Quick Hits: The Rainy Sunday Edition
A number of tips that came across the BFB Tip Department's desk this week:
- Piper found this piece wondering if airlines would charge passengers by the pound. Short answer seems to be "no", but it's not outside of the realm of possibility.
- Telling kids to diet doesn't work. Thanks, Sarah.
- MaLisa was understandably angry to discover that Old Navy no longer accepts in-store returns for their Women's Plus line. Returns are free but as she points out, this "wouldn't be such a big problem if the clothes ever actually fit properly the first time!"
- Speaking of The Gap, apparently they're also taking men's XXL clothes out of their stores. This affects me personally - The Gap (as well as Banana Republic) are the only stores I've been classified as a XXL so, hey, now I get relegated to the Online Fat Clothing Ghetto, too! Thanks, Gap!
- Finally, Pat pointed out that a recent survey from US Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama allows one to mention what topics are important to voters - it's a freeform text field. So her choice was, awesomely, fat rights:
So, I wrote the following: Fat Rights -- this is a civil rights issue -- please stop growing employment and medical discrimination against fat people -- people come in all shapes and sizes, and you cannot tell someone's health from their weight.
From the second article: "Nagging, preaching, coercion does not work," she said. "Let the kid be in charge. It's up to the teen to decide if and how he or she wants to lose weight."
Quite apart from the apparently radical notion of giving a teenager control over their own health decisions, the emphasis on the IF struck me as really quite a big deal in a world where it's automatically assumed now that every fat person wants to lose weight. (And even more so coming from someone who wrote a weight-loss book for teens).
As for the Gap, I've no idea what's going on with large-size men's clothes at the moment, but a couple of the places I shop in over here (cough George cough Primark cough) have also stopped carrying a full range of sizes (XL, and usually a tight, short XL seems to have become an unofficial upper limit, along with 36" waist trousers) and it's *really* getting on my wick. Again I wonder, if we're *all* supposedly getting fatter (and taller, but no-one ever mentions that), why we actually now have fewer clothing options than even four or five years ago.
Someone evidently skipped the 'give the customer what they want' part of Retail 101; that, or a classic case of prejudice trumping good business sense.
"It is possible to be fat and fit; not everyone is meant to, or can, be thin. The scourge of modern society is not obesity, but body fascism" - Amy Lamé
Re the Seattle P-U, er, P-I article (sorry, but I used to live up there!), I am so annoyed by this "skyrocketing obesity rates" nonsense. IT'S NOT TRUE. There has been no increase in "obesity" in children OR adults in the last five years, and very little (almost to the point of being statistically insignificant) in the last 9 years (going by government data). It really pisses me off. The kids who are at-risk healthwise are POOR children with involuntary food insecurity issues, not those from affluent families who can actually afford "diets." Aside from the poor, I'm way more concerned about the mental health of kids these days than their physical health, frankly, because of moral panics like this one.
Charging by the pound, bah. Most likely they wouldn't give really small people a discount, they'd just charge big people more. So if I am flying with my 45 pound child, I'm sure she'd have to pay the $400 or so, but I'd be stuck paying a few extra hundred over. Tall people tend to weigh more than short, men tend to weigh more than women. I wonder if they would weigh the luggage and charge by the pound for that, so that those of us who travel light could get a discount.
I already feel like the luggage allowance discriminates against fat people. My clothes are often about twice as big/heavy as the equivalent clothing for a very small woman, especially considering I dress modestly (full length skirts, etc.).
Hey airlines! Maybe you're going out of business because your customer service is lousy. Charging people by the pound, indeed!
Why don't you try making your seats bigger so that people can actually fit in them? I am 5'5 and weigh 143, and the seats on airplanes are just large enough for me to sit in. How the hell is the average man, who is 5'9, expected to fit in those dinky seats???
Viola, don't men usually weigh more than women because they tend to be taller and have more bone and muscle mass than women do? I'm a bit confused by your comment.
Viola, don't men usually weigh more than women because they tend to be taller and have more bone and muscle mass than women do? I'm a bit confused by your comment.
