ChristinaM
Jun 29 2007, 02:29 PM
Not even though it's a consequence of a bad choice, Devilette?
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 02:35 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 12:29 PM)

QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 02:26 PM)

QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 12:20 PM)

QUOTE(MarilynP @ Jun 29 2007, 02:02 PM)

I thought we already went over the fact that some people are not overweight by choice

That's exactly the problem I see here. It really isn't always apples to oranges. Being overweight is not always a choice. And having a large body frame is certainly not a choice. People are not willing to accommodate large people because they blame them for their size. Sometimes it is a choice, but even people who have not eaten well and don't exercise don't say "I choose to be fat" the way they might choose to be a smoker one day. Sometimes it's people in a wheelchair's "fault" too. Maybe they rode a motorcycle without a helmet. Maybe someone shot off fireworks at close range and now they've been blinded. But we don't usually blame them for their disability, do we?
The problem that I see there is, where do we draw the line in blaming people for their physical attributes?
Because we (as a nation/world) weren't as fat 10 years ago, or 20, 30, 40 years ago, etc. It
is a choice. For 95% of the population.
Not wearing a helmet & getting paralyzed becasue of that is NO WAY the same as being fat.
It's a bad choice that leads to a horrible life-changing handicap. But I would never say "it's your fault you're like this," because that happens. So does getting fat.
Do you think Americans are fatter today because they're more interested in making the choice to be fat? Because otherwise it seems to be a systemic problem.
I do. Laziness/super sized foods are rampant in America (the world too on a lesser scale).
I would say it's their fault, sure. As well as being fat is (mostly) someone's fault.
tammy sue kay
Jun 29 2007, 02:38 PM
Such a true comment. I ccan't think of anyone who "wants" to be fat or overly large. Sometimes it's genetics. Even at the lowest weight I have ever been, 155 pounds, I still wore a size 18. My bones are larger than some peoples whole body. Size 11 shoe, size 9 ring finger. Now I weigh 250, but I don't appear to be that overweight as I am solid. I don't jiggle or bounce. Which is not to say that every overweight person does. The normal way of dieting to lose weight does not work for me, so that leaves bariatrics, which are not an option for me as I am diabetic and puts me at a greater mortality rate. I may be dieing to lose weight, but I don't want to die because of it. I agree that there should be a "luxury" seat difference made for larger sized people. I know I would pay a small extra fee if neccesary, for the extra leg room and such. I don't think any of us heavy people want to be consdered a burden or interuption to someone else's privacy or comfort.
tammy sue kay
Jun 29 2007, 02:43 PM
As far as the weight regulations on airlines, I don't understand them at all. If they have a weight limit as to what they can legally carry, then how is it that I can "pay" to take over my luggage weight limit? Does that mean they kick someone off the plane, or do they just conveniently "lose" another passengers luggage? lol
mawilson
Jun 29 2007, 03:00 PM
QUOTE(tammy sue kay @ Jun 29 2007, 03:43 PM)

As far as the weight regulations on airlines, I don't understand them at all. If they have a weight limit as to what they can legally carry, then how is it that I can "pay" to take over my luggage weight limit? Does that mean they kick someone off the plane, or do they just conveniently "lose" another passengers luggage? lol
You can only take so much over the limit -- there's a hard limit you cannot exceed, even if you're willing to pay for it.
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 03:02 PM
QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 02:35 PM)

I do. Laziness/super sized foods are rampant in America (the world too on a lesser scale).
I would say it's their fault, sure. As well as being fat is (mostly) someone's fault.
By laziness, you mean not going to the gym? I hate when people use "laziness" to describe all fat people. It's just a stereotype. If you are a mother of four paying no less attention to your diet today than your 1960s counterpart did, you'll probably still be fatter, due to the choices we have and some wildcard factors like, who knows, maybe HFCS. Yet you'll be running around from dawn to dusk doing stuff for your job and your family. That isn't laziness, it's just not going to the gym, which a lot of people don't have time for. A lot of people never had time for it, but they're fat now.
The idea that most fat people are not trying to lose weight or not doing anything about it fails to explain the huge amount of money (billions and billions of dollars) spent each year on diet programs, exercise equipment, gym memberships, pills, and diet foods. America is obsessed with losing weight. Obviously some people have a hard time losing weight, and I think your characterization of 95% of fat people as lazy and supersized meals eaters (KarenCee is going to love your McDonalds reference again there) shows a lack of compassion and an unwillingness to try to understand the real causes of the weight-gain epidemic.
Jenn!
Jun 29 2007, 03:06 PM
You all are so opinionated.

rkl57
Jun 29 2007, 03:06 PM
Billions are spent on the diet industry because people are looking for an easy fix - I jsut don't understand how Americans are fat and "it's not their fault" but the rest of the world manages to stay slimmer with similar demands on their time and income.
*Marilyn*
Jun 29 2007, 03:08 PM
I think the problem nowadays too is that anybody over a size 10 is considered overweight...
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 03:12 PM
QUOTE(MarilynP @ Jun 29 2007, 01:08 PM)

I think the problem nowadays too is that anybody over a size 10 is considered overweight...

