amazing movie, and you could almost see us heading in that direction.   One of the best movies Pixar has made so far.



I really liked it also, I forget how old my eldest was when we saw it(15yrs now) and he got the "message".

My sister not so much, she slept through 90% of it and then pronounced it was the worst movie she had seen. Eldest mentioned she really shouldn't comment since she slept through the whole thing.


----------



## Ridewithme38

Ken555 said:


> I'm a firm believer that I should pay for whatever I use, and expect others to do so similarly. As others have already said, until this thread morphed into an obvious unfortunate discussion, if a passenger needs more than the space available within one seat then they must buy another. Period. End of story. Doesn't matter why they need more space at all. The simple fact is that they do need more space. You use it, you pay for it.



to be fair, most overweight people can't use an ENTIRE other seat, so what you are suggesting is forcing them to pay for space they WON'T use...that doesn't seem anymore fair then having an overweight person 'overflow' into your seat so there is some space you can't use


----------



## Rose Pink

Ridewithme38 said:


> to be fair, most overweight people can't use an ENTIRE other seat, so what you are suggesting is forcing them to pay for space they WON'T use...that doesn't seem anymore fair then having an overweight person 'overflow' into your seat so there is some space you can't use


I do think it is fair.  If a smaller person is not using up every inch of his/her seat, they don't get a discount for what they are not using. But I shouldn't expect to be uncomfortable in my seat because someone else is already sitting there, too.


As I said in a previous post, the airlines could make their seats any size they wish--even 12 inches--and then charge any of us for two or more seats depending on what it would take to keep our bodies within said number of seats.

Maybe there should be a divider between seats that goes as high as the shoulders so that people would be forced to keep within their alloted/purchased space.


----------



## Elan

Ridewithme38 said:


> to be fair, most overweight people can't use an ENTIRE other seat, so what you are suggesting is forcing them to pay for space they WON'T use...that doesn't seem anymore fair then having an overweight person 'overflow' into your seat so there is some space you can't use



  They can use the extra space for snacks.


----------



## Tia

Elan said:


> They can use the extra space for snacks.



Your bad, very bad :ignore:


----------



## Rose Pink

Tia said:


> Your bad, very bad :ignore:


Some things are so bad they are good.  

Sort of like a puppy that is so ugly, it is actually cute.


----------



## Tia

Rose Pink said:


> Some things are so bad they are good.
> 
> Sort of like a puppy that is so ugly, it is actually cute.



So so true


----------



## Ridewithme38

Rose Pink said:


> Some things are so bad they are good.
> 
> Sort of like a puppy that is so ugly, it is actually cute.





Tia said:


> So so true



My friend had a 'chug' when he was younger, half Chihuahua half Pug...That was about the ugliest dog i'd ever seen, but it was awesome!


----------



## Rose Pink

Are we going to talk about fat, ugly dogs on planes now?  Where is the courtesy?

(It _could_ be appropriate since the OP is a veterinarian.  It isn't really off topic, is it?)


----------



## geekette

ampaholic said:


> Thus spake the arbiter of what is *"okay"*? Who died and put you in charge of what is *"okay"*?
> 
> There is a lot of emerging science showing us it is not *"okay"* to be obese - so get off your high horse.
> 
> "Discrimination" as you use the word most certainly is defined by laws - just as "homicide" is a legal definition while killed is just a word.
> 
> Anyway I am at the Hotel waiting to get off to Hawaii so I won't be here much for a week or 10 days.
> 
> neener, neener, neener :hysterical: :rofl: :hysterical:



I don't care what the law says, dignified society says it is NOT OKAY.  Nobody has to die for this to be true.  no law has to be created.

Some things ain't cool.  Not sure why the need for legislation or the reliance on it??  Not sure why you require there to be some formal label or declaration.

Golden Rule covers many things that the law never will.  You can go by the law or you can participate in polite society.  Polite society obeys the law but goes a bit farther than that as well.

But either way, I'm not keen on your tone.  Which is also not discrimination, nor illegal, its simply how I feel.


----------



## Ken555

Ridewithme38 said:


> to be fair, most overweight people can't use an ENTIRE other seat, so what you are suggesting is forcing them to pay for space they WON'T use...that doesn't seem anymore fair then having an overweight person 'overflow' into your seat so there is some space you can't use



Absolute nonsense. 

Remember, in reality this is a simple business transaction, albeit for a somewhat regulated industry where the airline is just the service provider supplying a product. We don't determine how the provider allocates space, but this is a known item which can easily be discovered prior to buying the product as it's listed on their website, call sales offices, etc.

If I have someone overflow into my space, as others have already clearly stated, they are now utilizing space I paid for. That is not only not fair, but in my opinion the service provider should be held accountable to make certain this does not happen. I have every right to the space I purchased, and no one should have the ability to take away from my purchase without my consent.

On the other hand, if an individual simply cannot fit into the space of one seat then they need more space. It doesn't matter if they need one inch or ten inches of additional width, the simple fact is that they need more. Unfortunately, in general economy seats tend to be available in one size. We didn't make that decision, it's just the way it is. It is, unlike many posts on this thread, a FACT and is the product we are purchasing. There is every reason to assume the buyer knows this ahead of time, and also knows they will have difficulty (or not) fitting into the allocated space. The vendor does not know, and should not need to know, ahead of time if a specific individual requires more than the average space (as defined by the space for a single economy seat). The buyer is responsible for their actions, and in this scenario they are the one who is taking away from other paying passengers, which is simply wrong. It's not a stretch to say this is stealing.


----------



## Rose Pink

Ken555 said:


> ....The buyer is responsible for their actions, and in this scenario they are the one who is taking away from other paying passengers, which is simply wrong. *It's not a stretch to say this is stealing*.


 Agreed.


----------



## geoand

Isn't this really a problem created by the airlines?  The fault does not lie with the person who is too large for the seat provided.

Is this a discussion about how the airlines should handle it or about the OP's comment about the behavior and rudeness of the person sitting next to the OP?


----------



## geoand

Ken555 said:


> On the other hand, if an individual simply cannot fit into the space of one seat then they need more space. It doesn't matter if they need one inch or ten inches of additional width, the simple fact is that they need more. Unfortunately, in general economy seats tend to be available in one size. We didn't make that decision, it's just the way it is. It is, unlike many posts on this thread, a FACT and is the product we are purchasing. There is every reason to assume the buyer knows this ahead of time, and also knows they will have difficulty (or not) fitting into the allocated space. The vendor does not know, and should not need to know, ahead of time if a specific individual requires more than the average space (as defined by the space for a single economy seat). The buyer is responsible for their actions, and in this scenario they are the one who is taking away from other paying passengers, which is simply wrong. It's not a stretch to say this is stealing.



This is another example of the airline allowing this to happen.  Yes, airline does not know at purchase, but they certainly know at check in.  Again the airline is at fault for allowing someone to steal from others.


----------



## scrapngen

Ridewithme38 said:


> to be fair, most overweight people can't use an ENTIRE other seat, so what you are suggesting is forcing them to pay for space they WON'T use...that doesn't seem anymore fair then having an overweight person 'overflow' into your seat so there is some space you can't use



It's like hot dogs and buns. Hot dogs come 10 in a pack, but buns are 8 in a pack. (too small a seat). Don't really need 16 buns, but do need the extra 2. Therefore, you must pay for all 16 to get enough buns to cover your dogs. 

If you need the space, you should pay for it, and not take away from others. It doesn't matter why you have this situation. Frankly, if I got into my seat and one of the Harlem Globetrotters was elbowing my eye and hogging the armrest I'd be just as bothered as with  a width challenged person. Why the guy got that big is not my issue. Maybe he shouldn't have grown so abnormally and worked out to get so many muscles. However, I am not discriminating against tall basketball players when I complain about his size impinging on my space.    And if asked to rein in your elbows playing a game, then find another way to occupy yourself or hold the game differently.


----------



## ScoopKona

geoand said:


> Isn't this really a problem created by the airlines?  The fault does not lie with the person who is too large for the seat provided.



Both are to blame. The airline should risk the public relations spectacle and insist people who need more space buy an additional seat.

Morbidly-obese people can exercise more, eat healthier food and slim down to merely "obese" -- then they can fit in the seat. I think this is the point that ruffles the most feathers. "How dare you insinuate that someone should exercise and lose weight? It's an addiction. It's a medical problem. It's beyond their control. Slim people should just grin and bear it when the obese infringe on their personal space."

We don't have much sympathy for nicotine addicts on airplanes. If they want to be more comfortable on a long-haul, they can quit smoking. It's better for them, anyway. The morbidly obese should expect the same kind of attitude. Their addiction shouldn't mean my discomfort.


----------



## Ridewithme38

geoand said:


> Isn't this really a problem created by the airlines?  The fault does not lie with the person who is too large for the seat provided.



That IMO is a rather important question, do we fault overweight people who have to fly and have these situations forced upon them, or the Airlines for making the seats too small for even an average person to be comfortable in

99% of people can't tell you the difference between seat widths between airlines, the 21" may have been fine for them on the Airbus 320 with Air Asia, but the 16.25" available from Airbus A330-200 with Monarch Airlines is too small a 5" difference is a HUGE difference, do you really fault the guy that got tricked by the airline into a smaller seat?


----------



## geoand

ScoopLV said:


> Morbidly-obese people can exercise more, eat healthier food and slim down to merely "obese" -- then they can fit in the seat. I think this is the point that ruffles the most feathers. "How dare you insinuate that someone should exercise and lose weight? It's an addiction. It's a medical problem. It's beyond their control. Slim people should just grin and bear it when the obese infringe on their personal space."


I don't think the OP had this in mind when posting.  However, I do think the thread has been hijacked into this as the main discussion point.


----------



## ScoopKona

geoand said:


> I don't think the OP had this in mind when posting.  However, I do think the thread has been hijacked into this as the main discussion point.



What we're seeing is the same kind of frustration that we saw during the run-up to all the anti-smoking laws.

Remember when Northwest became the first airline to prohibit smoking on all their flights? I do. People didn't want to arrive at their destination smelling like an ashtray and coughing up phlegm.

People also want to quietly use their seat without constantly being jostled by flabby limbs. 

The public frustration will get worse until the airlines do something about it.


----------



## Rose Pink

ScoopLV said:


> Both are to blame. The airline should risk the public relations spectacle and insist people who need more space buy an additional seat.


It would be a less costly public relations issue if the rules were set by the FAA and not by each individual airline.  I see this as a safety issue, not merely a comfort issue or rudeness issue.



ScoopLV said:


> Morbidly-obese people can exercise more, eat healthier food and slim down to merely "obese" -- then they can fit in the seat. *I think this is the point that ruffles the most feathers. "How dare you insinuate that someone should exercise and lose weight? It's an addiction. It's a medical problem. It's beyond their control. Slim people should just grin and bear it when the obese infringe on their personal space."*
> 
> We don't have much sympathy for nicotine addicts on airplanes. If they want to be more comfortable on a long-haul, they can quit smoking. It's better for them, anyway. The morbidly obese should expect the same kind of attitude. Their addiction shouldn't mean my discomfort.


 
Whoa there, Scoop.  I'm the one that mentioned overeating can be an addiction.  However, I never in any of my posts said the rest of us should grin and bear it.  I've said the exact opposite--those who can't fit into their seats should buy more space.


----------



## Ridewithme38

ScoopLV said:


> Both are to blame. The airline should risk the public relations spectacle and insist people who need more space buy an additional seat.
> 
> Morbidly-obese people can exercise more, eat healthier food and slim down to merely "obese" -- then they can fit in the seat.



You need to fly a bit more...Even the 'pleasantly plump' can't fit in the current Airplane seats, let alone the 'morbidly obese' or just 'obese', heck, if you're just 'thick' your not fitting in a 16.25" seat!

I think people need to realize that its not the fault of every american who isn't anorexic, the airlines are making the seats too small for EVERYONE, not one person in this thread has mentioned how comfortable the width of airplane seats are


----------



## Phydeaux

Ridewithme38 said:


> That IMO is a rather important question, do we fault overweight people who have to fly and have these situations forced upon them, or *the Airlines for making the seats too small for even an average person to be comfortable in*
> 99% of people can't tell you the difference between seat widths between airlines, the 21" may have been fine for them on the Airbus 320 with Air Asia, but the 16.25" available from Airbus A330-200 with Monarch Airlines is too small a 5" difference is a HUGE difference, do you really fault the guy that got tricked by the airline into a smaller seat?



Really? And how did you arrive at that conclusion? Do you have first hand knowledge of body habitus statistics and how they are applied by the airlines in their design of the aircraft itself, including the seats? What, specifically, are the body habitus attributes of the "average person"?

Please, do tell.


----------



## ScoopKona

Rose Pink said:


> Whoa there, Scoop.  I'm the one that mentioned overeating can be an addiction.  However, I never in any of my posts said the rest of us should grin and bear it.  I've said the exact opposite--those who can't fit into their seats should buy more space.



I'm speaking of the morbidly obese woman who sat next to Heathpack. She obviously had a "you can sit there and deal with it" attitude.


----------



## PStreet1

geoand said:


> Isn't this really a problem created by the airlines?  I don't think so.  They have a product; they sell it.  We choose whether or not to buy it.  We know the size of the seats.  We know we will be herded on like cattle.  We buy or we don't buy.  The fault does not lie with the person who is too large for the seat provided.It does if the person doesn't allow for his size.  Flying on an airplane is "public conveyance," so everyone has a right to buy--but not everyone is entitled to pay the same price if the standards are spelled out.  I have a right to the seat I paid for--almost as if there were a ceiling to seat divider.  No one is entitled to be in my space--and a person who laps over into my space is violating the terms of my having purchased a seat.
> 
> Is this a discussion about how the airlines should handle it or about the OP's comment about the behavior and rudeness of the person sitting next to the OP?


It seems to me that it's both.  The person of size simply doesn't give a damn how much others are inconvenienced by the person of size; he/she is taking up extra room and that's that.  The airlines are in a bind.  Most people fit into the seats.  There is a problem with pointing out the obesity, e.g. asking my seat mate to lift his fat to display a locked seat belt (which wasn't locked).  Who's going to do that?  No one.  We are told when napping to be sure the seat belt is visible to the flight attendant--yet my seat mate simply doesn't wear a belt.  Is that right?  Obviously not--but again, who's going to ask?  I wouldn't.  At some point, the airlines have to make a blanket policy that can be enforced when needed--like the carryon rule.  Most of the time it isn't enforced, but the rule is there and can be enforced if need be.  On our flight to Puerto Rico, we returned to the gate so a passenger could be removed by force.  The police came on board and took him off.  If a person can't fit into the seat without taking the space other people paid for, perhaps that person needs to be enscorted off the plane.  He isn't entitled to abuse others, and lapping over onto them is a form of very unwelcome contact, which constitutes abuse.


----------



## Patri

Hi heathpack.    

As for some of the rest of you, the arguments are just getting lame. Take it outside. The topic is not worth losing TUG friends.


----------



## Liz Wolf-Spada

I really don't like strangers touching me when I fly and even my husband makes me uncomfortable if I have no personal space. I do believe it is the responsibility of the oversized person to keep their arms folded in and not extending over the armrest. Yes, it may not be comfortable for them, but it is their allotted space.
Liz


----------



## Beefnot

I am a relatively narrow person and I often feel a bit tight in airplane seats.


----------



## dioxide45

Rose Pink said:


> I do think it is fair.  If a smaller person is not using up every inch of his/her seat, they don't get a discount for what they are not using. But I shouldn't expect to be uncomfortable in my seat because someone else is already sitting there, too.



Sure the slim person doesn't get a discount for the space they don't use, but the proportion of space to price paid is different for the slim person vs. the overweight one. Sure the slim person may not utilize 4" of their seat and they don't get a discount, but the overweight one will pay double and not use 12" of their "paid for" space. Not really equally fair. Though until the airlines make different sized seat (won't happen) it won't change.

Unfortunately in the end you will never have a perfect situation. In the OPs case the flight attendants had to visit that row and speak to the occupants directly since they were in an exit row. The attendant should have seen the problem before the plane got off the ground. Perhaps there wasn't any empty seats, or they didn't want to embarrass the overweight flier. Either way, it made for a very uncomfortable ride for the OP and a very unfortunate situation.

I think the problem was only compounded by the overweight fliers complete disregard of an issue. If they had been polite and tried to be less intrusive it would have made things much better. Perhaps more bearable The issue seems to be more about the overweight fliers attitude than just the fact that they were overweight.


----------



## Beefnot

Obese fliers don't belong in exit rows, whether their attitude is super great or piss poor.  Yes, this is a failure of the stewardess/airline.


----------



## CarolF

Beefnot said:


> I am a relatively narrow person and I often feel a bit tight in airplane seats.



I am also _narrow_ and feel that my _personal space_ comfort level is compromised in airplane seats.


----------



## dioxide45

Beefnot said:


> Obese fliers don't belong in exit rows, whether their attitude is super great or piss poor.  Yes, this is a failure of the stewardess/airline.



True, but currently the only regulation is that the person can't be using a seatbelt extender. Which they apparently didn't need.


----------



## "Roger"

(Note: This is not meant to be an argumentive post - just posting something I noticed.)

My wife and I are time sharing in Florida at the moment. We like to spend our time going to various sites birding.  This afternoon we went to an unmanned (unpersoned?) Audibon site. I couldn't help but think of this thread getting into the site. You had to pass through a six foot long, chain-linked passageway that could not have been any wider than your average airline seat (maybe even narrower). Apparently Audibon consulted American Airlines when they designed the entryway to this site.


----------



## T_R_Oglodyte

dioxide45 said:


> Sure the slim person doesn't get a discount for the space they don't use, but the proportion of space to price paid is different for the slim person vs. the overweight one. Sure the slim person may not utilize 4" of their seat and they don't get a discount, but the overweight one will pay double and not use 12" of their "paid for" space. Not really equally fair. Though until the airlines make different sized seat (won't happen) it won't change.


Let's adjust the situation. Let's say that you are an owner at a timeshare resort rents out unused space, the rental income helping to defray annual owner maintenance fees.  Let's say that for a certain period your resort only has available for rent one bedroom units - kitchen, bedroom, and living room with hide-a-bed. Your classic one-bedroom, sleeps four type of arangement.

Now there is a couple traveling who rents from your resort, but they only need the bedroom since they are eating all of their meals out anyway.  Since your resort only has one-bedroom units that couple, however, winds up paying for a kitchen that they don't need. May I presume that you are satisfied  that they should not get some kind of discount or rebate from your resort for that kitchen and living room they received but didn't really need?

Now let's consider a family traveling with teenage son and daughter.  They need two bedrooms, but only one kitchen.  But since your resort only has one-bedroom units, they have to take two one-bedroom units, giving them a kitchen that they don't need.  Do you think your resort should give them a rebate because all that was available  was a unit that was bigger than what they needed?

*****

Seems to me that if it seems unfair to you that an airline would charge the full cost of a seat to a passenger who needs just a bit more room, then certainly you must think it equally unfair that your resort would require that person family who only needs a bedroom to pay for an entire one-bedroom condo.


----------



## dioxide45

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Seems to me that if it seems unfair to you that an airline would charge the full cost of a seat to a passenger who needs just a bit more room, then certainly you must think it equally unfair that your resort would require that person family who only needs a bedroom to pay for an entire one-bedroom condo.



I agree, it is equally unfair all around. I never said it was *only* unfair to the passenger of size to have to pay for a whole extra seat.

However, it is a little different with timeshares in your example. There are many different timeshares that someone can choose to go to. There are ones with 2BR units, ones with 3BR units, some with only studios or 1BR units. They don't have to rent from me and go to my timeshare that only has 1BR units. People can pay an proportionate difference in price for a different unit at a different resort. With airlines, they are more cookie cutter, you have seats that are pretty much 17-18" in width with a few exceptions. The business and first class seats that offer extra width and legroom are not proportionately priced as compared to the ones with 17-18" of legroom. Someone may be able to actually rent a 2BR unit cheaper than two 1BR units (even at the same resort), but that business class seat may cost four or more times as much as the coach seat.


----------



## Phydeaux

dioxide45 said:


> I agree, it is equally unfair all around. I never said it was *only* unfair to the passenger of size to have to pay for a whole extra seat.
> 
> However, it is a little different with timeshares in your example. There are many different timeshares that someone can choose to go to. There are ones with 2BR units, ones with 3BR units, some with only studios or 1BR units. They don't have to rent from me and go to my timeshare that only has 1BR units. People can pay an proportionate difference in price for a different unit at a different resort. With airlines, they are more cookie cutter, you have seats that are pretty much 17-18" in width with a few exceptions. The business and first class seats that offer extra width and legroom are not proportionately priced as compared to the ones with 17-18" of legroom. Someone may be able to actually rent a 2BR unit cheaper than two 1BR units (even at the same resort), but that business class seat may cost four or more times as much as the coach seat.