Yes, I wrote it backwards, I meant that in general men are larger, taller, more muscle mass, so a man often weighs more than a woman in a couple, and so on. If they honestly start charging by the pound, it shouldn't be that fat people are the only ones paying more, but I really do wonder if they would only charge for the pound over a certain weight, like 200 or 250 lbs. Speaking of lousy service, my husband still remembers flying in the days before deregulation. He said it was a much nicer experience, although my family never flew anywhere growing up because of the expense.
"I am 5'5 and weigh 143, and the seats on airplanes are just large enough for me to sit in."
That is approximately my own measurements, and my husband is 6' and weighs about 170. Neither of us have any problem fitting very comfortably into airline seats with room to spare, although certainly my husband could use more leg room.
I don't agree that airlines should charge outrageous fees, or that most people should pay for second seats (unless they really, REALLY can't fit into one, which should be a demonstrable test and not some bigoted gate agent doing an eyeball assessment). But I do take exception to the observation that the seats are too small for everyone. That's just not true. My mother is approximately 250 lbs, and 5'5", and she also fits into the seats. She's not comfortable, but she does fit, and doesn't take space away from those who sit around her (unless it's with family members, then she'll quite gladly let it all hang out
). I flew overseas with her last year, in a 3-seater area with my husband, and we were all reasonably comfortable.
The airlines have taken space away from all passengers for years now, until seats are uncomfortable for a majority of passengers...yes, I'm guessing on this one, but given the number of business flyers who howl in protest if they're expected to fly coach...a coach seat is uncomfortable for most people sitting in them.
The divide-and-conquer tactic involves the airlines (who control the space for seats) shifting blame onto fat people, making the debate fat-vs-thin passengers instead of where it should be: all passengers-vs.-airlines who product is officially inhospitable and uncomfortable.
I'm fat. I don't want to be pushed up against a thin person sitting next to me!!!
"The airlines have taken space away from all passengers for years now, until seats are uncomfortable for a majority of passengers...yes, I'm guessing on this one, but given the number of business flyers who howl in protest if they're expected to fly coach...a coach seat is uncomfortable for most people sitting in them."
Years ago, most people couldn't afford to fly. It was a luxury reserved mostly for the wealthy; certainly, it took phenomenal planning and budgeting for those of us firmly within the middle class. Nowadays, most people can afford a budget fare. The focus of the airline industry has shifted from that of service for the entitled few to little more than cattle cars for the masses. And it shows in the no-frills, in the tired, less-than-friendly faces of the airline personnel, and in how readily we've all given up our rights to be treated with respect and dignity, from the very moment, actually, that we step into the airport. It is no surprise that the airlines have made cuts where they can -- where the market will bear them.
I don't think it's entirely accurate to say that this is a divide-and-conquer tactic on the part of the airlines. They are simply making business decisions. They will continue to cut service, so long as the public is willing to forego amenities in exchange for rock-bottom ticket prices.
The problem as I see it is that passengers themselves refuse to take any responsibility for what the airline industry has been allowed to become. We continue to expect that we won't be inconvenienced, but we're not willing to pay for comfort. I am a frequent flyer, and I purchase my tickets through consolidators. My mindset is that the airline is responsible for getting me from Point A to Point B. They aren't responsible for how comfortable I am in the duration. I've sat next to people with horrific body odor, terrible manners, unruly children. I've vainly fought for shared elbow room with men who seemed to feel that they were entitled to the additional space. I've had my seatback kicked repeatedly by unrestrained children, despite polite requests to the parents that this behavior be dealt with. Once, I was vomited on (thankfully, my shoes took most of the splatter). I've also shared space with people who did spill over the armrest and into some of my seat. It's cramped and uncomfortable. But I'm not paying for posh and spacious; if I wanted that kind of service, I'd pony up for first class.
It's the luck of the draw for all of us. I consider myself fortunate if my only "inconvenience" is being seated next to a very large person.
I can fit comfortably in the seats, but then I've never taken a long flight, either. I also am fortunate enough not to suffer from phlebitis or any other ailment that would make sitting in a cramped space a medical hazard.
And don't even get me started on the restrictions on moving around! Sometimes you can't even get out of your seat for half the flight because the Fasten Seat Belts sign is on.