I'm not talking a size 10, I'm talking obese. Altho people ar much smaller in London/England definitely.
*Marilyn*
Jun 29 2007, 03:14 PM
QUOTE(MarilynP @ Jun 29 2007, 01:08 PM)

I think the problem nowadays too is that anybody over a size 10 is considered overweight...

I think I remember reading somewhere that Marilyn Monroe was a size 14...
Paul Daniels
Jun 29 2007, 03:15 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 02:37 PM)

QUOTE(erekose @ Jun 29 2007, 01:07 PM)

But that's exactly the same as premium economy - which we already have (costs more than coach, less than Business and 1st Class)
But the seats aren't significantly bigger at this time. Premium economy is not available everywhere either. Either way, the whole point is to make the seats at least 1 and a quarter times the regular coach seat.
I don't think that there's a call at the moment to significantly enlarge seats on planes that accommodate passengers across a global market. Are we saying that its just American passengers that are getting larger or passengers in general.
I could probably dig this up - but I read somewhere that the US has the highest prevalence of obesity in the developed world.
Jenn!
Jun 29 2007, 03:15 PM
QUOTE(MarilynP @ Jun 29 2007, 04:14 PM)

QUOTE(MarilynP @ Jun 29 2007, 01:08 PM)

I think the problem nowadays too is that anybody over a size 10 is considered overweight...

I think I remember reading somewhere that Marilyn Monroe was a size 14...
Sizes have inflated since Marilyn Monroe's time. I've heard that too, but I also heard that a 14 back then was like a 6 or 8 now...
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 03:19 PM
QUOTE(robinklake @ Jun 29 2007, 01:06 PM)

Billions are spent on the diet industry because people are looking for an easy fix - I jsut don't understand how Americans are fat and "it's not their fault" but the rest of the world manages to stay slimmer with similar demands on their time and income.
Look how fast that diarrhea weight loss pill sold out! Easy fix, no exercise needed! Except you get the runs.
American LOVES excuses!
Type II Diabetes has increased dramatically in the last 10 years...
Diabetes mellitus type 2 (formerly called diabetes mellitus type II, non insulin-dependent diabetes (NIDDM), obesity related diabetes, or adult-onset diabetes) is a metabolic disorder that is primarily characterized by insulin resistance, relative insulin deficiency, and hyperglycemia. It is often managed by engaging in exercise and modifying one's diet. It is rapidly increasing in the developed world, and there is some evidence that this pattern will be followed in much of the rest of the world in coming years. The CDC has characterized the increase as an epidemic.[1]sourceType 2 diabetes usually occurs gradually. Most people with the disease are overweight at the time of diagnosis. However, type 2 diabetes can also develop in those who are thin, especially the elderly.
Family history and genetics play a large role in type 2 diabetes. Low activity level, poor diet, and excess body weight (especially around the waist) significantly increase your risk for type 2 diabetes.source
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 03:24 PM
QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 03:19 PM)

QUOTE(robinklake @ Jun 29 2007, 01:06 PM)

Billions are spent on the diet industry because people are looking for an easy fix - I jsut don't understand how Americans are fat and "it's not their fault" but the rest of the world manages to stay slimmer with similar demands on their time and income.
Look how fast that diarrhea weight loss pill sold out! Easy fix, no exercise needed! Except you get the runs.
American LOVES excuses!
Nobody is denying that Americans are gaining weight and getting diabetes. I think pills are a bad idea, but nobody will deny that exercise equipment or a membership at Weight Watchers is looking for a "quick fix."
I think the difference between here and other countries is our general lifestyle, the chemicals in our food, and our lack of public transportation and walking. People in New York or London are going to be slimmer just from walking alone, before you even factor in other things.
I don't understand why the easiest answer for so many people is "Americans are fat because they are lazy idiots who don't try." That makes no sense. It's just our inferior national character?
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 03:25 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 01:24 PM)

QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 03:19 PM)

QUOTE(robinklake @ Jun 29 2007, 01:06 PM)