Give it a rest.


----------



## pgnewarkboy

Life's a bitch and then you die.  Man up and shut up about your  discomfort. Be glad you don't have a real problem.


----------



## Ridewithme38

T_R_Oglodyte said:


> Let's adjust the situation. Let's say that you are an owner at a timeshare resort rents out unused space, the rental income helping to defray annual owner maintenance fees.  Let's say that for a certain period your resort only has available for rent one bedroom units - kitchen, bedroom, and living room with hide-a-bed. Your classic one-bedroom, sleeps four type of arangement.
> 
> Now there is a couple traveling who rents from your resort, but they only need the bedroom since they are eating all of their meals out anyway.  Since your resort only has one-bedroom units that couple, however, winds up paying for a kitchen that they don't need. May I presume that you are satisfied  that they should not get some kind of discount or rebate from your resort for that kitchen and living room they received but didn't really need?
> 
> Now let's consider a family traveling with teenage son and daughter.  They need two bedrooms, but only one kitchen.  But since your resort only has one-bedroom units, they have to take two one-bedroom units, giving them a kitchen that they don't need.  Do you think your resort should give them a rebate because all that was available  was a unit that was bigger than what they needed?
> 
> *****
> 
> Seems to me that if it seems unfair to you that an airline would charge the full cost of a seat to a passenger who needs just a bit more room, then certainly you must think it equally unfair that your resort would require that person family who only needs a bedroom to pay for an entire one-bedroom condo.



The thing is, the timeshare advertises UPFRONT, how many Bedrooms and kitchens you are getting, i've never bought a ticket from an airline that specified on it the width of the seat....for some, the difference between 16.25" and 21" is the difference between fitting perfectly and overflowing, If the timeshare advertised a 1br, but when you checked in it was only a single/twin sized bed, that would be equal to getting on a plane and finding out your seat isn't big enough, should you be forced to upgrade to a 2br TS in that case?


----------



## ondeadlin

The most uncomfortable aspect of this situation is when the overweight person asks me to put the armrest up.  That's simply an unreasonable request in my book.

When I'm seated next to an overweight person, I typically ask to be moved.  If the steward can't accommodate my request, I'm putting the armrest down and they're dealing with it. There's no good solution IMO.


----------



## DianeG

ondeadlin said:


> When I'm seated next to an overweight person, I typically ask to be moved.  If the steward can't accommodate my request, I'm putting the armrest down and they're dealing with it. There's no good solution IMO.



Sigh... and are you the type to "claim" that arm rest too?

I'll say it again: the only way to survive sardine class is with courtesy.


----------



## PStreet1

DianeG said:


> Sigh... and are you the type to "claim" that arm rest too?
> 
> I'll say it again: the only way to survive sardine class is with courtesy.


My reason for insisting that it be down is that I don't want to be touching thigh to thigh for the whole trip.  I may not be able to avoid upper body contact with a stranger, but I don't have to have lower body contact also.


----------



## Beefnot

DianeG said:


> Sigh... and are you the type to "claim" that arm rest too?
> 
> I'll say it again: the only way to survive sardine class is with courtesy.



I would never let the armrest be put up. But I do believe that the person in the middle is "entitled" to the front two-thirds of each armrest to compensate for being in the least desirable seat.


----------



## IngridN

Talked to DH earlier this am and his flight yesterday, non-stop SFO to Frankfurt, had an interesting twist to the usual overweight person intruding on your space. 

He had the aisle seat and the person in the middle seat was of good size, but not obese by any means. This elderly (DH is no spring chicken at 65) gentlemen insisted on hogging some of DH's space simply because and kept poking him in the side throughout the flight. DH is 6'1" & 185# so takes up his own space. It got especially bad at mealtime...his seatmate told him he was right handed and therefore needed some of his (DH's) space during the mealtime and DH should lean into the aisle  while eating. DH finally had enough and complained to the flight attendant. They invited him to eat with them  as the plane was packed. 

DH hates to complain and puts up with the discomfort...after all we have over 2M miles to use for upcoming freebie flights :whoopie: . 

Ingrid


----------



## ScoopKona

IngridN said:


> This elderly (DH is no spring chicken at 65) gentlemen insisted on hogging some of DH's space simply because and kept poking him in the side throughout the flight.



This is basically what I look like when traveling by air. Except I'm not bald. And I don't have a goatee. But body size and build, this is spot on:







I fly a few times a year. And because it's physically impossible for me to sit in economy without eating my knees, the gate attendants take one look at me and offer to put me someplace more comfortable. Sometimes I have to engage them (if it's a busy day). I start the conversation with, "Hey, more than six and a half feet tall. Got any seats that might fit me? Please? I don't want to eat my knees for the next five and a half hours."

But let's talk concerts. We go to something like 50 concerts every year. And since we live in Las Vegas, most of these concerts are in casinos. Apart from the MGM, the Palm, and a few others, most of these concerts are held in ballrooms. The casino uses zip ties to wire 20 chairs together and those become the rows of seats.

Roughly five times each year, someone who simply does not fit in one seat tries to sit next to me. Seriously, only one buttock is going to fit in the seat. Now the person needs to put that other buttock somewhere.  So this person is trying to take all of the assigned seat, and 1/3 of each of the seats on either side. And there aren't any armrests. 

These people always try passive-aggressive behavior, using their sheer mass to try to horn their way in. But with me, that ain't working. Their flab is no match for me. 

One time, I had a seat one away from the aisle seat. A very large woman tried to sit in the aisle seat, but couldn't. She kept pushing against me. But I'm not going to budge. I have my own mass. And bone mass beats fat in that particular tug of war. She eventually left because there was no way for her to sit down. She should have bought two seats. Sorry, lady, your size problem is not MY size problem. I can't diet my way out of MY size problem.

Then, a year later, I'm at another show. And guess who starts to sit down next to me. The same large woman. She didn't even bother that time. She just left.

Obviously, this woman makes a habit of buying a single seat at concerts. And then EXPECTS to be able to use her seat, and part of the seat next to her. And obviously, most of the time people let her. Otherwise she wouldn't do it. They're so afraid of hurting someone's feelings that they'll suffer through something they SHOULD be enjoying.


----------



## ondeadlin

DianeG said:


> Sigh... and are you the type to "claim" that arm rest too?
> 
> I'll say it again: the only way to survive sardine class is with courtesy.



No, Diane, I'm more than willing to let the obese person have the arm rest.

Serious question: Why would one be less than courteous for insisting on the arm rest being lowered? Courteous has its roots in showing respect or consideration for another.  If I were too big to fit in an economy class seat, I would show courtesy to my fellow passengers by buying two seats, not by expecting them give me a portion of their personal space.


----------



## nightnurse613

Wow..this sure brought a lot of comment. I have read the airline "rules" about people of size and one airline states that it doesn't matter if the person in the seat next to you is "ok" or accommodating(or your own child or spouse) - if you overlap the arm rest - you can be asked to leave (or buy another seat, if available).  Let's get that 17 inch tape measure out!!


----------



## Rose Pink

nightnurse613 said:


> Wow..this sure brought a lot of comment. I have read the airline "rules" about people of size and one airline states that it doesn't matter if the person in the seat next to you is "ok" or accommodating(or your own child or spouse) - if you overlap the arm rest - you can be asked to leave (or buy another seat, if available).  Let's get that 17 inch tape measure out!!


Your post prompted me to look up SWA's policy as that is the airline I fly most often.  Per their webpage, the Transportation Agency does not require an airline to furnish more than one seat per ticket.  If you cannot fit into one seat, you may be asked to purchase two.  However, if the flight is not full, SWA will reimburse the cost of the second seat.

http://www.southwest.com/html/generated/help/faqs/extra_seat_policy_faq.html


(I really need to stop eating all of this English Toffee.)


----------



## IngridN

Scoop, DH feels your pain. Even tho' he's only 6'1", he's all legs and eats his knees when in a 'regular' seat. Fortunately, as an elite at United, he always has access to E+ and mostly gets the exit row.

Ingrid


----------



## dioxide45

Phydeaux said:


> Give it a rest.



Perhaps I will, but remember, its a two way street...

I guess as long as you don't agree with an *opinion*, you don't want to hear it. Good grief. If you don't want to read it, stay out of the thread.


----------



## geekette

dioxide45 said:


> Perhaps I will, but remember, its a two way street...
> 
> I guess as long as you don't agree with an *opinion*, you don't want to hear it. Good grief. If you don't want to read it, stay out of the thread.



With ya.  If I hear "give it a rest" in my head, I check out of that thread, enabling me to rest from it.


----------



## j1ceasar

*The Next Prejudice  ?*

Since 505 of population in USa is overweight - maybe we should complain your not eating enough to balance the plane ?


----------



## rickandcindy23

> (I really need to stop eating all of this English Toffee.)


This is my downfall.  I love toffee, and I have been an addict of Heath and Skor Bars.  I found Russell Stover sugar-free toffee to be an okay alternative on my low-carb diet, but I can only eat two small pieces.  SF candy is known for it's tendency to give a person terrible gas.  It's not something I eat often.  :rofl: 

My stepsister bought a bag of these candies as a diabetic, and she found out the hard way, at the theater, how really bad the gas could get.  

Imagine being on a plane with someone who ate SF candy by the handful.  Maybe that is why H's seatmate was letting go so often.


----------



## ampaholic

rickandcindy23 said:


> This is my downfall.  I love toffee, and I have been an addict of Heath and Skor Bars.  I found Russell Stover sugar-free toffee to be an okay alternative on my low-carb diet, but I can only eat two small pieces.  SF candy is known for it's tendency to give a person terrible gas.  It's not something I eat often.  :rofl:
> 
> My stepsister bought a bag of these candies as a diabetic, and she found out the hard way, at the theater, how really bad the gas could get.
> 
> Imagine being on a plane with someone who ate SF candy by the handful.  Maybe that is why H's seatmate was letting go so often.



(I found the computer room at the Wyndham Wakikiki  )

I suppose *now* someone is going to complain we are picking out "gasious people" for discrimination - sheesh :hysterical:


----------



## Beefnot

Discrimination is discrimination, laws or no laws.


----------



## Ridewithme38

Beefnot said:


> Discrimination is discrimination, laws or no laws.



I find that if i discriminate against EVERYONE, everything works out fine, its when i miss one or two people is when the problems get started


----------



## ScoopKona

Beefnot said:


> Discrimination is discrimination, laws or no laws.



Short of someone who willfully eats a big cabbage, broccoli and pinto bean meal before heading off to the airport, I find it hard to look down on someone who is suffering from gas. We've all been at the corner of "unexpected, copious gas" and "embarrassing social situation" at one time or another.

But how does this have ANYTHING to do with someone who has made a lifetime of poor food choices now forcing their weight problem upon their fellow man?


----------



## Beefnot

Yes, looks like a non-sequitur.  Actually I was reaching back into the discrimination debate and siding with dioxide and geoand against ampaholic, not relating it to gas. Agreed though, I am not down with sins of the fat that compromise my comfort.

As for gas, I have been there and empathize but do not sympathize.  Either bury your butt hard and deep into your seat and make sure the toxins remain trapped in the cushions, force yourself to hold it no matter what, or make however many trips to the restroom you need (and clean out your bowels in the toilet for good measure).


----------



## IngridN

Beefnot said:


> As for gas, I have been there and empathize but do not sympathize.  Either bury your butt hard and deep into your seat and make sure the toxins remain trapped in the cushions, force yourself to hold it no matter what, or make however many trips to the restroom you need (and clean out your bowels in the toilet for good measure).



You guys are ruthless :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:


----------



## Ken555

This may be an opportune moment to point out that I've read the new 777 has better ventilation and air quality...


----------



## Passepartout

*Enough.*

And it may also be time to come to grips with just looking the offender in the eye and saying, "Sir (or Madam), your arm is in my space. See that it stays in your own." and ignore 'the look'. Say it in full view of the flight attendant. Failure to do so is tantamount to giving the person of size permission to take your space and disturb your journey.

Ask those with uncontrolled flatulence if they need out to go to the restroom.

Jim


----------



## pjrose

rickandcindy23 said:


> This is my downfall.  I love toffee, and I have been an addict of Heath and Skor Bars.  I found Russell Stover sugar-free toffee to be an okay alternative on my low-carb diet, but I can only eat two small pieces.  SF candy is known for it's tendency to give a person terrible gas.  It's not something I eat often.  :rofl:
> 
> My stepsister bought a bag of these candies as a diabetic, and she found out the hard way, at the theater, how really bad the gas could get.
> 
> Imagine being on a plane with someone who ate SF candy by the handful.  Maybe that is why H's seatmate was letting go so often.



OMG, I still remember the doubling-over PAIN and very loud sound-effects for about a day after eating a half-bag of Russell Stover sugar-free jelly beans.  

Unfortunately I didn't realize at the time what had caused the problem, so a few days later I ate the other half-bag   





Ken555 said:


> This may be an opportune moment to point out that I've read the new 777 has better ventilation and air quality...


:hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:


----------



## rickandcindy23

> Unfortunately I didn't realize at the time what had caused the problem, so a few days later I ate the other half-bag



OMG, so funny!  :rofl: 

They should include warnings on the bag about sugar alcohol.  

I love those Atkins Caramel Nut Chew Bars, which taste very much like the Mars Almond Bars.  So delicious and seriously keep me from straying from my diet on most days, but do not eat more than one in 24 hours.   

H talked about the flatulence in her post, so this is not off topic, people.  It's just a bit gross. 

As far as the arms flailing in my people space, it is MY people space, so keep your arms in your own people space, which is determined by the size of the seat and the arms of said seat.  Stay out of my people space.  It works well for 1st graders, so it's pure common sense.  They all understood what Mrs. Forsmark meant.  Bless her heart.


----------



## Ridewithme38

rickandcindy23 said:


> As far as the arms flailing in my people space, it is MY people space, so keep your arms in your own people space, which is determined by the size of the seat and the arms of said seat.  Stay out of my people space.  It works well for 1st graders, so it's pure common sense.  They all understood what Mrs. Forsmark meant.  Bless her heart.



You guys keep blaming the people when the problem is the airline, if you checked into a 1br TS and and the only bed was a single/twin sized, would you be complaining to the TS or just say "This is the size of the bed, we should fit in it"...Thats the TS's fault for not saying how small the beds are just like its the airlines fault for not advertising the size of the seats


----------



## ondeadlin

Ridewithme38 said:


> You guys keep blaming the people when the problem is the airline, if you checked into a 1br TS and and the only bed was a single/twin sized, would you be complaining to the TS or just say "This is the size of the bed, we should fit in it"...Thats the TS's fault for not saying how small the beds are just like its the airlines fault for not advertising the size of the seats



The analogy doesn't work.  The vast majority of travelers are able to fit in a standard airline seat without complaint.


----------



## ampaholic

ondeadlin said:


> The analogy doesn't work.  The vast majority of travelers are able to fit in a standard airline seat without complaint.



I just flew out to Honolulu and Alaska on their web site said planly the seats are 17 inches in coach and 21 inches in first class - I measured my "girth" and found 17 inches would work fine - had a nice plesant flight.

Of course my little DD sat in the middle - so that helped.

Hey Beefnot - I'm in Waikiki - neener neener :rofl:


----------



## Beefnot

ampaholic said:


> Hey Beefnot - I'm in Waikiki - neener neener :rofl:



Why I oughta...


----------



## Ridewithme38

ondeadlin said:


> The analogy doesn't work.  The vast majority of travelers are able to fit in a standard airline seat without complaint.



I don't think that's true, 35.7% of Americans were considered 'obese' in 2010, and lets be honest, its only gone up... 

Measure your width from hip to hip and from deltoid to deltoid, even if your not obese 17" is a VERY tight squeeze, the only average i could find for average male shoulder width is 20"...i'd be surprised if ONE of those two measurements isn't over 17 inches and if it is under...you are a very small person

It's not that people fit in those spaces, because the average sized person won't, but that are too polite to complain and think they can't change things by telling the airlines the seats are too small

Plus, if your a couple that both have dimesions smaller then 17" you can both sleep in a single/twin bed


----------



## pjrose

Ridewithme38 said:


> I don't think that's true, 35.7% of Americans were considered 'obese' in 2010, and lets be honest, its only gone up...
> 
> . . .



But they aren't necessarily the ones who fly.....and I venture are less likely to fly, because:
Obesity is more prevalent among those with less education and less income.
Flying, whether for vacation or work, is more prevalent among those with more education and more income. 
So I'll bet fewer than 37.5% of fliers are obese.  

And even if 37.5% of fliers ARE obese, they are the minority, not the vast majority.

Not that I'm defending the seats that are narrow and have limited legroom; I don't like sardine-can airplanes, and choose exit rows or bulkhead whenever possible just to get that extra legroom!


----------



## CarolF

pjrose said:


> And even if 37.5% of fliers ARE obese, they are the minority, not the vast majority.


Whew, I feel better now.  Anything that reduces the fire hazard whilst flying has to be a good thing.  
http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,826639,00.html


----------



## ScoopKona

pjrose said:


> Not that I'm defending the seats that are narrow and have limited legroom; I don't like sardine-can airplanes, and choose exit rows or bulkhead whenever possible just to get that extra legroom!



Minor thread hijacking. (Heh, same joke used twice now.)

It REALLY, REALLY irks me when all the exit row and bulkhead seats are filled with short people. And I end up eating my knees as shown in the photo I linked. 

(This doesn't happen often. The gate attendants do a really good job putting me someplace where I'm not in agony for hours. The fact that I check in way early helps.)

I don't even have a solution -- short of paying through the nose for first class. Eventually, I'm going to have to. I've lucked out the last dozen or so flights. But eventually my luck will run out.


----------



## Ridewithme38

pjrose said:


> But they aren't necessarily the ones who fly.....and I venture are less likely to fly, because:
> Obesity is more prevalent among those with less education and less income.
> Flying, whether for vacation or work, is more prevalent among those with more education and more income.
> So I'll bet fewer than 37.5% of fliers are obese.
> 
> And even if 37.5% of fliers ARE obese, they are the minority, not the vast majority.
> 
> Not that I'm defending the seats that are narrow and have limited legroom; I don't like sardine-can airplanes, and choose exit rows or bulkhead whenever possible just to get that extra legroom!



But its not JUST the obese that the seats are too small for, with all due respect pjrose, women tend to have larger hips then men and men tend to have larger shoulders then women, if you measured your width from hip to hip and your husbands width from deltoid muscle to deltoid muscle, you will find atleast one of you doesn't fit in a 17" seat....

Don't forget the OP's complaint was the seat neighbors arms being in her seat, so shoulder width is what we should be discussing here...and i from the (admittedly one) statistic i found the AVERAGE man has 20" shoulders from deltoid to deltoid...so their arms will be in the neighbors seat also, that's the average, not the minority


----------



## pjrose

Ridewithme38 said:


> But its not JUST the obese that the seats are too small for, with all due respect pjrose, women tend to have larger hips then men and men tend to have larger shoulders then women, if you measured your width from hip to hip and your husbands width from deltoid muscle to deltoid muscle, you will find atleast one of you doesn't fit in a 17" seat....
> 
> Don't forget the OP's complaint was the seat neighbors arms being in her seat, so shoulder width is what we should be discussing here...and i from the (admittedly one) statistic i found the AVERAGE man has 20" shoulders from deltoid to deltoid...so their arms will be in the neighbors seat also, that's the average, not the minority



Agreed.  

I'm broad-shouldered and broad-hipped.  Regardless of the too-small seats and people's size, I think the bottom line come down to invasion of personal space.  If someone has paid for and been assigned a given space, others do not have the right to invade said space.  

If for whatever reason, said others are unable to or find it difficult to fit into their own space, then it should be incumbent on them to find the solution, i.e. buy more space, lean into the aisle, sit more sideways, etc.   

For those whose space issue is height and/or leg length, bulkheads and exit rows may offer some help, and henceforth if I have one of those rows and see someone really tall suffering, I will consider offering a swap   Who knows, maybe it'll be Scoop!


----------



## heathpack

It's worth knowing the reason we were in the exit row seats.  The trip was a last-minute arrangement due to the serious illness of a family member.  We were assigned middle seats in different rows when we booked the flights- that was the only availability at the time we booked.

The morning of the flight, during the online check-in process, we were offered the ability to *purchase* an upgrade into the exit row for $30 each, which we did because at least now we could sit together, the extra leg room would be an added bonus, worth $30 on a 5-hour-long flight.  I am, relative to others here, a short person at 5'5".

So I would not be willing to voluntarily give up the seat that I paid extra for.  It would not surprise me if my neighbor had also purchased the exit row "upgrade."

Gate agents likely have far less ability to put a sweet-talking tall person into an exit row seat these days, the seats are SOLD hours before most of us arrive at the airport.  If you need the leg space and the flight is of any significant duration, I suggest you either purchase it from the outset, purchase it during your online check in, or resign yourself to the increasing likelihood that you may be physically uncomfortable for the duration of the flight.

H


----------



## Tia

What is the airlines responsibility is to have a policy on people that don't fit and then a plan of what they do about it, then follow it.


----------



## geekette

Ridewithme38 said:


> You guys keep blaming the people when the problem is the airline, if you checked into a 1br TS and and the only bed was a single/twin sized, would you be complaining to the TS or just say "This is the size of the bed, we should fit in it"...Thats the TS's fault for not saying how small the beds are just like its the airlines fault for not advertising the size of the seats



I have never had a complaint about my not staying on my side of the bed and I don't recall making complaints if someone was taking some of my space.  There has never been an armrest adamantly in place to force the body separation.

I think it highly unlikely that a master br in any ts has a twin bed.  Maybe back in the days of Rob and Laura Petrie, but surely the last refurb would have changed up to allowing adults to sleep in the same room and even (GASP) same bed.


----------



## Beefnot

geekette said:


> I have never had a complaint about my not staying on my side of the bed and I don't recall making complaints if someone was taking some of my space.  There has never been an armrest adamantly in place to force the body separation.
> 
> I think it highly unlikely that a master br in any ts has a twin bed.  Maybe back in the days of Rob and Laura Petrie, but surely the last refurb would have changed up to allowing adults to sleep in the same room and even (GASP) same bed.



It was a hypothetical, albeit weak, argument, but not an actual observation.


----------



## Ridewithme38

Tia said:


> What is the airlines responsibility is to have a policy on people that don't fit and then a plan of what they do about it, then follow it.



Just understand that if the airlines require people that don't fit in a 17" seat to buy a second seat, Almost Everyone will have to buy a second seat...or at the very least, everyone slightly below average, average sized and above...

Odds are this includes you Tia


----------



## Ridewithme38

geekette said:


> I think it highly unlikely that a master br in any ts has a twin bed.  Maybe back in the days of Rob and Laura Petrie, but surely the last refurb would have changed up to allowing adults to sleep in the same room and even (GASP) same bed.



People have stepped up overtime and forced the hotel/motel/TS industry to change...If we let them get away with a single/twin bed in the 1br rooms, believe me, they would do it...Just like with the airlines, we are allowing them to put use in seats smaller then ANY normal human being can fit in, but for some reason we are blaming the people instead of the airlines in this case


----------



## jlr10

Since DH and I are not tall we never take the exit row or purchase the more legroom seats.  We leave those for taller people so they don't have to smash their knees into the back of our seats. (it is uncomfortable for us shorties in front too.)

We just flew back last night and I paid close attention to my seat.  I did fit in the seat at the bottom and the top but my elbow was on the arm rest.  Luckily I am shorter and with short arms and my elbow fit comfomfortably behind my husband's arm. Whew!

My same irritation: All overhead compartments were full before the plane was half full.  This was after the airline had already made several of the people gate check some of their bags in exchange for early boarding. We were also surrounded by children who fussed, irritated each other and talked over the top of the seats throughout the entire flight.  The child in front of me began to whine before take off until his parents gave him his drum to play with so he would be quiet.  But we were lucky as the digiplayer blocked out a lot of the sound and the children were small, so there was plenty of room in the seat.  It was a great two week vacation so it was all good in the end.


----------



## Tia

Ridewithme38 said:


> Just understand that if the airlines require people that don't fit in a 17" seat to buy a second seat, Almost Everyone will have to buy a second seat...or at the very least, everyone slightly below average, average sized and above...
> 
> Odds are this includes you Tia



Nope I am below average , good thing in this case,  and don't want to share my space that I paid for ... sorry.


----------



## ScoopKona

heathpack said:


> Gate agents likely have far less ability to put a sweet-talking tall person into an exit row seat these days, the seats are SOLD hours before most of us arrive at the airport.  If you need the leg space and the flight is of any significant duration, I suggest you either purchase it from the outset, purchase it during your online check in, or resign yourself to the increasing likelihood that you may be physically uncomfortable for the duration of the flight.



And I'm telling you that they still do put people in exit rows. And they do so without charging them another nickle. When you're as tall as I am, it isn't just about "a little extra comfort." It's the difference between an uncomfortable flight and wracking agonizing pain. I don't have to sweet talk the attendants. But I am nice about it. The way I look at it, they have people screaming at them and demanding things all day. So, I won't be that person, and they really seem to appreciate it. 

I've had gate attendants flat out tell me they try to save a couple seats on long hauls for people like me. My last flight, from Las Vegas to London -- 11 hours there, 13 back -- the gate attendant took one look at me and said "49H, but you two will have to split up." Fine with us. I could stretch my legs the entire flight there and back. And I wasn't the only giant sitting in row 49. 

And except for short flights, I have had similar experiences on my last dozen trips. I try not to have a sense of entitlement about it. But I think that very tall people should get priority for the exit rows. 

And while I'd like to fly first class, a first-class seat for the trip to India I'm mulling over costs more than $13,000.


----------



## Ridewithme38

ScoopLV said:


> And I'm telling you that they still do put people in exit rows. And they do so without charging them another nickle. When you're as tall as I am, it isn't just about "a little extra comfort." It's the difference between an uncomfortable flight and wracking agonizing pain. I don't have to sweet talk the attendants. But I am nice about it. The way I look at it, they have people screaming at them and demanding things all day. So, I won't be that person, and they really seem to appreciate it.
> 
> I've had gate attendants flat out tell me they try to save a couple seats on long hauls for people like me. My last flight, from Las Vegas to London -- 11 hours there, 13 back -- the gate attendant took one look at me and said "49H, but you two will have to split up." Fine with us. I could stretch my legs the entire flight there and back. And I wasn't the only giant sitting in row 49.
> 
> And except for short flights, I have had similar experiences on my last dozen trips. I try not to have a sense of entitlement about it. But I think that very tall people should get priority for the exit rows.
> 
> And while I'd like to fly first class, a first-class seat for the trip to India I'm mulling over costs more than $13,000.



Whats very tall?  I don't think i'm very tall at about 6'3 but do try my best to always book an exit row when i fly...but, heck if i qualify for a free upgrade at my height, i'd be super nice to the flight attendants and gate agents!


----------



## Ridewithme38

Tia said:


> Nope I am below average , good thing in this case,  and don't want to share my space that I paid for ... sorry.



I'm sure you'd fit fine in a single/twin sized bed too!


----------



## heathpack

ScoopLV said:


> And I'm telling you that they still do put people in exit rows.



I don't doubt this is true, just pointing out that it may be less true in the future.  If you _need_ the legroom, there may come a time when you will have to _buy_ the legroom.  Previously there were perhaps 12 exit row seats for GA to work with, now maybe 2 or 3?

We would be very unlikely to fly first/business if we had to actually pay cash, for us its all about the FF miles.  Thankfully we head to Cabo on Saturday in business class (award) seats.

H


----------



## ScoopKona

Ridewithme38 said:


> Whats very tall?  I don't think i'm very tall at about 6'3 but do try my best to always book an exit row when i fly...but, heck if i qualify for a free upgrade at my height, i'd be super nice to the flight attendants and gate agents!



Obviously, 6'3" isn't "very tall." At least not as far as the gate people are concerned. 

My concern is that currently the system works on the "common sense" principle. The attendants have certainly been told to keep an eye out for people who are tall enough to be constantly asked about their basketball prowess, and put them someplace where they're not in considerable pain. It wouldn't surprise me if this is done to limit liability.

If the airlines made an official policy of keeping a few exit row seats available for the very tall, every bozo who flies would trip over themselves on their way to a doctor looking for a note that says they have to have these good seats. Tall or not, exceedingly long legs or not. Just like they get their permission slips to fly with Woogums the Incontinent Cat and how normally-spry people suddenly need a wheelchair, because it just so happens to get them through the lines quicker.

Some people will take advantage of ANY policy, whether they need it or not. I'd prefer this policy stay quiet, for the benefit of those who would otherwise be in pain. And can't afford to pay the same as a good used car for first class.




heathpack said:


> I don't doubt this is true, just pointing out that it may be less true in the future.  If you _need_ the legroom, there may come a time when you will have to _buy_ the legroom.  Previously there were perhaps 12 exit row seats for GA to work with, now maybe 2 or 3?



That's why I often check in 24-48 hours in advance, during a non-rush time, so that I have a better chance of scoring one of these seats. I'm well aware that eventually my luck will run out.

I'm very much against selling exit row seats. These seats should be given to people who need them. And if nobody needs them people who wouldn't be a freakin' liability in the event of an emergency. Two-ton Tilly sitting next to you in the exit row is a perfect example. She has no business blocking the exit like that. Obviously, she was quite an inconsiderate person.


----------



## Patri

Think about it. That large woman has gone on her merry way, enjoying her life. And here are a bunch of TUGGERS distressed about situations that aren't terminal, blowing hours of computer time trying to fix things without going to the source (at this point that seems to be the airlines).
The early posts were funny and I really enjoyed them. The last pages are dull............:deadhorse:


----------



## ScoopKona

Patri said:


> Think about it. That large woman has gone on her merry way, enjoying her life.
> .
> .
> .
> The early posts were funny and I really enjoyed them. The last pages are dull............



I'll try to be more entertaining in the future. Your edification is my #1 priority.

But, personally, I doubt that large woman is enjoying her life all that much. If she was enjoying life, she'd do something about her weight problem. I doubt seriously she has Prader Willi, because sufferers rarely live to past their teens.


----------



## Beefnot

Patri said:


> Think about it. That large woman has gone on her merry way, enjoying her life. And here are a bunch of TUGGERS distressed about situations that aren't terminal, blowing hours of computer time trying to fix things without going to the source (at this point that seems to be the airlines).
> The early posts were funny and I really enjoyed them. The last pages are dull............:deadhorse:



I just wish there was more eschatological humor in this thread...


----------



## ScoopKona

Beefnot said:


> I just wish there was more eschatological humor in this thread...



Air travel is Hell. Even on a good flight, it's the death of me. Getting off the plane is sheer Heaven. You have to wonder about any mode of transportation where the waiting area is called a "terminal."


----------



## dougp26364

ScoopLV said:


> and how normally-spry people suddenly need a wheelchair, because it just so happens to get them through the lines quicker.



And here I always thought people were being touched by the hand of God as they flew closer to heaven and were being miraculously healed in flight. They're wheeled onto the plane but walk off as if nothing had ever been wrong with them. Now you tell me they're just faking it?   Heaven forbid!

Honestly, I can't believe we're still talking about people who can't fit in an airline seat.


----------



## pjrose

Patri said:


> Think about it. That large woman has gone on her merry way, enjoying her life. And here are *a bunch of TUGGERS *distressed about situations that aren't terminal, *blowing hours of computer time *trying to fix things without going to the source (at this point that seems to be the airlines).. . .



Just keeping up the traditions of the TUG Lounge  



Patri said:


> . . .
> The early posts were funny and I really enjoyed them. The last pages are dull............:deadhorse:



But some of us keep checking, just in case there's something interesting, eschatological, or funny!

***Newsflash****
This has made it to number 9 in terms of number of replies on Lounge threads, above Mini-Pies and Cranky!  Woot Woot!


----------



## Rose Pink

pjrose said:


> ***Newsflash****
> This has made it to number 9 in terms of number of replies on Lounge threads, above Mini-Pies and Cranky!  Woot Woot!


See what can happen when we all chip in and do our part?  
This is a quirky community and I'm glad I found it.  I used to feel all alone in the world.....


----------



## CarolF

Tia said:


> What is the airlines responsibility is to have a policy on people that don't fit and then a plan of what they do about it, then follow it.



They could always take the scientific approach and measure and weigh everything.  Step up madam and put your carry-on luggage in this rack and your backside in this rack. :rofl:


----------



## ace2000

pjrose said:


> But some of us keep checking, just in case there's something interesting, eschatological, or funny!


 
Personally, I stopped checking this thread a long time ago.   

Wait a minute...


----------



## Tia

Ridewithme38 said:


> I'm sure you'd fit fine in a single/twin sized bed too!



Sure would but at home have the luxury of a queen :ignore: , it's a one time investment well worth it for repeat use.


----------



## Tia

That is what we do at the hospital and we get the tape measure out too  



CarolF said:


> They could always take the scientific approach and measure and weigh everything.  Step up madam and put your carry-on luggage in this rack and your backside in this rack. :rofl:


----------



## pjrose

CarolF said:


> They could always take the scientific approach and measure and weigh everything.  Step up madam and put your carry-on luggage in this rack *and your backside in this rack.* :rofl:



OK, I started laughing at the above...:rofl: :rofl: 



ace2000 said:


> *Personally, I stopped checking this thread a long time ago.
> 
> Wait a minute...*



and HERE, I couldn't control the laughter. :hysterical: :hysterical: :hysterical:


----------



## ampaholic

I just checked this thread and found out it is now about checking threads - Deja' Vu all over again.


----------



## geekette

CarolF said:


> They could always take the scientific approach and measure and weigh everything.  Step up madam and put your carry-on luggage in this rack and your backside in this rack. :rofl:



"Oh, gosh by golly, I am sooo sorry, but, only your carry-on qualifies for cabin seat service, go ahead and strap it in that seat, then you will have to proceed to the butt sling over there so we can really figure out what we're dealing with here, in real girth. mass and weight numbers, so we can get the plane all butt-balanced....  It is of course for your safety and comfort..."


----------



## Rose Pink

Reading this thread just makes me want to eat more toffee.


----------



## Tia

Just checking to see what is new......... 

Reading this thread made me want to always fit in my 17" seat


----------



## Sandi Bo

Me too, as I sit hear eating my M&M's...


----------



## pjrose

*How to measure a tush?*

Lacking a 17"  backside rack or a large set of calipers, I'm debating just how to measure the diameter of my rear.....back up to a wall and have DH put pencil marks right and left?  It would be more accurate while sitting, so as to get the full spread, but I'd rather not put pencil marks on the couch cushion.  And then again, the tush and thighs lack rigidity, so when constrained by airplane armrests, the window-wall, or my seatmate's hips and thighs, said constraints would, if necessary, force a fit....

Perhaps there should be a downloadable and printable tush-measuring template, similar to those for measuring ring size! 

_Sir or Madam, prior to confirming your seat on XYZ airlines, please download and print this template, and sit on same with the center of your rear at the big red X.  In order to book this seat, your width must be WITHIN, and not overlapping, lines A and B, as marked on the template.  Should your width overlap lines A and B, please book, instead, a First Class or designated oversize seat. _

Oh, Heath, what hast thou wrought with thy thread?


----------



## Htoo0

They could send a can of ink with a roller. Then you can roll your tush, sit on the template and get a better idea. Of course, if you run out of ink-well, no need to wonder!    Personally however, I think you all are just too, 2, to, two much just not in the same way as the lady discussed by the OP.


----------



## pjrose

Htoo0 said:


> They could send a can of ink with a roller. Then you can roll your tush, sit on the template and get a better idea. Of course, if you run out of ink-well, no need to wonder!    Personally however, I think you all are just too, 2, to, two much just not in the same way as the lady discussed by the OP.



hee hee hee

Or send a big inkpad and big piece of paper....sit on inkpad, sit on paper, measure.  (Which begs the question of what to wear....but let's not go there )

I don't think she was a "Lady"!


----------



## ampaholic

pjrose said:


> Lacking a 17"  backside rack or a large set of calipers, I'm debating just how to measure the diameter of my rear.....back up to a wall and have DH put pencil marks right and left?  It would be more accurate while sitting, so as to get the full spread, but I'd rather not put pencil marks on the couch cushion.  And then again, the tush and thighs lack rigidity, so when constrained by airplane armrests, the window-wall, or my seatmate's hips and thighs, said constraints would, if necessary, force a fit....
> 
> Perhaps there should be a downloadable and printable tush-measuring template, similar to those for measuring ring size!
> 
> _Sir or Madam, prior to confirming your seat on XYZ airlines, please download and print this template, and sit on same with the center of your rear at the big red X.  In order to book this seat, your width must be WITHIN, and not overlapping, lines A and B, as marked on the template.  Should your width overlap lines A and B, please book, instead, a First Class or designated oversize seat. _
> 
> Oh, Heath, what hast thou wrought with thy thread?



I actually checked by measuring my office chair between the armrests, it was 21" (same as Alaska's 1st class) I then put a 4" thick cardboard box beside me and sat down - *simulating* the 17" seat in coach.

It worked perfectly - same "tightness" as the real airline seat.

Didn't want some TUGGER writing about me .....


----------



## CarolF

pjrose said:


> I'm debating just how to measure the diameter of my rear.....back up to a wall and have DH put pencil marks right and left?



:hysterical: ooooh, the mental picture.



pjrose said:


> Perhaps there should be a downloadable and printable tush-measuring template, similar to those for measuring ring size!
> 
> _Sir or Madam, prior to confirming your seat on XYZ airlines, please download and print this template, and sit on same with the center of your rear at the big red X.  In order to book this seat, your width must be WITHIN, and not overlapping, lines A and B, as marked on the template.  Should your width overlap lines A and B, please book, instead, a First Class or designated oversize seat. _



Or ....  the speedy version - sit on the photocopier, email it and ask for the price and availability of an appropriate seat.  :rofl:


----------



## Tia

Perfect solution except if it's those large shoulders with flying elbows  



CarolF said:


> :hysterical: ooooh, the mental picture.
> 
> Or ....  the speedy version - sit on the photocopier, email it and ask for the price and availability of an appropriate seat.  :rofl:


----------



## pjrose

And if you break the photocopier glass while sitting on it, you probably will NOT fit in the cheap seats!


----------



## pedro47

I feel the OP Pain.  Wow!!  She should be charge for an extra double wide seat.


----------



## Numismatist

pedro47 said:


> I feel the OP Pain.  Wow!!  She should be charge for an extra double wide seat.



Hey wait!  I'm wicked skinny, I want a discount for my seat for not using it all!:rofl:


----------



## geekette

Numismatist said:


> Hey wait!  I'm wicked skinny, I want a discount for my seat for not using it all!:rofl:



Just rent out what you aren't using.  that's what I do with my timeshares ...


----------



## Numismatist

geekette said:


> Just rent out what you aren't using.  that's what I do with my timeshares ...



:hysterical:  Can I lock it off and then does II or RCI exchange it for me?


----------



## pacodemountainside

May as well go for another post and shot at record.

Fortunately my only recent experience in this regard was when 6' 6" guy was sitting behind me,  knees were in my  back and I could not recline seat. The flight attendant simply had us switch seats.

Given the humorous turn this thread has taken it reminds me of the joke about the fat lady that backed into an air plane propeller and dis-aster. This might be a solution albeit a bit messy!

I did like idea about shoe box and put one in my chair to keep in shape when I return vacationing. Cataract surgery has put on temporary hold.

As the say, keep de faith brudder, in God we trust, all others pay cash  and from Rusty Warren keep those bottoms and knockers up. Her routine on dog named sex is too funny even when sober but  too raunchy to print here!

:whoopie:   :rofl:


----------



## ScoopKona

pacodemountainside said:


> Fortunately my only recent experience in this regard was when 6' 6" guy was sitting behind me,  knees were in my  back and I could not recline seat. The flight attendant simply had us switch seats.



That's me behind you. Sorry about the inconvenience. But there's nothing (short of femur reduction surgery) that I can do about it.

I've had flights where the person in front of me spent the entire flight trying to mash my knees into jelly. (Even when I explained that my legs are bracing the seat forward. Because I have no place else to put them.)


----------



## geekette

I think that those passengers whose legs cannot fit into their assigned space should have to buy an entire row and then sit perpendicular so as to not overflow.

YES I AM KIDDING!!!!!

Meanwhile, does anyone really use the word "recline" with airline seats?  That's not really what it is, it's merely a slight deviation from upright which, IMO, is not at all Reclined.   

I don't bother, it's just not enuf to make a difference.  If you are tall and sitting behind me, we'll work it out.  I won't recline and I will accept your need to periodically move your legs if you agree to not jam a knee into the middle of my back.  A nice tappy tap and I will lean forward so you can readjust and bash the seat back as you need to.


----------



## Tia

What is just as bad is a child kicking your seat back repeatedly throughout a flight


----------



## ScoopKona

geekette said:


> I think that those passengers whose legs cannot fit into their assigned space should have to buy an entire row and then sit perpendicular so as to not overflow.
> 
> YES I AM KIDDING!!!!!