Billions are spent on the diet industry because people are looking for an easy fix - I jsut don't understand how Americans are fat and "it's not their fault" but the rest of the world manages to stay slimmer with similar demands on their time and income.
Look how fast that diarrhea weight loss pill sold out! Easy fix, no exercise needed! Except you get the runs.
American LOVES excuses!
Nobody is denying that Americans are gaining weight and getting diabetes. I think pills are a bad idea, but nobody will deny that exercise equipment or a membership at Weight Watchers is looking for a "quick fix."
I think the difference between here and other countries is our general lifestyle, the chemicals in our food, and our lack of public transportation and walking. People in New York or London are going to be slimmer just from walking alone, before you even factor in other things.
I don't understand why the easiest answer for so many people is
"Americans are fat because they are lazy idiots who don't try." That makes no sense. It's just our inferior national character?
Because it's true!!!! Americans ARE lazy. Americans LOVE junk food. Americans LOVE giant sodas & portions.
How many treadmills/etc turn into coat racks? How many memberships at WW, continue after the weight loss or first 2 meetings? How many unused gym memberships are there? There's a reason they make them 3 year commitments!
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 03:31 PM
I think you're imagining this slothful idiot population. I'm getting this image that suggests that all fat people like NASCAR and wrestling and have never read a book. I don't eat junk food, yet I've got some junk in the trunk.
I get upset because I saw the way people treated me so differently when I was slender from when I was carrying 15 extra pounds to when I gained a lot of weight. People assume you are stupid and uneducated the heavier you are, and you can see it in their eyes and hear it in the way strangers talk to you. It's very frustrating to live with these stereotypes. People who have struggled with finding balance between two eating disorders know the tremendous pressure you're under whether too thin or too fat. I'm sorry if I'm coming off as angry, but I don't think people gain weight out of laziness. It's out of lots of other problems that are more complicated.
QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 03:25 PM)

Because it's true!!!! Americans ARE lazy. Americans LOVE junk food. Americans LOVE giant sodas & portions.
How many treadmills/etc turn into coat racks? How many memberships at WW, continue after the weight loss or first 2 meetings? How many unused gym memberships are there? There's a reason they make them 3 year commitments!
I don't think the problem is people go to WW twice and leave. They lose 50 pounds and then quit and then gain it back. Then they rejoin and lose 50 pounds again. Then one year they finally do it and lose the 75 pounds they wanted to. Then they keep it off for five years, and then gain it back. It's just endless.
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 03:34 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 01:29 PM)

I think you're imagining this slothful idiot population. I'm getting this image that suggests that all fat people like NASCAR and wrestling and have never read a book. I don't eat junk food, yet I've got some junk in the trunk.
I get upset because I saw the way people treated me so differently when I was slender from when I was carrying 15 extra pounds to when I gained a lot of weight. People assume you are stupid and uneducated the heavier you are, and you can see it in their eyes and hear it in the way strangers talk to you. It's very frustrating to live with these stereotypes. People who have struggled with finding balance between two eating disorders know the tremendous pressure you're under whether too thin or too fat. I'm sorry if I'm coming off as angry, but I don't think people gain weight out of laziness. It's out of lots of other problems that are more complicated.
Laziness, depression, diabetes, etc. All reasons for gaining. Only the weight gainer can take responsibilty for it. Own up to the fact they are big & decide to DEAL WITH IT. STOP MAKING EXCUSES.
I don't imagine a slothful population, I've seen it, in LA, in Ohio, in NYC. Tons of places in America.
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 01:31 PM)

QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 03:25 PM)

Because it's true!!!! Americans ARE lazy. Americans LOVE junk food. Americans LOVE giant sodas & portions.
How many treadmills/etc turn into coat racks? How many memberships at WW, continue after the weight loss or first 2 meetings? How many unused gym memberships are there? There's a reason they make them 3 year commitments!
I don't think the problem is people go to WW twice and leave. They lose 50 pounds and then quit and then gain it back. Then they rejoin and lose 50 pounds again. Then one year they finally do it and lose the 75 pounds they wanted to. Then they keep it off for five years, and then gain it back. It's just endless.
Exactly why anyone who has lost & MAINTAINED a healthy weight will say it's a lifestyle choice, not a diet.
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 03:36 PM
Yes but even a lifestyle choice is difficult to maintain when you grow up forming wrong ideas about food. And all the while, these people are fighting messages they are getting from their caveman brains telling them to eat. That's why people can be overpowered by their impulses without being able to think about it first. It's a HUGE undertaking, changing the way you eat.
Fuzzness
Jun 29 2007, 03:37 PM
I'm fat and that's nobody's f*cking business. Sure, americans are lazy, but they sure love to stick their nose in other people's business too.
Paul Daniels
Jun 29 2007, 03:38 PM
I still stand to my answer on the poll - buy 2 seats. Let's just be honest and admit that if you really did need 2 plane seats to yourself you would have to be very large indeed.
I've seen the same thing on the bus and train and they don't make specific concessions for 'outsize' people. You make the best of what's available. Noone said that mass transit was supposed to be luxurious - but there should be a minimum standard.
Should the airline make costly concessions just for a few people who come predominantly from one world market? What happens if a person wants to fly who's larger than the new ideal?
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 03:40 PM
QUOTE(erekose @ Jun 29 2007, 03:38 PM)