I'm pretty sure this is the reason I usually get an exit row seat without having to pay for it. (Or they find two empty seats and put me in one of them so I can sit diagonally.) The airlines know damned well they're putting too many people in too small a space. 

It's one thing to demand that a morbidly obese person buy an extra seat. That person can lose weight and (eventually) fit in the seat. It's quite another to try to shoehorn someone with a 38" inseam into a seat with with a 32" pitch.


----------



## pjrose

*Tappy Tap the Seat Back*

That's got some rhythm to it - we should be able to make up a song.

The kicking child might instead be the tray-table going up and down, up and down, up and down.....Since I realized that was the cause of my annoyance years ago when I was blaming an innocent little cherub (yeah, right), I've been very gentle and quiet with my own tray-table.  

And Geekette - wouldn't someone sitting sideways in an entire row be parallel to the seats, not perpendicular?   Well, perpendicular to the plane, parallel to the wings.....'tis all relative.  

I had visions of Scoop and other height-endowed types (38" inseam?  Wow!) buying the two aisle seats and sitting across them making a bridge of his legs.  Wouldn't the little ones have fun racing back and forth climbing over or crawling under!  We could start another thread about kids (other people's of course) and air travel.....but let's not.


----------



## Beefnot

Scoop is really only 5' 11", but just all legs.


----------



## geekette

Pj, I went with perp in relation to the other pax whose legs are in front of them.  But, professor, I accept whatever changes you determine.  My brain is exhausted this week so I'm just glad to not be cranky.  Being Right is reserved for work, Tug is Play.


----------



## pjrose

Whether Scooper and his leggy ilk are perp or par is indeed relative.  Talking about perp, the original perp in this thread is, thank goodness, not a relative, but instead Ms. Large Goldfish, who is clueless about courtesy, and most likely about what she inspired here in TUG-Land.  Look at that, did I get back on topic or what?  hee hee hee.


----------



## geekette

Crap, I missed the part about her being Ms Large Goldfish??   Guess I'll be going back thru the record number of posts to figure out what that reference is about...

definite kudos on completing the circle well,tying up the tangents and landing right back at home base!


----------



## pjrose

geekette said:


> Crap, I missed the part about her being Ms Large Goldfish??   Guess I'll be going back thru the record number of posts to figure out what that reference is about...
> 
> definite kudos on completing the circle well,tying up the tangents and landing right back at home base!



How many mixed metaphors are in that sentence?

I'll make the search easy - go to the original post


----------



## Rose Pink

Friend of my DD is training to become a physician's assistant.  She just diagnosed a 4 year old with type 2 diabetes.

We can joke and/or cuss about airline seats but the sad and sorry fact is we are killing ourselves and our children.  We have a nation addicted to junk "food" and, although the simple answer is to just stop eating it, the fact remains that it is much, much more difficult than it seems.  With other addictions such as tobacco, etc, a person can stop it altogether.  However, a person must eat.  Having worked with people with eating disorders I know how dieting (or completely avoiding certain foods) can turn into disordered eating--IOW, changing one type of disordered eating for another type.  

Fat people are not simply lacking discipline or willpower (some of them maybe but not all or even most).  They have addicted brains.  We need more education.  People simply do not understand how what they eat affects their brains.


----------



## ScoopKona

Rose Pink said:


> Fat people are not simply lacking discipline or willpower (some of them maybe but not all or even most).  They have addicted brains.  We need more education.  People simply do not understand how what they eat affects their brains.



As a society, we expect smokers to stop smoking. We have made laws and levied taxes to encourage them. 

We expect drug addicts to kick their habit. We have made their addiction illegal and will incarcerate them if they don't do it on their own.

As I said way back on the first page of this thread -- we mollycoddle the morbidly obese. At SOME TIME IN THEIR LIVES they should have noticed that they can't fit through a doorway without squeezing. And they should have decided to do something about that. They can get help -- just like the alcoholic and the drug addict. 

Just like I don't want someone's nicotine, alcohol or cocaine addiction to become MY problem on an airplane, I don't want someone's lifetime of poor food choices to become MY problem, either.


----------



## Rose Pink

I agree with you, Scoop.  And most of them do try to get help.  The diet business does billions of dollars annually and yet people are getting fatter than ever because they don't understand why they feel compelled to eat.  

We understand why tobacco and cocaine are bad.  Our society, as a whole, is still largely in the dark about food addiction.  Why are we selling soft drinks to our school children?  Why are airlines serving them along with other processed foods such as cookies, pretzels and crackers?  Why are we not taxing junk food like we do tobacco?

It' more than just being painfully uncomfortable on a plane.  This obesity epidemic is costing all of us in terms of health insurance premiums.

I wouldn't be surprised if the OP's seat mate hasn't been on many, many diets already.  Some of them may be the reason why she got so big in the first place.


----------



## Beefnot

It's also about what people eat, not just how much.  Have you seen the dietary information on Cheesecake Factory entrees?  Oh. My. Lord.


----------



## Tia

Beefnot said:


> It's also about what people eat, not just how much.  Have you seen the dietary information on Cheesecake Factory entrees?  Oh. My. Lord.



Don't ruin Cheesecake Factory for me! Lucky there isn't one close by though.

On the other hand obese people's problems do become societies problems when dealing with health care costs and special equipment needed etc.


----------



## pjrose

OMG, yes, Cheesecake Factory's food is terribly high in everything.  However, the few times I've eaten there I've brought one 1/2 or 2/3 of my food for the next day.  

Re addictive eating and overeating, some other considerations are culture, upbringing, and income.  Fried Everything is part of the culture in some areas, and equates with Mom's cooking, comfort food, and so forth.  It may well the the only way someone knows how to cook.  If people were brought up with everything covered in gooey cheese, dessert every night, etc, that's what they learned.  

Fresh vegetables and leaner meats and whole grain foods tend to be more expensive than the less healthy alternatives.  If you can take a pound or so of the highest fat ground beef and dump some Hamburger Helper on it and make dinner for your family, and if it never occurred to you to first drain the fat from the cooked ground beef, well.....  Potatoes, by themselves, are not unhealthy - but if you are used to them fried, it's a different story.  

We can try to educate all we want, but these influences are really hard to undo.


----------



## amycurl

As a nation, we've also made the decision to subsidize high fructose corn syrup with our tax dollars, yet not done the same with fresh greens. There's a reason why one is more prevalent than the other. And if you're looking at calories per dollar, some choices become obvious. You can feed a lot of people more cheaply at Taco Bell than you can at Whole Foods. That is, if you can even find a grocery store (any grocery store) that even carries fresh veggies in your neighborhood.

It's not just all about choices we make as individuals, but choices we make as a society.


----------



## pgnewarkboy

ScoopLV said:


> As a society, we expect smokers to stop smoking. We have made laws and levied taxes to encourage them.
> 
> We expect drug addicts to kick their habit. We have made their addiction illegal and will incarcerate them if they don't do it on their own.
> 
> As I said way back on the first page of this thread -- we mollycoddle the morbidly obese. At SOME TIME IN THEIR LIVES they should have noticed that they can't fit through a doorway without squeezing. And they should have decided to do something about that. They can get help -- just like the alcoholic and the drug addict.
> 
> Just like I don't want someone's nicotine, alcohol or cocaine addiction to become MY problem on an airplane, I don't want someone's lifetime of poor food choices to become MY problem, either.



Scoop I am sure you can do better than this post. Obesity, and morbid obesity are serious medical problems.  The reasons for obesity and the way to lose weight and keep it off are not yet fully understood by science.  Research in this field is ongoing.  Mollycoddling is not the cause and ridicule is not the cure.


----------



## Beefnot

pgnewarkboy said:


> Scoop I am sure you can do better than this post. Obesity, and morbid obesity are serious medical problems.  The reasons for obesity and the way to lose weight and keep it off are not yet fully understood by science.  Research in this field is ongoing.  Mollycoddling is not the cause and ridicule is not the cure.



While science is trying to figure it out, obese people should stop eating so much.  When they see all these obese people losing weight, science will have figured it out.


----------



## ScoopKona

pgnewarkboy said:


> Scoop I am sure you can do better than this post. Obesity, and morbid obesity are serious medical problems.  The reasons for obesity and the way to lose weight and keep it off are not yet fully understood by science.  Research in this field is ongoing.  Mollycoddling is not the cause and ridicule is not the cure.



For what seems to be the fifth or sixth time this thread: I don't care HOW they became morbidly obese. That is not my problem. 

My problem is when they're invading my personal space. Whatever they do away from me is not my concern. 

My problem is that airline employees would rather let the morbidly obese impose on others rather than take the chance of hurting their feelings by telling them to buy an additional seat. 

That is the debate in a nutshell. Despite the repeated attempts by apologists for the morbidly obese to make ridiculous comparisons, the fact remains that they are taking more than they paid for at the expense of people who aren't getting what they paid for.

Period. I cannot make it any more clear than that.


----------



## Ridewithme38

ScoopLV said:


> For what seems to be the fifth or sixth time this thread: I don't care HOW they became morbidly obese. That is not my problem.
> 
> My problem is when they're invading my personal space. Whatever they do away from me is not my concern.
> 
> My problem is that airline employees would rather let the morbidly obese impose on others rather than take the chance of hurting their feelings by telling them to buy an additional seat.
> 
> That is the debate in a nutshell. Despite the repeated attempts by apologists for the morbidly obese to make ridiculous comparisons, the fact remains that they are taking more than they paid for at the expense of people who aren't getting what they paid for.
> 
> Period. I cannot make it any more clear than that.



So let me ask you stretch, its ok for the Airline to provide you with an exit row seat free because of your height, but the wide should have to pay for an extra seat?


----------



## Rose Pink

Ridewithme38 said:


> So let me ask you stretch, its ok for the Airline to provide you with an exit row seat free because of your height, but the wide should have to pay for an extra seat?


Scoop has no control over his height.  It isn't a fair comparison.  

The obese do have an opportunity to not be obese.  What I've been saying is that many of them do not know how.  They have tried and tried and tried and failed and failed and failed, each time getting larger and larger.  We live in an obesogenic environment.  I am not making excuses or coddling anyone.  Weight loss can be achieved but the signals we get on a daily basis conflict with a healthy lifestyle.  

We've battled tobacco addiction with some success by heavy educational compaigns and by restricting the environments in which it is allowed.  We've instituted taxes to help defray the costs of public tobacco education.  We restrict when and where it can be advertised.  You don't see advertisements for alcohol and tobacco during children's programming but you certainly see advertisements for candied cereals!  We don't sell cigarettes in school vending machines to finance school sports but we do sell candy and soft drinks to our children in school vending machines.

I could go on and on and on.  But then, I'd just be going on and on and on.


----------



## Beefnot

What if it was demonstrated that, at least in some cases, someone had no control over their obesity, but rather it was genetically coded? Are they entitled to a free seat then? Do they get a special ID card that reads "genetically uncontrollable obesity" that gets them extra airline seats and other compensatory perks?


----------



## SunSand

Just took a southwest flight and a pretty good size guy sat next to me.  He had a C boarding pass, so only the middle seats were available.  Here's a tip for anyone who may be oversized, carry along free drink coupons.  He gave me 2 SWA free cocktail coupons.  There was no way I was going to complain about this guy.  I was feeling too good by the end of the flight.


----------



## Beefnot

SunSand said:


> Just took a southwest flight and a pretty good size guy sat next to me.  He had a C boarding pass, so only the middle seats were available.  Here's a tip for anyone who may be oversized, carry along free drink coupons.  He gave me 2 SWA free cocktail coupons.  There was no way I was going to complain about this guy.  I was feeling too good by the end of the flight.



Aah, i only more big fellas were like Del Griffith...


----------



## Passepartout

This thread has morphed from 'the fat chick next to me plays her video game and bothers me' to voluntary vs. involuntary obesity vs. inseam length.

Whenever I'm out and about and and see a morbidly obese disabled person motoring around on a scooter, I wonder, "is that person disabled because they are (self inflictedly) morbidly obese, or are they morbidly obese because they are disabled, and simply can't burn the calories the are provided?" Kind of a 'chicken and egg' question. Which came first?

I have an old school chum who is disabled, and has been for decades. She simply can't be on her feet moving around due to phlebitis and open ulcers on her legs. Her income on disability is only about $600/mo. and frankly, fat calories from mac & cheese and cookies are cheaper calories than meat and salads. Over the decades, she has ever so slowly become one of those whom I would consider morbidly obese. There just is nothing she can do about it. I would pity the person who would have her beside her on an airplane. If she were on one, I could see her playing a game on her phone to avoid any uncomfortable conversation with some innocent seated beside her. I don't agree with it, but can easily see it happening. 

There is no easy answer. The incapacitated morbidly obese can't afford 2 seats. In Heathpack's OP, the airline did what they could by providing the extra large person an exit row seat. it's just too bad that she and her DH had paid extra for the privilege of sitting beside her. She still could have scrunched her shoulders in and sat uncomfortably still for the duration of the flight, and apologized to H for taking her space. Didn't happen and it's all water under the bridge.

Jim


----------



## pgnewarkboy

ScoopLV said:


> For what seems to be the fifth or sixth time this thread: I don't care HOW they became morbidly obese. That is not my problem.
> 
> My problem is when they're invading my personal space. Whatever they do away from me is not my concern.
> 
> My problem is that airline employees would rather let the morbidly obese impose on others rather than take the chance of hurting their feelings by telling them to buy an additional seat.
> 
> That is the debate in a nutshell. Despite the repeated attempts by apologists for the morbidly obese to make ridiculous comparisons, the fact remains that they are taking more than they paid for at the expense of people who aren't getting what they paid for.
> 
> Period. I cannot make it any more clear than that.



Scoop, the number of times you say something doesn't make your arguments stronger.  As long as the airline gets you to your destination you have received what you paid for. No airline guarantees your comfort.  You are livid about your discomfort.  You hold no high ground.  You and the obese person bought the same thing -transportation.


----------



## Beefnot

pgnewarkboy said:


> Scoop, the number of times you say something doesn't make your arguments stronger.  As long as the airline gets you to your destination you have received what you paid for. No airline guarantees your comfort.  You are livid about your discomfort.  You hold no high ground.  You and the obese person bought the same thing -transportation.



So if someone was hanging over your seat with their upper arm against your cheek, you would not complain? You would be satisfied with just arriving at your destination?


----------



## pgnewarkboy

Beefnot said:


> So if someone was hanging over your seat with their upper arm against your cheek, you would not complain? You would be satisfied with just arriving at your destination?



Scoop said he wasn't getting what he paid for. I say he got what he paid for-transportation.  And to answer your question - I might be unhappy but I wouldn't complain.  The road of life is filled with potholes.  Nobody gets a smooth ride.  All people who have ever walked the earth have faced everything from discomfort to major tragedy.   Hardship and starvation is a condition that many face in all parts of the world.  You have to be realistic and put things in perspective.  Discomfort on an airpoane is not worthy of major aggravation and complaint.


----------



## ScoopKona

Ridewithme38 said:


> So let me ask you stretch, its ok for the Airline to provide you with an exit row seat free because of your height, but the wide should have to pay for an extra seat?



The difference is -- *I fit in the seat.* Because of the seat pitch, the person in front of me isn't going to be able to recline. I cannot do anything about that. But I will have no effect whatsoever on the person next to me.

On short trips like LAS to SFO, I have often folded myself into an origami-like position for the 1.5 hour flight. I cause no discomfort to the people around me -- only to myself.


----------



## am1

Passepartout said:


> I have an old school chum who is disabled, and has been for decades. She simply can't be on her feet moving around due to phlebitis and open ulcers on her legs. Her income on disability is only about $600/mo. and frankly, fat calories from mac & cheese and cookies are cheaper calories than meat and salads. Over the decades, she has ever so slowly become one of those whom I would consider morbidly obese. There just is nothing she can do about it. I would pity the person who would have her beside her on an airplane. If she were on one, I could see her playing a game on her phone to avoid any uncomfortable conversation with some innocent seated beside her. I don't agree with it, but can easily see it happening.
> 
> There is no easy answer. The incapacitated morbidly obese can't afford 2 seats. In Heathpack's OP, the airline did what they could by providing the extra large person an exit row seat. it's just too bad that she and her DH had paid extra for the privilege of sitting beside her. She still could have scrunched her shoulders in and sat uncomfortably still for the duration of the flight, and apologized to H for taking her space. Didn't happen and it's all water under the bridge.
> 
> Jim



If you are able to, offer to pitch in to help a friend.


----------



## pacodemountainside

Anyone watched  "Biggest Loser" on TV?


----------



## Passepartout

am1 said:


> If you are able to, offer to pitch in to help a friend.



Suggestions? I offer her love. Moral support. She lives in a different city and has had double hip replacement (possibly due- or at least aggravated by her weight) which limits her activity, and is of higher-than-average intelligence. Should I send salad coupons? Membership to Over-eaters Anonymous? Curves? All that would to would be to alienate her. Unfortunately, I am not in a position, nor do I think it would help to subsidize her grocery bill. So there it is. I love her as a friend and as she is, not just as I wish she could be.

Jim


----------



## Rose Pink

Beefnot said:


> What if it was demonstrated that, at least in some cases, someone had no control over their obesity, but rather it was genetically coded? Are they entitled to a free seat then? Do they get a special ID card that reads "genetically uncontrollable obesity" that gets them extra airline seats and other compensatory perks?


That only happens in extremely rare cases where the individual has a mental deficiency and is unable to understand the consequences of his behavior.  In such a case, the individual is not competent to live independently and that person's care takers are responsible for what he eats.

While it is true that there can be a genetic predisposition to process nutrients differently or to be more inclined to OCD and addictive behaviors, those genetic traits do not cause a rational person to be obese.  It's physics.  If  you don't put more energy into your body than your body expends, you will not get fat.  IOW, if there are no excess calories, they cannot be stored as fat.  You have a choice.  Especially if you know there is a genetic trait/family  history of diabetes, cancer, heart disease, etc you should take steps to eat a healthy diet.


----------



## am1

Passepartout said:


> Suggestions? I offer her love. Moral support. She lives in a different city and has had double hip replacement (possibly due- or at least aggravated by her weight) which limits her activity, and is of higher-than-average intelligence. Should I send salad coupons? Membership to Over-eaters Anonymous? Curves? All that would to would be to alienate her. Unfortunately, I am not in a position, nor do I think it would help to subsidize her grocery bill. So there it is. I love her as a friend and as she is, not just as I wish she could be.
> 
> Jim



Anything that you can, want to and that she would appreciate or at least not be annoyed by.


----------



## Ridewithme38

ScoopLV said:


> The difference is -- *I fit in the seat.* Because of the seat pitch, the person in front of me isn't going to be able to recline. I cannot do anything about that. But I will have no effect whatsoever on the person next to me.
> 
> On short trips like LAS to SFO, I have often folded myself into an origami-like position for the 1.5 hour flight. I cause no discomfort to the people around me -- only to myself.



but you don't fit in the space provided for you, sounds like your using some of the space the person in front of you paid for...why is that different then those who use the paid for space of those next to them?


----------



## ScoopKona

Ridewithme38 said:


> but you don't fit in the space provided for you, sounds like your using some of the space the person in front of you paid for...why is that different then those who use the paid for space of those next to them?



Sorry, keep at it. I fit exactly in the space provided for me, utilizing 100% of it. The fact that my knees touch the seat do not impinge on the space of the person in front of me. The seats don't recline much, anyway, and we're required to sit upright for much of the flight. 

The difference is, for the umpteenth time, that short of femur reduction surgery, there is nothing I can do about my (vertical) size issue. Nothing. I cannot diet myself shorter. I suppose I could stop my calcium intake and hope my bones shrink. Perhaps I could visit a witch doctor. And of course, there's always amputation. 

Are you being contrary for the sake of contrariness? Or do you have some sort of reason why the morbidly obese deserve to spill over into everybody's space?


----------



## pacodemountainside

Hey Denise  M:

There is  definately no consensus,  actually quite a diversity of opinion on this thread.

Why don't you set up a survey?  The resutls could then be forwarded  to air lines indicating a sampling of some 58K+  active travelers.


----------



## kenie

ScoopLV said:


> As a society, we expect smokers to stop smoking. We have made laws and levied taxes to encourage them.
> 
> We expect drug addicts to kick their habit. We have made their addiction illegal and will incarcerate them if they don't do it on their own.
> 
> As I said way back on the first page of this thread -- we mollycoddle the morbidly obese. At SOME TIME IN THEIR LIVES they should have noticed that they can't fit through a doorway without squeezing. And they should have decided to do something about that. They can get help -- just like the alcoholic and the drug addict.
> 
> Just like I don't want someone's nicotine, alcohol or cocaine addiction to become MY problem on an airplane, I don't want someone's lifetime of poor food choices to become MY problem, either.



In America you throw people in prison for smoking a joint. Billions of dollars are wasted on the "War on Drugs". Has it worked?  NO
What are you going to do to fat people? Put them in fat prison, sentenced to lose X amount of weight if they want out??
If you want people to do something then educate them and get the f'n junk food and garbage that people are BEING TOLD TO EAT off of the airwaves and out of the schools. How many vending machines dispense fruit or healthy snacks??Schools are cutting out gym classes for budget cuts but there's always a way to feed people "pink slime".
Kids are bombarded with advertising for crap from the time they are born, getting less exercise and then people are blamed for being fat. Most families are dual income to make ends meet, and it's "easier" to go for fast food than make a healthy meal.
Start holding the companies that push this crap responsible just like you do the drug pushers. I would be willng to bet that a gallon of high fructose corn syrup will do more damage to someone than a couple of joints. How many people complaining about obese people own stock in the companies that peddle this garbage? If it's so wrong, why are you willing to profit from it?

And no, I am not trying to absolve people from being responsible for their actions. But don't train them to do one thing and then be surprised that it worked. 
Congatulations to all the advertising agencies out there who get paid to come up with these great ad campaigns.


----------



## heathpack

*First Class Seat*

Flew today LAX to San Jose del Cabo.  First Class award seats.  The seat was seriously FINE and Mr. H & I had our own personal row.  Extremely civilized.  I also had my own personal bottle of wine, but that is a different story altogether.


----------



## Ridewithme38

edited, nevermind i see the second leg now....


----------



## DeniseM

ScoopLV said:


> Are you being contrary for the sake of contrariness?



Of COURSE he is - this is RIDE!  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




If everyone came out in support of the obese person, he would immediately jump ship and vehemently argue the other side.


----------



## pwrshift

heathpack said:


> Flew today LAX to San Jose del Cabo.  First Class award seats.  The seat was seriously FINE and Mr. H & I had our own personal row.  Extremely civilized.  I also had my own personal bottle of wine, but that is a different story altogether.



However, now I'm afraid to eat any of your mini pies for fear I might get the seat next to you.


----------



## fillde

kenie said:


> In America you throw people in prison for smoking a joint. Billions of dollars are wasted on the "War on Drugs". Has it worked?  NO
> What are you going to do to fat people? Put them in fat prison, sentenced to lose X amount of weight if they want out??
> If you want people to do something then educate them and get the f'n junk food and garbage that people are BEING TOLD TO EAT off of the airwaves and out of the schools. How many vending machines dispense fruit or healthy snacks??Schools are cutting out gym classes for budget cuts but there's always a way to feed people "pink slime".
> Kids are bombarded with advertising for crap from the time they are born, getting less exercise and then people are blamed for being fat. Most families are dual income to make ends meet, and it's "easier" to go for fast food than make a healthy meal.
> Start holding the companies that push this crap responsible just like you do the drug pushers. I would be willng to bet that a gallon of high fructose corn syrup will do more damage to someone than a couple of joints. How many people complaining about obese people own stock in the companies that peddle this garbage? If it's so wrong, why are you willing to profit from it?
> 
> And no, I am not trying to absolve people from being responsible for their actions. But don't train them to do one thing and then be surprised that it worked.
> Congatulations to all the advertising agencies out there who get paid to come up with these great ad campaigns.


You picked a poor example for our war on drugs. Nobody goes to prison for smoking a joint. Selling marijuana results in jail.

If people need to go to a fast food place for convenience, there are healthy alternatives such as salads. Even Subway can be a healthy alternative. There are choices.


----------



## ScoopKona

kenie said:


> In America you throw people in prison for smoking a joint. Billions of dollars are wasted on the "War on Drugs". Has it worked?  NO
> What are you going to do to fat people? Put them in fat prison, sentenced to lose X amount of weight if they want out??
> 
> [much deleted]
> 
> Start holding the companies that push this crap responsible just like you do the drug pushers. I would be willng to bet that a gallon of high fructose corn syrup will do more damage to someone than a couple of joints. How many people complaining about obese people own stock in the companies that peddle this garbage? If it's so wrong, why are you willing to profit from it?
> 
> And no, I am not trying to absolve people from being responsible for their actions. But don't train them to do one thing and then be surprised that it worked.



Again, I REALLY DO NOT CARE the reasons why people are morbidly obese. Go through my old posts. I am Mr. "Buy Locally, source from farmers and ranchers, cook everything yourself, never buy anything out of a package."

I agree with everything you've said. From federal corn subsidies to sugar-added hormone-pumped school milk, to vending machines in schools, to letting agricorp make our kids meals -- THE DECK IS STACKED AGAINST the average American. I certainly get that.

On the other hand, let's take an average young baseball fan and count how many beer ads that kid is going to see in his young life. Blaming agricorp for obesity is like blaming breweries for alcoholism. Sure -- they provide the product that feeds the addiction, and they market it heavily. I get that, too.

But it is incumbent on the consumer to know when to stop.

Airlines won't let someone who is completely blotto onto an airplane. Airlines won't let people smoke onboard anymore. All I'm asking is for airlines to enforce the sensible policies they already have in regard to morbid obesity.


----------



## heathpack

pwrshift said:


> However, now I'm afraid to eat any of your mini pies for fear I might get the seat next to you.



The mini pie is all good, eat the mini pie!  Just don't forget to account for the calories somewhere.  Or else fly first class.

H


----------



## heathpack

On a more serious note: my maternal grandfather was obese- I would say 75 pounds overweight.  My mother has been obese to varying degrees her whole life, including morbidly obese at times, maybe now is 100 pounds overweight.  My brother was skinny like a string bean until he needed to go on prednisone for a medical condition that also decreased his activity level and made things like shopping and cooking very difficult. I have been overweight by 20 pounds or so most of my adult life, but when then crept up to 35 pounds overweight, my doctor absolutely put his foot down in year 3 of his telling me to lose weight, for some reason I finally did about a year ago.

So I can tell you from first hand experience that it's not exactly hard- losing weight is really pretty straightforward.  Less calories consumed, more calories burned, as long as you are brutally honest with yourself.  Probably the only thing that's hard is coming to terms with the reality of it all- exactly how few calories it takes to really run a body is eye-opening, along with how much exercise it takes to really burn it.  No one can put you on a diet, you have to figure it out yourself.  You can absolutely eat lots of mini pies, you just have to figure out what to do with the associated calories.

Sure food policy in America for some reason favors unhealthy foods over healthy ones, this is a real failing of a government IMO.  In part, this is because so many normal weight-people apply the value judgement to the overweight person- he/she is fat because lazy, with no self-control +/- maybe stupid- so reversing some of these food policy mistakes becomes difficult because skinny folks decide they are skinny through better virtue, they oppose changes to food policy that might be very helpful to the overall health of the American public. Personally, I think most overweight people are overweight as a result of a combination of lack of information about nutrition and diet and a sense not being powerless to make the necessary changes.  If you decide to lose weight, you hear over and over messages of failure- most people can't do it, they gain more weight in the long run, they can't keep it off, etc.  Also hogwash, if YOU are the one who figured out how to lose the weight, you are also the one that can figure out how to keep it off.  The same principles apply ad infinitum.  But the defeatist message is certainly not helpful.

So I really do have a good deal of sympathy to my obese neighbor on the plane vis a vis her obesity itself.  My only issue was that she was pretty rude and clueless about her impact on others.  Laying moral judgement on the obese is not helpful, but enabling them with a gazillion pre-made excuses is not helpful either.  Everyone who is overweight should be given a loud and clear message, over and over, to lose the weight for the sake of their health.  It would also behoove us to make changes on a societal level that would help people to get the tools they need to take the weight off.

H


----------



## pgnewarkboy

fillde said:


> You picked a poor example for our war on drugs. Nobody goes to prison for smoking a joint. Selling marijuana results in jail.
> 
> If people need to go to a fast food place for convenience, there are healthy alternatives such as salads. Even Subway can be a healthy alternative. There are choices.



Sorry  your facts are wrong.  Many people go to jail for using marijuana.


----------



## "Roger"

A few thoughts...

I am reluctant to blame the airline industry or the food industry.  (In line with my previous posts) it was interesting to see that the OP was in the exit row after paying $30 for an upgrade on a five hour flight.  These seats were available at the airport on what was an otherwise full plane.  That price is in line with what it would cost the airline to have provided more pitch (room between seats) for everyone.  Yet, those were the seats available at the last moment.  What are we suppose to say.  "Shame on you airlines for tempting us with cheaper seats with less pitch.  You know we are too weak to say no."

Foods.  More complicated.

Any habit is hard to break.  As a teacher, I often had students vow mid semester that they were going to improve their study (actually non-study) habits.  After about a week and a half, there they were again, missing classes, coming unprepared, etc.

Certainly one thing that has changed since I was a kid is the size of soda bottles.  I grew up in the days of the 7 oz. Coke.  What allowed us to esculate to 20 oz. bottles.  Cheaper sweetners (corn fructose syrup).  That has allowed the food industry to add sweetners to many things.  How much should we blame advertising and how much the food industry providing a product that sells to us.

I would recommend  going back to the best drink - water.  People used to do just fine drinking water.  (Diet beverages are not the answer.  Studies show that they just encourage a sweet tooth so that people end us getting their sweetners - corn fructose syrup - elsewhere.

Finally, somewhat related, the NY Times has an article this week about exercise and the growth of new brain cells.  (It started as about the ninth most viewed article and has creeped up to number one.)  Part of the article mentions that mice were given both enriched environments and environments that allowed for mild exercise.  The former had no impact on the growth (or retention) of new brain cells - the latter encouraged them.  There is more reason for people to walk and do light exercise than just physical health.


----------



## heathpack

"Roger" said:


> A few thoughts...
> 
> I am reluctant to blame the airline industry or the food industry.  (In line with my previous posts) it was interesting to see that the OP was in the exit row after paying $30 for an upgrade on a five hour flight.  These seats were available at the airport on what was an otherwise full plane.  That price is in line with what it would cost the airline to have provided more pitch (room between seats) for everyone.  Yet, those were the seats available at the last moment.



Just as an FYI, the exit row seats can only be purchased on the day of travel & I made my purchase about as early as one is able to.  It may be that every single person on the plane would've been willing to pay $30 more, but only 12 of us were able to.

H


----------



## geekette

pgnewarkboy said:


> Sorry  your facts are wrong.  Many people go to jail for using marijuana.



Not true.  Can't quote law, but I believe that it is the possession above a certain amount that is illegal vs use.  Sale is also illegal.  

I know plenty of "imbibers" and not one has ever been arrested for it.


----------



## jlr10

heathpack said:


> Probably the only thing that's hard is coming to terms with the reality of it all- exactly how few calories it takes to really run a body is eye-opening, along with how much exercise it takes to really burn it.



This is a valid point.  On a doctor monitored weight program I found out: At my height (5 feet nothing) and metabolism I have to work out 2 hours per day 7 days a week and consume 1200 or less to maintain being 40 pounds over weight.  If I want to reach chart ideas I have to eat less than 1000 calories a day. Yes, I can go on an extream diet and lose weight but keeping the caloric intake on less than what most people would find hard to do, on a daily basis is hard. Which is why my weight goes up and down. Don't judge anyone on their weight unless that person is yourself, since you don't know their story.

As for OP, as she pointed out, her problem was not the weight but rather the sense of entitlement the person beside her had with regards to personal space and attitude.  It would have been the same issue if it was a tall skinny person who kept jabbing her in the ribs with total disregard.  Definately a valid point. Very glad to see that the seats on first class gave her a much deserved break!


----------



## Rose Pink

ScoopLV said:


> But it is incumbent on the consumer to know when to stop.


 
Agreed. But without education, many of them don't understand when to stop.  Having taken hundreds, maybe thousands, of diet histories over the decades I can tell you people simply do not understand what they are eating or how much they are eating.  Food as drug is a relatively new development in brain chemistry and obesity studies. 

The bottom line is that the consumer is the one who is responsible but the consumer cannot make wise choices without good information.

Each year the schools host a Red Ribbon Week to get the children educated about drugs and have them pledge not to take drugs.  I think certain foods should be added to that list.  



heathpack said:


> ... my doctor absolutely put his foot down in year 3 of his telling me to lose weight, for some reason I finally did about a year ago.


It's been suggested that physicians need to be more pro-active in discussing obesity with their patients and even writing a prescription to lose weight.  The doctor's office is no place to be polite about avoiding discussing someone's fatness.  Kudos to your doc!



heathpack said:


> ...food policy in America for some reason favors unhealthy foods over healthy ones, this is a real failing of a government IMO.  In part, this is because so many normal weight-people apply the value judgement to the overweight person- he/she is fat because lazy, with no self-control +/- maybe stupid- so reversing some of these food policy mistakes becomes difficult because skinny folks decide they are skinny through better virtue, they oppose changes to food policy that might be very helpful to the overall health of the American public.


Perhaps, but the bigger player is dollars.  Billions and billions are made on junk foods by the corporations who make them and those who sell them retail or in school vending machines.  Unfortunately, billions and billions are being spent on the other end of this including the billions spent on weight reduction, diabetes, cancer, etc.




heathpack said:


> So I really do have a good deal of sympathy to my obese neighbor on the plane vis a vis her obesity itself.  My only issue was that she was pretty rude and clueless about her impact on others.
> 
> H


It certainly seems that she was rude and/or clueless but there is also another explanation.  She could be one of those extremely shy people who simply freeze up when confronted by a stranger.  I was so shy as a child/teen that at times I could not return a smile or a hello.  People thought I was conceited or stuck up.  I wasn't.  I just could not speak.  It is the way some people's brains are wired.  Just as some people are extroverts and some are introverts.  Shyness is built it.  Through the years I have learned to overcome it but at times it still rears it's miserable head.  While I've learned behaviors to help me function in public, the shyness is still hard-wired in me.
So, the woman sharing your seat space may have been pathologically shy.  If so, she may be self-medicating with food.  Not a good idea and hopefully, she'll get a clue as to how to overcome that.


----------



## pacodemountainside

Madison Avenue has been manipulating us since the day of the great flood. Still good reading today when scrunched on an air plane!


Vance Packard (May 22, 1914 – December 12, 1996) was an American journalist, social critic and author.

In 1957, The Hidden Persuaders was published and received national attention. The book launched Packard's career as a social critic and full-time lecturer and book author. In 1961 he was named a Distinguished Alumnus of Penn State University. He died in 1996 at the Martha's Vineyard Hospital in Massachusetts.


"The Hidden Persuaders" redirects here. For the 2011 British film, see The Hidden Persuaders (film).

Vance Packard's book The Hidden Persuaders, about media manipulation in the 1950s, sold more than a million copies. 
In The Hidden Persuaders, first published in 1957, Packard explores the use of consumer motivational research and other psychological techniques, including depth psychology and subliminal tactics, by advertisers to manipulate expectations and induce desire for products, particularly in the American postwar era. He identified eight "compelling needs" that advertisers promise products will fulfill. According to Packard these needs are so strong that people are compelled to buy products to satisfy them. The book also explores the manipulative techniques of promoting politicians to the electorate. The book questions the morality of using these techniques.


----------



## heathpack

Rose Pink said:


> Agreed. But without education, many of them don't understand when to stop.  Having taken hundreds, maybe thousands, of diet histories over the decades I can tell you people simply do not understand what they are eating or how much they are eating.  Food as drug is a relatively new development in brain chemistry and obesity studies.
> 
> The bottom line is that the consumer is the one who is responsible but the consumer cannot make wise choices without good information.
> 
> Each year the schools host a Red Ribbon Week to get the children educated about drugs and have them pledge not to take drugs.  I think certain foods should be added to that list.
> 
> 
> It's been suggested that physicians need to be more pro-active in discussing obesity with their patients and even writing a prescription to lose weight.  The doctor's office is no place to be polite about avoiding discussing someone's fatness.  Kudos to your doc!
> 
> 
> Perhaps, but the bigger player is dollars.  Billions and billions are made on junk foods by the corporations who make them and those who sell them retail or in school vending machines.  Unfortunately, billions and billions are being spent on the other end of this including the billions spent on weight reduction, diabetes, cancer, etc.
> 
> 
> 
> It certainly seems that she was rude and/or clueless but there is also another explanation.  She could be one of those extremely shy people who simply freeze up when confronted by a stranger.  I was so shy as a child/teen that at times I could not return a smile or a hello.  People thought I was conceited or stuck up.  I wasn't.  I just could not speak.  It is the way some people's brains are wired.  Just as some people are extroverts and some are introverts.  Shyness is built it.  Through the years I have learned to overcome it but at times it still rears it's miserable head.  While I've learned behaviors to help me function in public, the shyness is still hard-wired in me.
> So, the woman sharing your seat space may have been pathologically shy.  If so, she may be self-medicating with food.  Not a good idea and hopefully, she'll get a clue as to how to overcome that.



Food policy drives the dollars.  For example- we- you & I and every US taxpayer- heavily subsidize the production of corn.  Which becomes corn-fed beef and HFCS.  HFCS is way cheaper than traditional cane sugar, therefore junk foods become cheaper to make and therefore easier to sell at an attractive price.  Our government could choose instead to more heavily subsidize say raspberry production or provide serious tax breaks for farmers raising beef on pasture for its entire lifespan.  But instead of giving the break to the lady on the plane who'd maybe prefer a pint of raspberries over the family sized kit kat bar that she actually ate, we set up our food policy such that the raspberries are $5 but the kit kat is $2.  

Maybe that is not the best example, part of the cost of raspberries are their extreme perishability.  But you see what I'm saying.  It's as if food policy subsidized the production of rum and then we as a nation wondered why everyone was drunk all the time.

H


----------



## MOXJO7282

jlr10 said:


> This is a valid point.  On a doctor monitored weight program I found out: At my height (5 feet nothing) and metabolism I have to work out 2 hours per day 7 days a week and consume 1200 or less to maintain being 40 pounds over weight.



Unless you have some other health issues in play this is not true. Trust me if you're just overweight because of overeating and lack of exercise if you follow what you suggest above you will lose weight rapidly. You won't be able to work out 2 hours a day if you're 40 lbs overweight but you can target that to build up to. And 1200 calories a day is very few, especially if youre working out with vigor. 

This is one of the prominent excuses people use, along with "working out will make me eat more so I don't do it" If you have a health issue that makes your metabolism that slow that is a different story but for most people its just bad choices of what they're eating or the lack of any exercise.


The problem I see is people are just too darn sedentary. Technology has made it so easy to be. I bet if you asked 10 people if they worked out vigorously regularly let's say 4 times a week, it would be 3 out of 10. 3 more might get moderate activity and the other 4 would get none. If you don't exercise regularly you will not be healthy, unless you eat and drink like a teetotaller. I'm going to try to research that and get back with stats.  

I work out almost every day in one way or another. I'm at the gym lifting weights and running or biking at least 4-5 times a week and then doing vigorous yard work the other days, and actively coach all my son's sports teams.

Now I am still 15lbs over weight even with all that good exercise because I still like to eat rich foods sometimes and indulge in a cocktail or two.  I can tell you for sure the way I eat and drink if I didn't exercise so much I'd be one of those in need of 2 airline seats but I have a nice balance I think.

I feel good about myself except for my bald head because although I carry the extra weight  my doctors just recently confirmed I am a very healthy 47 yr old, and in fact said I was 10 years younger than my peers health wise, even being a little chubby. 

So it comes down to personal effort to keep yourself in reasonable shape. Even the people that now have health issues that make them obese, many got that way because of bad habits when they were young and not something genetic.

This may sound like a simple way to solve it but to be fair anyone who can't fit into a seat and has a legitmate medical reason why they are obese should be able to get a doctor's note to justify, and get a free seat from the airline, otherwise they should buy two seats.


----------



## MOXJO7282

I quickly looked it up. Its actually worst than I thought with less than 50% meeting the guidelines.

*"More Americans are exercising regularly, but still fewer than half of us are exercising enough to meet the exercise guidelines for healthy adults, according to a CDC survey"
*
This sums it up right here. These issues will continue to rise because we are going to continue to get fatter as a nation until more people take personal accountability and do the right thing.

I'm going to the gym right now. However I will be eating eggplant parm later so that is my trade off.


----------



## pgnewarkboy

geekette said:


> Not true.  Can't quote law, but I believe that it is the possession above a certain amount that is illegal vs use.  Sale is also illegal.
> 
> I know plenty of "imbibers" and not one has ever been arrested for it.



NO STATE HAS MADE THE POSESWION OF POT IN ANY AMOUNT LEGAL  WITH THE EXCEPTION OF STATES THAT LEGALIZE MEDICAL MARIJUANA.  Possession above a certain amount is considered possession with intent to sell.  If your imbiing friends were ever caught and arrested they might very well go to jaio particularly if they are black .   Read AND JUSTICE FOR SOME BY GLENN GREENWALD and you will see the actual statistics.  Some states make possession below a certain amount a disorderly persons offense which cn e penalized with just a fine and or 6 months in jail.  These states, and there are very few f them are probaky in conflict with federal law which des not permit such leniency.  Many more states have harsh penalties for possession of a small amount.  Whether or not you get arrested and sent to jail depends  largely on your skin color.  There is much written on this topic based upon verifiable statistics instead of anecdotal evidence.


----------



## am1

And the thread will be locked.


----------



## kenie

Just to be clear, I am in full agreement with the op that the behaviour of the person sitting beside her was wrong. She was totally inconsiderate of the people sharing the row with her and there is no excuse for that.


----------



## ScoopKona

geekette said:


> Not true.  Can't quote law, but I believe that it is the possession above a certain amount that is illegal vs use.  Sale is also illegal.
> 
> I know plenty of "imbibers" and not one has ever been arrested for it.



One out of every 150 prison inmates is in jail for simple cannabis possession. There are roughly 2.5 million people incarcerated in America, right now. We lead the world in per capita incarceration. (USA!  USA!  USA!  )


But, try as people may to excuse away obesity as an addiction, this is about what happens when someone who can't fit in a seat tries to do so next to you. I haven't heard one good argument why this sort of behavior should be permitted.

Just a lot of smoke and mirrors deflecting the point.


----------



## Tia

Thinking of diet choices

Sat in an early am diabetic education committee mtg this last week for my facility. The lead person mentioned how no one around the table had the cafeteria biscuits and gravy, meaning good choices at the table. Well the next two late arrive-es had you guessed it biscuits& gravy, they were both seated next to the lead person who had to  have noticed... she spoke too soon  

A coworker mentioned how expensive it is to eat fresh vegetables/fruit as she is trying to make healthier choices. This single coworker is making $70K/year so imagine trying to make healthier choices of lots less income  

Agree schools making $$$ off of soda machines in schools is bad bad bad, but there they are elementary - high school.


----------



## DeniseM

In California it is illegal to sell, or provide carbonated soft drinks at school.


----------



## fillde

pgnewarkboy said:


> NO STATE HAS MADE THE POSESWION OF POT IN ANY AMOUNT LEGAL  WITH THE EXCEPTION OF STATES THAT LEGALIZE MEDICAL MARIJUANA.  Possession above a certain amount is considered possession with intent to sell.  If your imbiing friends were ever caught and arrested they might very well go to jaio particularly if they are black .   Read AND JUSTICE FOR SOME BY GLENN GREENWALD and you will see the actual statistics.  Some states make possession below a certain amount a disorderly persons offense which cn e penalized with just a fine and or 6 months in jail.  These states, and there are very few f them are probaky in conflict with federal law which des not permit such leniency.  Many more states have harsh penalties for possession of a small amount.  Whether or not you get arrested and sent to jail depends  largely on your skin color.  There is much written on this topic based upon verifiable statistics instead of anecdotal evidence.



Not sure why you brought race and an obscure author into this topic.But if you must, we have a black president and a black attorney general not doing a thing about it. What a shame.


----------



## Tia

DeniseM said:


> In California it is illegal to sell, or provide carbonated soft drinks at school.





Well CA has something right . Soda machines have been in schools here since 21yo was in elementary school and machines were still in high schools last year when dtr was a senior. Her high school cafeteria is so small it encourages hs kids to go elsewhere for lunch -> fast food , plus they must drive as nothing except a gas station within  2+ miles.


----------



## "Roger"

heathpack said:


> Just as an FYI, the exit row seats can only be purchased on the day of travel & I made my purchase about as early as one is able to.  It may be that every single person on the plane would've been willing to pay $30 more, but only 12 of us were able to.
> 
> H


I must admit that I am not that familiar with many airlines.  AirTran does allow you to buy exit row seats at the time of purchase.  Frontier has a number of rows that offer "stretch seating" for $5 to $30 (I believe that is the range).  These seats are more interesting in that there are no limitations as to who can sit in them.

This thread has got my curiousity up.  I just went to the Frontier site and looked at a Minneapolis to Denver flight for this Friday.  (I chose something near at hand in that it would be mostly full.)  Ignoring the exit rows (not sure if they are up for sale or not), there were 114 regular seats available and 24 with stretch seating ($20 extra - on a flight of this length that would not give Frontier much profit over the extra cost of providing the extra room).  Both sections had 15 seats still available.  That means that the in your face, almost no pitch seats are selling at a 86% occupancy rate and the more leg room seats at a 37% pace.

Figures like this are hardly likely to encourage Frontier to offer more stretch seating.  People want cheap.


----------



## kenie

It also became more of an issue when airlines started to shrink the size of their seats as the public expanded the size of theirs....  

A perfect storm...


----------



## twofortheroad

I only noticed one posting on this thread that mentioned safety.

We often are seated in the exit row; the flight attendant usually asks us if we understand  and are capable of performing the duty of opening the door should it be necessary.  Sometimes the gate agent asks us also.  It's pretty obvious this woman was not able to do this.  She would have been an obstacle if an evacuation would have been necessary.  Think about the flight that landed on the Hudson river - how could she possibly have gotten off that plane?  I really feel for the person in the window seat.!

If you had expressed your concern to the flight attendant she could not have ignored the situation; their job includes passenger safety.  

I was once seated in the center, aisle seat was empty.  A very large man sat down next to me and flipped up the seatrest.  An announcement was made that someone had left an oversized carryon in the coat closet (this was years ago) that was blocking the aisle and needed to be moved.  No one claimed it - they announced his name on the intercom - it was him. He had to go up and claim it and find room for his bag in an overhead - the armrest was firmly down when he returned to his seat.  There are simply people out there that feel the rules don't apply to them.

Since that experience I keep my arm on the armrest & I place a  large book or magazine next to my thigh on either side of me - takes care of the ooze.

When my husband & I are seated next to one another we raise the armrest.  I always sit in the middle; he gets the aisle or window.  I am small and would feel discriminated  if a really large person was seated next to me because they needed extra room!  

Think maybe all airline employees should have chairs the same width as airline seats.


----------



## spencersmama

heathpack said:


> as long as you are brutally honest with yourself
> 
> H



Therein lies the key to life when applied to weight, money, relationships, really everything important.  Unfortunately, it is easier said than done.


----------



## ampaholic

Just got back from Waikiki - we flew in row 30 (the last row) - so the seats didn't "recline" even the 2.5 inches that the other seats do, what a pain in my knees.

DD threw a fit when we tried to put her on board - so the staff gave her special treatment, even gave her a set of wings - that was very nice.

They are very good people trying to make your flight safer and easier both - but they can't make the seats bigger or the butts smaller.

I am amazed how this thread has run on and on .... is it a record yet?


----------



## pjrose

ampaholic said:


> Just got back from Waikiki - we flew in row 30 (the last row) - so the seats didn't "recline" even the 2.5 inches that the other seats do, what a pain in my knees.
> 
> DD threw a fit when we tried to put her on board - so the staff gave her special treatment, even gave her a set of wings - that was very nice.



Awwwww, all parents have been through those fits.  I didn't realize they still had wings to give kids!  



ampaholic said:


> They are very good people trying to make your flight safer and easier both - but they can't make the seats bigger or the butts smaller.
> 
> I am amazed how this thread has run on and on .... is it a record yet?



#6 on TUG Lounge, only ones ahead are several American Idol threads, picture of the day, and song of the day.

When you're looking at the list of Lounge threads, click on Replies at the very top to sort, or just click here:
http://tugbbs.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=2&daysprune=-1&order=desc&sort=replycount

Of course it's up there; we're covering some important ground (air?) here.....safety, courtesy, obesity, airline bottom lines, seating, nutrition, measuring.....


----------



## beejaybeeohio

twofortheroad said:


> I only noticed one posting on this thread that mentioned safety.
> 
> We often are seated in the exit row; the flight attendant usually asks us if we understand  and are capable of performing the duty of opening the door should it be necessary.  Sometimes the gate agent asks us also.  It's pretty obvious this woman was not able to do this.  She would have been an obstacle if an evacuation would have been necessary.  Think about the flight that landed on the Hudson river - how could she possibly have gotten off that plane?  I really feel for the person in the window seat.



I am also very concerned when frail-looking elderly folk have exit row seats!


----------



## Ridewithme38

pgnewarkboy said:


> NO STATE HAS MADE THE POSESWION OF POT IN ANY AMOUNT LEGAL  WITH THE EXCEPTION OF STATES THAT LEGALIZE MEDICAL MARIJUANA.  Possession above a certain amount is considered possession with intent to sell.  If your imbiing friends were ever caught and arrested they might very well go to jaio particularly if they are black .   Read AND JUSTICE FOR SOME BY GLENN GREENWALD and you will see the actual statistics.  Some states make possession below a certain amount a disorderly persons offense which cn e penalized with just a fine and or 6 months in jail.  These states, and there are very few f them are probaky in conflict with federal law which des not permit such leniency.  Many more states have harsh penalties for possession of a small amount.  Whether or not you get arrested and sent to jail depends  largely on your skin color.  There is much written on this topic based upon verifiable statistics instead of anecdotal evidence.



there are states that have 'decriminalized' it up to a certain amount, NY is one of them, 25 grams is the 'decriminalized' level in NY....now don't get me wrong, i know that's not 'legal' but the fines for having it are equal to that of a parking ticket, i think i only paid a couple hundred dollars in high school, but the court case was pretty embarrassing, i was under 18 so the parents had to go to court with me, which with both parents working meant they had to take time off work for it and several friends were also ticketed...NOW, if caught USING, it is a whole different story, that can result in 3 months in prison 

While there is Some black/white disparity when dealing with legal cases, i didn't experience that in high school, i was with several kids when we got ticketed, we all lived in the same town, but were from many different ethnic backgrounds...The black or hispanic kids that were with me suffered no more, atleast in that case, then i did....IMO, it's not a skin color thing, but a economic background thing...We were all well spoken, upper Middle class kids from a decent area with no history of legal problems(I was older when i got my first DWI)


----------



## Passepartout

pjrose said:


> Of course it's up there; we're covering some important ground (air?) here.....safety, courtesy, obesity, airline bottom lines, seating, nutrition, measuring.....



I cannot think of anything even remotely related to air travel or obesity or any of the above that hasn't been addressed ad nauseum.

*PLEASE! Moderators: Put this thread out of it's misery and close it!* Enough already when we get down to expounding on marijuana laws. Absolutely no bearing on the subject of the thread.

Jim


----------



## ace2000

Passepartout said:


> *PLEASE! Moderators: Put this thread out of it's misery and close it!* Enough already when we get down to expounding on marijuana laws. Absolutely no bearing on the subject of the thread.
> 
> Jim


 
+1

TUG is better than this!


----------



## Ridewithme38

Heres a good article on airline seats

http://calorielab.com/news/2009/06/18/ailrine-seats-obese-wider-seat-options/


----------



## Rose Pink

heathpack said:


> *Food policy drives the dollars*.  For example- we- you & I and every US taxpayer- heavily subsidize the production of corn.  Which becomes corn-fed beef and HFCS.  HFCS is way cheaper than traditional cane sugar, therefore junk foods become cheaper to make and therefore easier to sell at an attractive price.  Our government could choose instead to more heavily subsidize say raspberry production or provide serious tax breaks for farmers raising beef on pasture for its entire lifespan.  But instead of giving the break to the lady on the plane who'd maybe prefer a pint of raspberries over the family sized kit kat bar that she actually ate, we set up our food policy such that the raspberries are $5 but the kit kat is $2.
> 
> Maybe that is not the best example, part of the cost of raspberries are their extreme perishability.  But you see what I'm saying.  It's as if food policy subsidized the production of rum and then we as a nation wondered why everyone was drunk all the time.
> 
> H


[emphasis added by me]

I think it is the other way around.  Dollars drive the food policy.  Lobbying is heavy.  We used to have the Basic Four Food Groups where each group had equal visual standing in the grid.  The Food Pyramid was held back for I-don't-remember-how-many months/years because the dairy and meat industries didn't like losing real estate to the grains and produce.  They didn't like the smaller emphasis on their products.  The science was there but the industries (large and small) opposed the change.  

Another example is school vending machines.  Each time that is brought up in our state legislature the vending machine companies as well as the schools come out against it.  Everyone knows it is bad for the children but they come up with excuses such as choice and moderation blah, blah, blah.


----------



## Rose Pink

kenie said:


> Just to be clear, I am in full agreement with the op that the behaviour of the person sitting beside her was wrong. She was totally inconsiderate of the people sharing the row with her and *there is no excuse for that*.


 


ScoopLV said:


> *But, try as people may to excuse away obesity as an addiction*, this is about what happens when someone who can't fit in a seat tries to do so next to you. I haven't heard one good argument why this sort of behavior should be permitted.
> 
> Just a lot of smoke and mirrors deflecting the point.


[emphasis added by me]
Explanations are not the same as excuses.  I've not made any excuses for people but only explanations as something to consider.  

Fat lady taking up more than what she paid for on the plane?  I've said all along that was wrong.  However, smug judgements are also wrong.  We simply do not know what was going on in that woman's life.  She may have been an insensitive, self-entitled slob with no concern for anyone around her.  Or, she may have been pathologically shy, abused from childhood, with a damaged psyche, poor education, low IQ and who self-medicated with food and video games.  None of us knows and therefore have no right to label her.

Whatever, she needed two seats, should have bought two seats and maybe it never occured to her that she could actually buy two seats.  Sometimes the obvious isn't obvious to the individual and we have all fallen into that at some point.   O_h, I could have had a V-8. _Maybe by buying the exit row seat, she thought she was buying an upgrade to a larger seat.  That is the airline's mistake for not informing her.  It is the airline's mistake for not following its own policy (assuming here it had one as most airlines do).  As I've said before, it is a safety issue not just a public relations or comfort issue.  

All of us need to take responsibility for our own actions and I believe we also have a responsibility to help other people as well.  It doesn't hurt us to be kind.  That fat-woman-on-the-plane affects me almost as much as my own fat affects me.  The $$$$ obesity is causing this nation is staggering.  We *all* pay for it.

I don't think the airlines need to make larger seats just because the population is large.  The population needs to shed its excess poundage.  The more we accomodate fat, the more normal it seems.  The ever larger food portion sizes now seem average.  When did a small soft drink become 20 ounces?!  When did a hamburger go from 3 ounces to a half pound?!  

To me, the answer, as painful or embarrasing as it may be, is to charge people for two seats.  As I mentioned before, SWA will reimburse for the second seat if the flight is not full.  If we have to pay for our fat upfront, maybe we will be more likely to face it and do something about it.  Then we won't have to pay so much for the effects of fat after the fact such as disease caused directly from it.


----------



## Tia

Rose Pink said:


> ....  Dollars drive the food policy.  Lobbying is heavy.  .....



That is the bottom line-- $$$$ drives policy in many things including airline seats.


----------



## Rose Pink

DeniseM said:


> In California it is illegal to sell, or provide carbonated soft drinks at school.


Where's the "like" button?!


----------



## Rose Pink

ampaholic said:


> I am amazed how this thread has run on and on .... is it a record yet?


I'm trying to do my part.  Thank you for doing yours.


----------



## kenie

.... Dollars drive the food policy. Lobbying is heavy. .

Isn't it true that somebody made pizza fit into one of the food groups because it has tomato sauce on it??  

I'm sure I read about this a couple of months ago.


----------



## Ridewithme38

kenie said:


> .... Dollars drive the food policy. Lobbying is heavy. .
> 
> Isn't it true that somebody made pizza fit into one of the food groups because it has tomato sauce on it??
> 
> I'm sure I read about this a couple of months ago.



Ketchup And relish were included as a vegetable for school lunches, ah, nevermind wrong decade, that was Reagan


----------



## Rose Pink

kenie said:


> .... Dollars drive the food policy. Lobbying is heavy. .
> 
> Isn't it true that somebody made pizza fit into one of the food groups because it has tomato sauce on it??
> 
> I'm sure I read about this a couple of months ago.


At one point there was an uproar because ketchup was allowed to be counted as a vegetable in school lunches.  

Pizza is a combination food with ingredients from more than one food group.  It contains grains (best to choose whole grains), vegetables (yes, tomato sauce is a vegetable, just watch how much sodium is in it), cheese (dairy group--you can still get the cheesy flavor by using a small amount of cheese and/or highly flavored cheeses, but by using less cheese you can keep the saturated fat down.  Depending on how you make your pizza, it can be a healthy food.  Load it with lots of fresh veggies and even add some lean meats if you like.  Choose foods low in sodium when loading up your pizza.


----------



## "Roger"

Here is an article from about four years ago detailing how our country supports high calory (but hardly healthful) food.

Michael Pollon


----------



## Rose Pink

"Roger" said:


> Here is an article from about four years ago detailing how our country supports high calory (but hardly healthful) food.
> 
> Michael Pollon


Thank you for posting that, Roger.  I hope many people will read it.


----------



## Tia

5'4" here and maybe 8 years ago was walking x5days/week with a friend a couple miles. She then heard that we probably needed to walk 5 miles x5days/wk to drop weight. Neither of us overweight according to charts but wanted to drop to that 20 yo body weight  we no longer had.  So she figured out a couple 5 mile routes, 1/2 being uphill, and guess what? I started to drop pounds, no diet changes. Then she got a new job so that project stopped :ignore: I am convinced from that experience it takes lots of exercise and/or diet changes to drop weight but everyone's metabolism is no doubt different and stage of life/age has a whole lot to do with mine. 



jlr10 said:


> This is a valid point.  On a doctor monitored weight program I found out: At my height (5 feet nothing) and metabolism I have to work out 2 hours per day 7 days a week and consume 1200 or less to maintain being 40 pounds over weight.  If I want to reach chart ideas I have to eat less than 1000 calories a day. Yes, I can go on an extream diet and lose weight but keeping the caloric intake on less than what most people would find hard to do, on a daily basis is hard. Which is why my weight goes up and down. Don't judge anyone on their weight unless that person is yourself, since you don't know their story.
> 
> As for OP, as she pointed out, her problem was not the weight but rather the sense of entitlement the person beside her had with regards to personal space and attitude.  It would have been the same issue if it was a tall skinny person who kept jabbing her in the ribs with total disregard.  Definately a valid point. Very glad to see that the seats on first class gave her a much deserved break!


----------



## pwrshift

*Seat selection for two seats.*

I know someone who bought two lowest price economy seats to have more space but they didn't permit seat selection online.  At check in, the flight people had her two seats but not side by side...then gave the extra to a standby at takeoff.  

She's still fighting for her money back on the extra seat.


----------



## pjrose

*Obesity and The Perfect Food*



Rose Pink said:


> At one point there was an uproar because ketchup was allowed to be counted as a vegetable in school lunches.
> 
> Pizza is a combination food with ingredients from more than one food group.  It contains grains (best to choose whole grains), vegetables (yes, tomato sauce is a vegetable, just watch how much sodium is in it), cheese (dairy group--you can still get the cheesy flavor by using a small amount of cheese and/or highly flavored cheeses, but by using less cheese you can keep the saturated fat down.  Depending on how you make your pizza, it can be a healthy food.  Load it with lots of fresh veggies and even add some lean meats if you like.  Choose foods low in sodium when loading up your pizza.



I'm not sure if we've yet discussed the relationship between obesity and what some of us consider The Perfect Food.  Of course I refer here to Chocolate, which, to many, especially women, is The Perfect Food.  Cocoa beans are beans, right?  Vegetable and Protein?  Sugar comes from vegetables.  Vanilla?  Another vegetable.  Milk? Dairy, more protein.  So what's the darn problem?  

It's yummy, it's medicinal (think stress), it's a happy food, it has protein and vegetable, and it's so darn frustrating that it's so darn 1) fattening and 2) addictive.  Grrrrr.  If I had chocolate in the house, I would eat it.  If DH or DD hid it, I would find it and eat it.  And I would find it difficult if not impossible to not over-eat it.  And I would become obese and not fit into a 17" airline seat.  

Sure, if I could eat it in moderation like DH (another Grrrrr), there'd be no problem.  My mother could actually eat HALF of an Oreo (not that I'm putting Oreos in a class with good chocolate...)  But either there really IS something addictive in it, or I (and many others) have wiring or genes or whatever that leads to chocolate cravings.  If I have just a little - say a few Hershey Kisses or a few squares of really really good dark chocolate - I want more, more, more. I will happily eat a whole bag of Kisses or Dove dark chocolate or even Hershey's miniatures in about two nights, maybe three.  On the other hand, if I haven't had any for a few weeks, I could probably go forever without any.  But I don't WANT TO go without any chocolate!  Again, frustrating.

Thus I must restrain myself so if I ever find myself in an exit row I can safely open the exit and get out, and if I ever find myself sitting next to Heath I won't jab her with my elbows akimbo!  

ok, rant over


----------



## ScoopKona

pjrose said:


> But I don't WANT TO go without any chocolate!  Again, frustrating.



I wouldn't fret too much. Chocolate and vanilla are about to become so expensive that only the super rich can afford it. 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/02/13/chocolate-shortage_n_1273795.html

http://www.fox40.com/news/headlines...pcakes-bean-shortage-20120422,0,2451070.story


These links are hack jobs. Poorly written. The problem is worse than they say. Orchids which produce the vanilla bean are dying en masse, and so are the cocoa trees.

My wife's ancestors have a saying. "May you live in interesting times."

Well, it's getting interesting. I'd use "scary." But you get the idea.


----------



## pjrose

ScoopLV said:


> I wouldn't fret too much. Chocolate and vanilla are about to become so expensive that only the super rich can afford it.



Well that should help with the obesity problem.  

And maybe I'll stock my freezer with the really good stuff.


----------



## ampaholic

pwrshift said:


> I know someone who bought two lowest price economy seats to have more space but they didn't permit seat selection online.  At check in, the flight people had her two seats but not side by side...then gave the extra to a standby at takeoff.
> 
> She's still fighting for her money back on the extra seat.



Wouldn't a first class ticket have been cheaper? 

She needed a handicap placard to positively ensure side by side on her seats (or a quality airline) - sounds like it was Del*a?


----------



## ScoopKona

pjrose said:


> ScoopLV said:
> 
> 
> 
> I wouldn't fret too much. Chocolate and vanilla are about to become so expensive that only the super rich can afford it.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Well that should help with the obesity problem.
> 
> And maybe I'll stock my freezer with the really good stuff.
Click to expand...


Cocoa (and vanilla) aren't the culprits. Cocoa is amazingly good for you. It's all that extra sugar and fat that we add when we turn them in to chocolate bars and vanilla ice cream.

Start drinking unsweetened cocoa as a beverage. Seriously. Find yourself a tin of decent unsweetened cocoa and start brewing it. If you've got a Jones for cocoa, you may as well feed your addiction in such a way that it's good for you.

It's a powerful anti-oxidant.


----------



## Tia

So someone tried to do the right thing and the airline messed it up! What airline didn't refund her $$$?

From what I have seen  first class tickets would usually cost more then 2 lowest price economy, though I don't often look. 



pwrshift said:


> I know someone who bought two lowest price economy seats to have more space but they didn't permit seat selection online.  At check in, the flight people had her two seats but not side by side...then gave the extra to a standby at takeoff.
> 
> She's still fighting for her money back on the extra seat.


----------



## ScoopKona

ampaholic said:


> Wouldn't a first class ticket have been cheaper?



Nope. For instance, for the trip I want to take to India, economy costs around $1300 round trip. First class is 10 times more expensive.

First class only makes sense when using points/miles. But I cash my points in and pay every 10th bill. So I never have many points.


----------



## lvhmbh

We always upgrade using our miles.


----------



## pgnewarkboy

lvhmbh said:


> We always upgrade using our miles.



There is an interesting article in the "ombudsman" section of Conde Naste Traveller this month.  A couple booked a trip (I think to SF) and used their United Air miles to upgrade to business class.  When they arrived at the airport they were told they had to pay an additional $900 per ticket.  They were not previously told at the time of reservation there was an additional fee.  United answers the Ombudsman (who took the case) that their rules concerning "co-pays" were placed on their website and the fliers had to check the web site to find out there would be a charge.  The burden was on the fliers according to United even though the airline had many opportunities to advise them of the fee at the time of booking.  Bottom line is that the couple was stuck and paid the fees to take their already arranged trip.  Ombudsman could not get United to reimburse the charges.  Apparently, co-pays for upgrades are really the "in thing" with many airlines.


----------



## carl2591

*time to lock this one down.*

i am amazed this thread has spilled over to some 17 pages now..  

I think it time to lock it down and move on... 


like the cops on the streets... "move along nothing to see here.. " :ignore: 


good night..


----------



## Tia

So long as no rules are broken shouldn't it remain open??


----------



## ampaholic

carl2591 said:


> i am amazed this thread has spilled over to some 17 pages now..
> 
> I think it time to lock it down and move on...
> 
> 
> like the cops on the streets... "move along nothing to see here.. " :ignore:
> 
> 
> good night..



But we haven't fixed the problem yet ....


----------



## kenie

ampaholic said:


> But we haven't fixed the problem yet ....



Which problem were we fixing...I forget..


----------



## heathpack

kenie said:


> Which problem were we fixing...I forget..



I think it was the school lunch program.

H


----------



## Beefnot

heathpack said:


> I think it was the school lunch program.
> 
> H



I thought it was getting obese people to stop eating.


----------



## geekette

I thought it was getting people to stay in their People Space.


----------



## ampaholic

I thought it was that the threads with record numbers of replies were all "entertainment" threads - no _*substance*_ like this thread.


----------



## scrapngen

ampaholic said:


> I thought it was that the threads with record numbers of replies were all "entertainment" threads - no _*substance*_ like this thread.



Yep...quite a bit of "substance" overflowing into others' assigned seats....
Not entertaining at all


----------



## Htoo0

Substance threads can usually be solved with a bit of reason and factual information. While the OP suffered an unfortunate situation at the 'arms' of a (perhaps) clueless and rude person with a bit of size problem combined with the airlines shrinking of seat space to maximize their profitability, this thread has been a combination of subjects which has touched areas to interest almost anyone. I'm amazed it hasn't been locked several times.


----------



## pjrose

Htoo0 said:


> Substance threads can usually be solved with a bit of reason and factual information. While the OP suffered an unfortunate situation at the 'arms' of a (perhaps) clueless and rude person with a bit of size problem combined with the airlines shrinking of seat space to maximize their profitability, this thread has been a combination of subjects which has touched areas to interest almost anyone. I'm amazed it hasn't been locked several times.



If the person had only a BIT of a size problem the thread wouldn't have started.

There's no TUG rule about a long discussion with many tangents that are semi-related to the original post, and that often come right back to it.  

And the problems we're solving?  Oh my, so many......airline seat size, height vs width, obesity, junk food......

IMNSHO, those who want to stop the conversation should perhaps leave the conversation.....but there's no reason for the rest of us to stop our discussion.   I am enjoying the conversation!


----------



## scrapngen

pjrose said:


> If the person had only a BIT of a size problem the thread wouldn't have started.
> 
> There's no TUG rule about a long discussion with many tangents that are semi-related to the original post, and that often come right back to it.
> 
> And the problems we're solving?  Oh my, so many......airline seat size, height vs width, obesity, junk food......
> 
> IMNSHO, those who want to stop the conversation should perhaps leave the conversation.....but there's no reason for the rest of us to stop our discussion.   I am enjoying the conversation!



Ooooohhhhh!! PJ!   I love the fact that you've gone to the: IMNSHO!!!  
First time I've seen you use that! You go, girl


----------



## pjrose

scrapngen said:


> Ooooohhhhh!! PJ!   I love the fact that you've gone to the: IMNSHO!!!
> First time I've seen you use that! You go, girl



hee hee hee.....I had to be careful to get the acronym right


----------



## planzfortomorrow

*New points to consider*

Have greatly enjoyed reading this thread.  Have learned several new things...such as seat size & that my shoulders are 16" across, more or less, so even when I was much skinner, I always had to hunch shoulders on airplanes.  Never knew seat sizes were right at the same length as my shoulders, just knew that I needed all my space, and if someone went over their space I'd always feel my personal space had been invaded.  I do fit in my seat, but do not have any room to share.  And greatly agree with many observations as to diet, losing weight is simple (eat less than you burn) but not easy, the woman might have needed to buy 2 seats, etc.

Anyway, have two new points for consideration:
I know that this may be taken the wrong way, but when you're NOT the one in the middle seat--no single passanger has this as your first choice--you've got to give a little.  The window seat person can hug the window, the aisle seat person can lean into the aisle (and gets whacked by every passanger & cart going by), but the middle person really has no where to go.  And I don't care how POLITELY you say it, there's just no way it doesn't come across as "your too fat, stay on your side!"

Which brings up my next point: maybe this woman is already in the process of trying to correct her size, but as it didn't take a year to get that big, it will take longer than a year to lose it... I do not believe that she needed the seat belt extension, so just how much spillage is too much?  1 inch on either side?  10 inches????  Anyway--she can't become "unfat" overnight, and certainly not while she's on the plane.  Yeah, she's made a lifetime of bad choices, but for the immedate situation, what is she suppose to do?  I'd give someone the fish stare too.  Don't get me wrong--I try very hard to be polite, but also expect it from others too.

Final point--seating is limited on airplanes.  The flight attendants do not have unlimited seats to chose from--and if you want to be moved, chances are you're going to start affecting someone else.  Yeah, you don't want to sit next to the stinky fat person?  Or the one with woogums?  Or the one with the screaming kid?  Or the other with the newborn baby?  Or next to mister tall guy who you've got to climb over to get into your seat (and forget about mid-flight restroom breaks).  Uh, not too many choices left  

My solution: make window & aisle seats 1/2" to 1" shorter.  Give that to the middle seat.   And/or start charging 5 to 30 extra for the choice window/aisle seats.  Then airlines make more money, & there's seating for the short & squat.

:rofl:


----------



## ampaholic

I think the ultimate solution is to medicate unhappy flyers with Jack Daniels - it works for me. Two or three of those and all is well ....


----------



## pacodemountainside

pjrose said:


> If the person had only a BIT of a size problem the thread wouldn't have started.
> ......
> 
> IMNSHO, those who want to stop the conversation should perhaps leave the conversation.....but there's no reason for the rest of us to stop our discussion.   I am enjoying the conversation!



Howdy: 

From the over the hill gang  and  not with  swinging texting lingo of today. Do have  cell phone, but sans texting. Could you tell me in  ingles or espanol what your short hand(thats what it was called back in day of great flood) means? 

And,  perhaps refer me to web site that deciphers  like  the cheat sheets  used to use  interpret  CB radio talk!:whoopie: 

10/4 outta de back door on all four:deadhorse: :deadhorse:


----------



## Rose Pink

Beck02 said:


> Have greatly enjoyed reading this thread.  Have learned several new things...such as seat size & that my shoulders are 16" across, more or less, so even when I was much skinner, I always had to hunch shoulders on airplanes......


 
This comment reminded me of regular (non-airline) seats.  Many of them have wider tops to accomodate the extra room our top halves use considering arm movement.  When you think about it, we need more room above the waist than we do below the waist.



ampaholic said:


> I think the ultimate solution is to medicate unhappy flyers with Jack Daniels - it works for me. Two or three of those and all is well ....


Do you sip it from hollow chocolate Easter bunnies?


----------



## Rose Pink

pjrose said:


> IMNSHO


 


pacodemountainside said:


> Howdy:
> 
> From the over the hill gang  and  not with  swinging texting lingo of today. Do have  cell phone, but sans texting. Could you tell me in  ingles or espanol what your short hand(thats what it was called back in day of great flood) means?
> 
> And,  perhaps refer me to web site that deciphers  like  the cheat sheets  used to use  interpret  CB radio talk!:whoopie:
> 
> 10/4 outta de back door on all four:deadhorse: :deadhorse:


 
*I*n *M*y* N*ot *S*o *H*umble *O*pinion

I had to think a small moment to figure it out but recognized it was based on IMO, in my humble opinion, then it became clear to me.  You can google for lists of internet and text acronyms.


----------



## pjrose

pacodemountainside said:


> Howdy:
> 
> From the over the hill gang  and  not with  swinging texting lingo of today. Do have  cell phone, but sans texting. Could you tell me in  ingles or espanol what your short hand(thats what it was called back in day of great flood) means?
> 
> *And,  perhaps refer me to web site that deciphers  like  the cheat sheets  used to use  interpret  CB radio talk!:whoopie:
> *
> 10/4 outta de back door on all four:deadhorse: :deadhorse:



Google: internet acronyms.  One such site is:

http://www.gaarde.org/acronyms/



ampaholic said:


> I think the ultimate solution is to medicate unhappy flyers with Jack Daniels - it works for me. Two or three of those and all is well ....



Just as long as there's no turbulance that stirs up your liquid medication, such that you might have to race for the rest room because there are no little white bags in the seat-backs, and then you don't get stuck trying to climb over Mr. or Ms. Wide or Tall and lose it......


----------



## pacodemountainside

Rose Pink said:


> This comment reminded me of regular (non-airline) seats.  Many of them have wider tops to accomodate the extra room our top halves use considering arm movement.  When you think about it, we need more room above the waist than we do below the waist.
> 
> 
> Are you inferring we should have Dolly Parton bust in on this  discussion?:whoopie:
> 
> 
> Thinking back to the good ole days, would  one rather have  chimneys smoking all  around them  or hunker down in smaller seat?
> 
> Ya pays your money and takes your choice!


----------



## Beefnot

Rose Pink said:


> *I*n *M*y* N*ot *S*o *H*umble *O*pinion
> 
> I had to think a small moment to figure it out but recognized it was based on IMO, in my humble opinion, then it became clear to me.  You can google for lists of internet and text acronyms.



I thought it was In My Not So Honest Opinion.


----------



## ampaholic

Beefnot said:


> I thought it was In My Not So Honest Opinion.


That's only in LA


----------



## pacodemountainside

Beefnot said:


> I thought it was In My Not So Honest Opinion.



Too much to deal with at this stage of my life!  


IMAO 
In My Arrogant Opinion 
IMBO 
In My Biased Opinion 
IMBO 
In My Bloody Opinion 
IMBW 
I May Be Wrong 
IMCAO 
In My Completely Arrogant Opinion 
IMCDO 
In My Conceited Dogmatic Opinion 
IMCO 
In My Considered Opinion 
IME 
In My Experience 
IMHBCO 
In My Humble But Correct Opinion 
IMHO 
In My Holy Opinion 
IMHO 
In My Honest Opinion 
IMHO 
In My Humble Opinion 
IMMOR 
I Make My Own Rules 
IMNSCO 
In My Not So Considered Opinion 
IMNSHO 
In My Not So Humble Opinion 
IMNSVHO 
In My Not So Very Humble Opinion 
IMO 
In My Opinion 
IMOBIHO 
In My Occasionally But Infrequently Humble Opinion 
IMOBO 
In My Own Biased Opinion 
IMOHO 
In My Occasionally  Humble Opinion


----------



## Tia

pjrose said:


> ............
> Just as long as there's no turbulance that stirs up your liquid medication, such that you might have to race for the rest room because ......



Oooh that would be very very very bad! :rofl: :hysterical: :rofl:


----------



## pjrose

pacodemountainside said:


> . .
> 
> Are you inferring we should have Dolly Parton bust in on this  discussion?:whoopie:
> 
> Thinking back to the good ole days, would  one rather have  chimneys smoking all  around them  or hunker down in smaller seat?



Nope, you may be inferring, but Rose Pink, to whom you were responding, would have been implying  



Beefnot said:


> I thought it was In My Not So Honest Opinion.



Meanie.  I suppose that would be a viable translation, but I meant Not So Humble


----------



## Htoo0

I wasn't complaining about the thread and was trying to be nice by calling it a bit of a size problem. I was merely commenting on the fact that I've seen threads locked in the past for what seemed like less controversy than what I've sometimes read in this thread. (And if any number of controversial social issues haven't been covered in these pages I don't know what the term means.) There have been times when it appeared there was a bit of rudeness occurring as well. TUG seems to have much tighter rules than any other site in which I participate (which is fine by me). But I've overstepped a few times myself. However, if the rules are relaxed from time to time or changed altogether that's OK too. I try to live within the rules though and it can become difficult if the line wavers. As to if this thread crossed the line at times isn't my call, I wasn't asking that it be locked, merely expressing surprise that it hasn't happened. Certainly those who don't care to participate can skip reading it. That could be said for several threads which have been closed which didn't violate the politics, religion or controversial social issues rules. Some of them were joke threads which some apparently thought crossed some decency?? line. Personally, although I didn't start them, I enjoyed them and wondered why those who objected couldn't have just skipped over the thread(s). Again however, not my call.
By all means, continue to enjoy the thread, I'm not complaining, merely explaining.


----------



## Ridewithme38

Htoo0 said:


> I wasn't complaining about the thread and was trying to be nice by calling it a bit of a size problem. I was merely commenting on the fact that I've seen threads locked in the past for what seemed like less controversy than what I've sometimes read in this thread. (And if any number of controversial social issues haven't been covered in these pages I don't know what the term means.) There have been times when it appeared there was a bit of rudeness occurring as well. TUG seems to have much tighter rules than any other site in which I participate (which is fine by me). But I've overstepped a few times myself. However, if the rules are relaxed from time to time or changed altogether that's OK too. I try to live within the rules though and it can become difficult if the line wavers. As to if this thread crossed the line at times isn't my call, I wasn't asking that it be locked, merely expressing surprise that it hasn't happened. Certainly those who don't care to participate can skip reading it. That could be said for several threads which have been closed which didn't violate the politics, religion or controversial social issues rules. Some of them were joke threads which some apparently thought crossed some decency?? line. Personally, although I didn't start them, I enjoyed them and wondered why those who objected couldn't have just skipped over the thread(s). Again however, not my call.
> By all means, continue to enjoy the thread, I'm not complaining, merely explaining.



Psst, Discussion of Moderation of a thread, is reason for it to be closed also...


----------



## Rose Pink

pacodemountainside said:


> Rose Pink said:
> 
> 
> 
> This comment reminded me of regular (non-airline) seats.  Many of them have wider tops to accomodate the extra room our top halves use considering arm movement.  When you think about it, we need more room above the waist than we do below the waist.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pacodemountainside said:
> 
> 
> 
> Are you inferring we should have Dolly Parton bust in on this  discussion?:whoopie:
> 
> 
> Thinking back to the good ole days, would  one rather have  chimneys smoking all  around them  or hunker down in smaller seat?
> 
> Ya pays your money and takes your choice!
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> pjrose said:
> 
> 
> 
> Nope, you may be inferring, but Rose Pink, to whom you were responding, would have been implying
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Actually, I was referring to the lateral width of upper bodies not frontal width.  It was a reference to the flying elbows not the flying and/or sagging frontal baggage.
Click to expand...


----------



## geekette

Rose Pink said:


> Actually, I was referring to the lateral width of upper bodies not frontal width.  It was a reference to the flying elbows not the *flying and/or sagging frontal baggage*.



:hysterical: 

"I'll have a seat in Flying Frontal Baggage, please"

"Sorry, Lady, you don't quality based on our Sagometer.  To the Sag Section with you!"


----------



## MuranoJo

geekette said:


> :hysterical:
> 
> "I'll have a seat in Flying Frontal Baggage, please"
> 
> "Sorry, Lady, you don't quality based on our Sagometer.  To the Sag Section with you!"



And the Sag Section is worth the extra cost because it has a special secondary upper seat belt which provides support where you need it most.

This thread has been pretty entertaining.  :hysterical:


----------



## Tia

Adward9999 said:


> I have such a experience but I cant share this.Because it was funny and private.I think I can't forget this in my whole life



Na you can't say that and not share!


----------



## geekette

Adward9999 said:


> I have such a experience but I cant share this.Because it was funny and private.I think I can't forget this in my whole life



The internet is anonymous.  Your privacy is pretty well assured since I don't even know your name.

Come on, SPILL!!!!!

It is against Tug rules to dangle an amusing story yet withhold it.


----------



## DeniseM

Since Adward9999 is posting from Asia, and not LA, and has posted 4 nonsense posts, I am 99% sure he is setting us up to spam TUG...


----------



## pjrose

DeniseM said:


> Since Adward9999 is posting from Asia, and not LA, and has posted 4 nonsense posts, I am 99% sure he is setting us up to spam TUG...



Party Pooper (him/her, not you)


----------



## ScoopKona

Morbidly obese woman sues airline...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/kenlie-tiggeman-southwests_n_1476907.html


----------



## Beefnot

And the thin passenger that got booted from another flight should have sued for reverse discrimination.



> In July 2010, the airline reportedly booted a thin passenger on a flight from Las Vegas to Sacramento to make room for an overweight passenger.


----------



## Rose Pink

ScoopLV said:


> Morbidly obese woman sues airline...
> 
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/05/04/kenlie-tiggeman-southwests_n_1476907.html


According to the video, she is suing for lack of a clear policy at the point of purchase.  I don't know what SWA's policy was last year when the incident happened, but when I checked their website, it was clear to me.  I think SWA is very fair.  They require the purchase of two seats but refund one of those tickets if the flight is not full.  I don't see how they could be any more fair and accomodating.


----------



## Tia

Beefnot said:


> And the thin passenger that got booted from another flight should have sued for reverse discrimination.



Don't have the details but possibly the overweight passenger had purchased 2 seats and needed them. Not sure how airlines decide things when overbooked.


----------



## Fern Modena

Southwest makes the refund sound transparent and easy, but it is not.  They make it easy to purchase a ticket, online, by telephone, etc.  But to get the refund you must mail in the ticket stub.  Period.  No other way to do it.

Fern



Rose Pink said:


> According to the video, she is suing for lack of a clear policy at the point of purchase.  I don't know what SWA's policy was last year when the incident happened, but when I checked their website, it was clear to me.  I think SWA is very fair.  They require the purchase of two seats but refund one of those tickets if the flight is not full.  I don't see how they could be any more fair and accomodating.


----------



## Beefnot

Tia said:


> Don't have the details but possibly the overweight passenger had purchased 2 seats and needed them. Not sure how airlines decide things when overbooked.



The situation referenced in the article was that a 110lb woman was booted in favor of an overweight 14-yr old who had only paid for one seat.


----------



## Tia

Thanks for the link. Guess it's because the overweight person was a minor and they didn't want to babysit. 

I am always saddened when I see overweight children, seems to be many many more then in the 60's- 70's -80's. My good old days without cable TV,  soda was a rare treat (no machines in school lobby) , fast food was rare occasion, and didn't have a cupboard full of chips/cookies either. 

I had a flight attendant last trip be loud and rude when the over head bins were full of  "emergency equipment" aka audio equipment over our seats and had no choice but to put mine a few rows behind (which makes it hard to get after landing). I had not even said anything to him, but had remarked to my friend.    He went on saying you can't put items in rows ahead of your row either, as that was an option I saw. He continued to going on how there was life saving equipment! and what did I think was more important!

Later while in flight ,same as above, after being asked by a lady in our row we changed seats  with her dtr and grandchild who were in seats a few rows ahead and moved our carry on's  

[QUOTE ww.huffingtonpost.com/2010/07/27/southwest-airlines-fat-pa_n_660323.html"]article[/URL] was that a 110lb woman was booted in favor of an overweight 14-yr old who had only paid for one seat.[/QUOTE]


----------



## vacationhopeful

Beefnot said:


> The situation referenced in the article was that a 110lb woman was booted in favor of an overweight 14-yr old who had only paid for one seat.



She was a standby passenger who was booted when the ticketted passenger arrived. As he needed 2 seats (yes, he had paid for one) but the other seat was NOT SOLD - 110lb lady was asked to deplane.

I have been a SWA standby passenger - I understood that I could be asked to deplane if a ticketted passenger needed the seat arrived or if a NEW paying passenger showed up.

As for babysitting the 14 yo - unless he was escorted with the tag around his neck (I think it is 10 or 11 yo when a child can fly by themselves), they are treated just like the 85 yo or the 25 yo. I have been at SWA for a 6AM flight where the thunderstorms type weather had cancelled all the evening flights. 2 escorted children where put into the employee break room (period). Yes, left in the break room with random persons eating or getting sodas all night long. These kids (first cousins) had their cell phone and the AM onduty gate agent fetched them back into the terminal when they arrived around 5AM. No food, just water, after their 6PM flight was delayed and then, everything was cancelled. Seems some of the vendor machines returned the money along with food - so they had a little to eat. If they had NOT been escorted, they would have had to sleep in the public lounge area.


----------



## ScoopKona

You know those carry-on measuring contraptions that nobody ever uses?

Let's put a 17" wide seat at the ticket counter. "If you cannot fit into this seat, you are required to buy two adjacent tickets. If two adjacent seats are not available for this flight, you will have to fly a later flight."

The morbidly obese who buy tickets online and then come up with precious excuses like, "How was I supposed to know I wouldn't fit" should be told "You should look in a mirror sometime" and sold an additional seat.


----------



## Beefnot

vacationhopeful said:


> She was a standby passenger who was booted when the ticketted passenger arrived. As he needed 2 seats (yes, he had paid for one) but the other seat was NOT SOLD - 110lb lady was asked to deplane.



how does that work. So because the passenger was standby, the seat was not sold? SWA doesnt sell seats, it sells admission basically.  As far as I'm concerned, the standby passenger was entitled to that seat because the fat kid only paid enough revenue to occupy one seat, just the same as the standby passenger.


----------



## vacationhopeful

The "fat kid" was higher up the feeding chain than the standby traveller. It was immaterial that she was sitting on the plane. SWA boards 20 minutes before take off; seat and rights to seats are NOT FORTFITTED til 10 minutes before push back. The gate agent might have thought - yee, 2 seats, 1 missing passenger and 1 standby. But it did NOT ADD up due to "Passenger of Size" who claimed the seat (and the empty seat, which WAS NOT reserved by the standby). The Standby did NOT fly - did NOT have a reserved seat - did NOT pay for a reserved seat ON THAT FLIGHT.

Yes, SWA did NOT get revenue for that seat, but DID follow their boarding procedures and "PASSENGER of SIZE" guidelines.


----------



## ScoopKona

vacationhopeful said:


> The "fat kid" was higher up the feeding chain



Yes, I think that has been established.


----------



## Rose Pink

Perhaps airline internet sites need a pop-up that asks, "Do you need two seats?" as a reminder to persons of size.  [Oh, why can't we just say large?  Why so PC with "persons of size?"  It's large. Or extra-large. Everyone is a "size." We aren't discussing the need for a small-sized person to need extra room--the baggage thread is on the Travel forum.]

Also, if making reservations over the phone, the agent should also ask.  This leaves no question regarding airline policy.  It seems obvious to me that anyone who has ever flown knows the seat limitations and should take responsibility for asking themselves but since, as per the woman suing, they don't seem to have a clue then airlines could make it easier by one simple question.  "Airline seats are 17 inches wide.  Will you be needing two to accomodate your size?"


----------



## Tia

Rose Pink said:


> .... airlines could make it easier by one simple question.  "Airline seats are 17 inches wide.  Will you be needing two to accomodate your size?"



Yes they could easily do this, seems like a no brainer


----------



## Blue Skies

The woman who is suing SWA has a website: http://www.kenlietiggeman.com/

She talks about the lawsuit on her blog.  She has lost over 100 pounds so far and is trying to lose more.  

She says she is not opposed to purchasing 2 tickets, but the rules are inconsistent and left up to the discretion of the gate agent.  She flies a lot and sometimes she is deemed "to fat to fly" and other times she is not.  Also, she wishes the gate agent would use more discretion when pointing out her size in front of the other passengers.  It's all on her blog.


----------



## timeos2

Losing weight isn't easy no matter how much a person may desire to. Gaining weight is easy to do no matter how much you may not want to.  Self discipline isn't a strong suit for many. 

But it is no surprise to anyone, regardless of what even the most positive thinking may want to see, to know that you have gained weight or find that weight limits or seat size that used to be meaningless (weight limits) or easily navigated (seat size) now present a problem.  If you think you may have an issue chances are you do. It would be wise to inquire how large a seat is on that plane - if only to make yourself comfortable.  It isn't the job or problem of the airline although we have as a society pushed it off the individual and onto a third party - not really a fair thing to do.  Then we are surprised when things don't work out.  

Take personal responsibility and be realistic goes a LONG way toward avoiding any problems.  Regardless of size.


----------



## Rose Pink

timeos2 said:


> Losing weight isn't easy no matter how much a person may desire to. Gaining weight is easy to do no matter how much you may not want to.  Self discipline isn't a strong suit for many.
> 
> But it is no surprise to anyone, regardless of what even the most positive thinking may want to see, to know that you have gained weight or find that weight limits or seat size that used to be meaningless (weight limits) or easily navigated (seat size) now present a problem.  If you think you may have an issue chances are you do. It would be wise to inquire how large a seat is on that plane - if only to make yourself comfortable.  It isn't the job or problem of the airline although we have as a society pushed it off the individual and onto a third party - not really a fair thing to do.  Then we are surprised when things don't work out.
> 
> Take personal responsibility and be realistic goes a LONG way toward avoiding any problems.  Regardless of size.


I completely agree but since people either do not recognize their size nor take responsibility for it, I think it would make it more consistent for everyone, regardless of size, if the website or agent asked the question.  Then there would be no confusion.  The airline does bear responsibility to all of its passengers for clear rules of safety.


----------



## Rose Pink

Blue Skies said:


> The woman who is suing SWA has a website: http://www.kenlietiggeman.com/
> 
> She talks about the lawsuit on her blog.  She has lost over 100 pounds so far and is trying to lose more.
> 
> She says she is not opposed to purchasing 2 tickets, but the rules are inconsistent and left up to the discretion of the gate agent.  She flies a lot and sometimes she is deemed "to fat to fly" and other times she is not.  Also, she wishes the gate agent would use more discretion when pointing out her size in front of the other passengers.  It's all on her blog.


She flies alot.  That leaves her no room, IMO, to sue the airline.  She knows she does not fit.  I applaud her for her weight loss thus far but she knows she is still too big for one seat.


----------



## Tia

Rose Pink said:


> She flies alot.  That leaves her no room, IMO, to sue the airline.  She knows she does not fit.  I applaud her for her weight loss thus far but she knows she is still too big for one seat.



from the blog link http://www.kenlietiggeman.com/
"...The problem I have with Southwest is not that they may want me to purchase two seats.  It’s that sometimes they want that, and other times they don’t.  I don’t know about you, but I fly a lot.  And paying double because a gate agent may or may not have something against overweight people is not realistic…nor should it be necessary.  ..."

 Seems to me sometimes she has been allowed to bypass their rules, making it less costly $$$,  and other times not. She is asking the airline employees to always follow their rules and make it known.


----------



## vacationhopeful

Tia said:


> ... Seems to me sometimes she has been allowed to bypass their rules, making it less costly $$$,  and other times not. She is asking the airline employees to always follow their rules and make it known.



The SWA rule is "Buy the 2 seats and IF plane is not full, "passenger of size" can request a FULL REFUND of the cost of the 2nd seat." Where does it say the employees should enforce* the size rule *at the gate consistantly? If "BB" doesn't comply, SWA may deny boarding to her to protect the other passengers from an unpleasant (and possibly unsafe) trip while she is practing being cheap.

Kevin Smith learned that lesson with just ONE bump off SWA => he also lost alot of weight after that.


----------



## pjrose

Tia said:


> from the blog link http://www.kenlietiggeman.com/
> "...The problem I have with Southwest is not that they may want me to purchase two seats.  It’s that sometimes they want that, and other times they don’t.  I don’t know about you, but I fly a lot.  *And paying double because a gate agent may or may not have something against overweight people is not realistic…nor should it be necessary.*  ..."
> 
> Seems to me sometimes she has been allowed to bypass their rules, making it less costly $$$,  and other times not. She is asking the airline employees to always follow their rules and make it known.



I don't see it related to whether a "gate agent may [have] something against overweight people..." - it's whether the gate agent is following policy.  

I think their policy makes sense, two seats, but if the plane has extra room they'll refund the second.  Sounds pretty fair to me.

We're only four posts away from the AI 2010 thread in front of us, with 479.  Not that that's our goal, just FYI 

PM


----------



## Passepartout

Strikes me that the inconsistent enforcement of the 'two seat rule' is a lot like the 'random inspection' button one pushes entering Mexico, or being subject to random inspection by TSA upon boarding any flight. When you get by without additional inconvenience or expense, you just feel lucky. Those who _should_ be subject to the 'buy two seats' rule know it. This is no mystery. They should simply feel lucky when the flight doesn't cost them double and be quiet about it.

A lot like cruising past a parked cop with his radar out the window at 70 in a 55. Sometimes you just get lucky even when caught dead to rights.

Jim


----------



## Ken555

pjrose said:


> We're only four posts away from the AI 2010 thread in front of us, with 479.  Not that that's our goal, just FYI



Oh, really?


----------



## ampaholic

Ken555 said:


> Oh, really?



not anymore


----------



## Tia

I did not read SWA rules, just her blog where it sounded as if some gate agents let her on with no second ticket?  Even if they were going to refund the cost later if flight was not full from what their rules apparently are. 



vacationhopeful said:


> The SWA rule is "Buy the 2 seats and IF plane is not full, "passenger of size" can request a FULL REFUND of the cost of the 2nd seat." Where does it say the employees should enforce* the size rule *at the gate consistantly? If "BB" doesn't comply, SWA may deny boarding to her to protect the other passengers from an unpleasant (and possibly unsafe) trip while she is practing being cheap.
> 
> Kevin Smith learned that lesson with just ONE bump off SWA => he also lost alot of weight after that.


----------



## Rose Pink

Passepartout said:


> Strikes me that the inconsistent enforcement of the 'two seat rule' is a lot like the 'random inspection' button one pushes entering Mexico, or being subject to random inspection by TSA upon boarding any flight. When you get by without additional inconvenience or expense, you just feel lucky. Those who _should_ be subject to the 'buy two seats' rule know it. This is no mystery. They should simply feel lucky when the flight doesn't cost them double and be quiet about it.
> 
> A lot like cruising past a parked cop with his radar out the window at 70 in a 55. Sometimes you just get lucky even when caught dead to rights.
> 
> Jim



Consider the like button activated. 
I simply do not understand this woman's attitude.
I think she is miffed about being humiliated at the gate which would not have happened if she had bought the two tickets that she knew was policy.  She tried to get away with something and got nabbed.


----------



## geekette

Blue Skies said:


> Also, she wishes the gate agent would use more discretion when pointing out her size in front of the other passengers.


Don't the other passengers already know that she is a Large Lady?


----------



## vacationhopeful

geekette said:


> Don't the other passengers already know that she is a *Large Lady*?



What is clear is, she is a _Passenger of Size_. Don't think the 17 inch seat or the person(s) seated next to a Passenger of Size care about anything else.


----------



## ScoopKona

vacationhopeful said:


> What is clear is, she is a _Passenger of Size_. Don't think the 17 inch seat or the person(s) seated next to a Passenger of Size care about anything else.



Passenger of size, indeed. Pfft.

She's morbidly obese. She's losing weight. And that's great. Good for her. I hope she sticks with it. But she's morbidly obese. Not "of size."

I'm very tall. I'm not "of size" either. Call me "of size" and I'll correct you. 

We should quit beating around the bush and say what we mean. "Morbidly obese" is the correct, accurate, medical description for someone with her body mass. If morbidly obese people take offense at the term, they should take a little more exercise and eat healthier food.

I refuse to be an enabler for America's obesity crisis.

I don't think they should even receive a refund. They _used_ two seats. They should _pay_ for two seats -- even if the airplane isn't full. Refunding the extra ticket is akin to the healthy subsidizing the unhealthy -- which we do anyway though our insurance payments and property taxes.


----------



## vacationhopeful

I was polite and did reference her only once as BB in a prior post. :ignore:


----------



## vacationhopeful

ScoopLV said:


> Passenger of size, indeed. Pfft...



_Passenger of Size_ is the term used in documents by Southwest Airlines. I would phrase it closer to your terms in face to face communications with others in a social setting involving wine.


----------



## Timeshare Von

After being away for more then two weeks, I'm surprised to see this thread still going.


----------



## ampaholic

Timeshare Von said:


> After being away for more then two weeks, I'm surprised to see this thread still going.



Yep it just keep going and going and going ....


----------



## Passepartout

*And now THIS- Overweight passengers seatbelts won't hold them*

As if it isn't enough to have porky beside us paying the same as us, NOW, it's shown that their seats and seat belts won't hold them in a crash!

All the more reason to charge 'em double. Reinforced seats to protect the rest of us. Maybe put them all in first class in big seats so in a crash and the plane 'accordioning', us 'people of standard size' will have a soft cushion ahead of us in the plane!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47333720/ns/business-us_business/#.T6kaCcV52Ss

Jim


----------



## Beefnot

Passepartout said:


> As if it isn't enough to have porky beside us paying the same as us, NOW, it's shown that their seats and seat belts won't hold them in a crash!
> 
> All the more reason to charge 'em double. Reinforced seats to protect the rest of us. Maybe put them all in first class in big seats so in a crash and the plane 'accordioning', us 'people of standard size' will have a soft cushion ahead of us in the plane!
> 
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47333720/ns/business-us_business/#.T6kaCcV52Ss
> 
> Jim



In a crash, the seatbelt will be the least of one's worries.


----------



## Passepartout

Beefnot said:


> In a crash, the seatbelt will be the least of one's worries.



Perhaps not, but I still don't want some hippopotamus bouncing around the cabin during turbulence. Some sort of restraint and reinforced seats are needed. And by the article above, 42% of Americans will be obese in just a few years. I see it now- like in the early days of passenger travel- climb aboard the trusty DC-2 or Ford Trimotor with one seat on each side of the aisle.

Jim


----------



## Tia

“There is no regulation that says they have to test for heavier.”  from the article linked below. Seems common sense, but until they are forced to or have proof guess they will avoid it! :annoyed: 



Passepartout said:


> As if it isn't enough to have porky beside us paying the same as us, NOW, it's shown that their seats and seat belts won't hold them in a crash!
> 
> All the more reason to charge 'em double. Reinforced seats to protect the rest of us. Maybe put them all in first class in big seats so in a crash and the plane 'accordioning', us 'people of standard size' will have a soft cushion ahead of us in the plane!
> 
> http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47333720/ns/business-us_business/#.T6kaCcV52Ss
> 
> Jim


----------



## vacationhopeful

Flying on American and Delta (6 different flight) in the past month, I forgot how Southwest is an equal opportunity airline for seat choices. Those First Class and Business Class seats look so nice and big and plush. With leg room and elbow room, too. Plus, those tabletop tray sections between the seats.

I had seats in the middle, window and aisle. I even TWICE had all 3 seats to myself, but 3 times, all 3 seats were occupied (full flights). Only once out of 4 times was the middle seat empty. The one bad flight was 3+ hours where I sat in a window seat and the woman infront of me smelled really BAD from purfume; told the flight male attendant that "she stank" and I was having reaction to her with trouble breathing. He did NOTHING, but said say the flight was full. The guy in the middle seat was VERY NICE TO ME - but could/would NOT comment to the flight attendant on my complaint as these 2 passengers were of the same race. It was so bad that my lips actually developed a chemical reaction rash after an hour.

Next time, I will get up immediately and bitched to all the flight attendants.

Oder can be just as bad as invading personal space on a flight.


----------



## Tia

Have a co worker who starts coughing with strong perfume/cologne near her . I hate it when I go to the gym and somebody is wearing too much cologne/perfume then gets on a machine next to me. Or even when there is a left over scent in the air after someone passes by...



vacationhopeful said:


> ...It was so bad that my lips actually developed a chemical reaction rash after an hour.
> 
> Next time, I will get up immediately and bitched to all the flight attendants.
> 
> Oder can be just as bad as invading personal space on a flight.


----------



## Beefnot

vacationhopeful said:


> I had seats in the middle, window and aisle. I even TWICE had all 3 seats to myself, but 3 times, all 3 seats were occupied (full flights). Only once out of 4 times was the middle seat empty. The one bad flight was 3+ hours where I sat in a window seat and the woman infront of me smelled really BAD from purfume; told the flight male attendant that "she stank" and I was having reaction to her with trouble breathing. He did NOTHING, but said say the flight was full. The guy in the middle seat was VERY NICE TO ME - but could/would NOT comment to the flight attendant on my complaint as these 2 passengers were of the same race. It was so bad that my lips actually developed a chemical reaction rash after an hour.



Huh?  He told you that?  What did he say exactly?


----------



## Passepartout

vacationhopeful said:


> It was so bad that my lips actually developed a chemical reaction rash after an hour.



I seem to be more sensitive to strong smells than others. My throat seems to clamp shut at the smell of smoke and strong perfume. But smelly is one thing... _Corrosive_ is something else! I think I might have said something like, "Madam, I seem to be allergic to your perfume. Would you remove some of it for the comfort of others around you?"

Jim


----------



## pjrose

Passepartout said:


> I seem to be more sensitive to strong smells than others. My throat seems to clamp shut at the smell of smoke and strong perfume. But smelly is one thing... _Corrosive_ is something else! I think I might have said something like, *"Madam, I seem to be allergic to your perfume. Would you remove some of it for the comfort of others around you?"*
> 
> Jim



In the airplane's shower???


----------



## vacationhopeful

Beefnot said:


> Huh?  He told you that?  What did he say exactly?



Lets see "do you smell anything?", answer "Uh?" with the downward looking eyes. "is that perfume really strong?", answer "Uh?" with downward eyes. Every other question, he replied with at least 15 words and follow up questions.


----------



## Makai Guy

Sorry folks, "hippopotomus" has pushed this over the edge.  We're done here.


----------