I still stand to my answer on the poll - buy 2 seats. Let's just be honest and admit that if you really did need 2 plane seats to yourself you would have to be very large indeed.
Not really. You can be very large and need one plane seat, or kind of average sized and barely fit in yours.
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 03:41 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 01:36 PM)

Yes but even a lifestyle choice is difficult to maintain when you grow up forming wrong ideas about food. And all the while, these people are fighting messages they are getting from their caveman brains telling them to eat. That's why people can be overpowered by their impulses without being able to think about it first. It's a HUGE undertaking, changing the way you eat.
It's still excuses Alex. Everyone knows what makes them fat. You are saying people are too busy listening to their caveman brains to know better? Come on.
Back to the topic at hand - I do not want to pay extra for my airplane seat. Nor do I want to be squished by a person who clearly doens't fit in theirs.
Paul Daniels
Jun 29 2007, 03:46 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 04:40 PM)

QUOTE(erekose @ Jun 29 2007, 03:38 PM)

I still stand to my answer on the poll - buy 2 seats. Let's just be honest and admit that if you really did need 2 plane seats to yourself you would have to be very large indeed.
Not really. You can be very large and need one plane seat, or kind of average sized and barely fit in yours.
If you spill across 2 seats (enough so that your arms are in your neighbours lap) you would have to be very large. I've seen it on every form of public transport I've ever used. The guy who rides my bus out of NYC takes up a whole bench to himself, is clearly very overweight and weighs at a guess no less than 300lbs.
Again why should the airline make concessions for a minority of people who come largely from the US as opposed to Europe and Asia?
Jenn!
Jun 29 2007, 03:48 PM
QUOTE(erekose @ Jun 29 2007, 04:38 PM)

Should the airline make costly concessions just for a few people who come predominantly from one world market? What happens if a person wants to fly who's larger than the new ideal?
Good question. I do think that the airline has the responsibility to make the necessary changes so that the "average" passenger has a reasonable level of comfort. If that means widening seats by 2" or 3", then that's what they should do.
What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 03:49 PM
I think the fat people issue really is at the heart of the topic at hand though. Obviously nobody wants someone in the plane seat they paid for. Nobody's even debating that. I find this book (excerpted at
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.p...oryId=10354959) to be really depressing, but your average overweight person is probably thinking about and attempting to lose weight every day, and most people are failing. This country really pressures us to be thin, so you better believe most people are trying.
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 03:50 PM
QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 01:48 PM)

Good question. I do think that the airline has the responsibility to make the necessary changes so that the "average" passenger has a reasonable level of comfort. If that means widening seats by 2" or 3", then that's what they should do.
What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
Not the same thing! Those seats fit MOST people & I'm sure many weeks/months were spent designing them to fit an average sized person.
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 03:50 PM
QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 03:48 PM)

QUOTE(erekose @ Jun 29 2007, 04:38 PM)

Should the airline make costly concessions just for a few people who come predominantly from one world market? What happens if a person wants to fly who's larger than the new ideal?
Good question. I do think that the airline has the responsibility to make the necessary changes so that the "average" passenger has a reasonable level of comfort. If that means widening seats by 2" or 3", then that's what they should do.
What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
That would accommodate your average Chinese person. What if it's a Chinese airline?
tammy sue kay
Jun 29 2007, 03:52 PM
Just to clear up a few things about my diabeties. Had I put on extra weight around the waist just prior to becoming diabetic? Yes, in the form of a triplet pregnancy. Though diabeties has been prevalent in my family for many generations, and I have always been "borderline" diabetic, I had always controlled it with diet and excersise. During my pregnancy, I became what is known as a "brittle" diabetic. My diabeties is very hard to control, the same dose of insulin that covers me today, may make me go into extreme lows or highs tomorrow. So, I do eat a well balance diet, chicken, fish, veggies. I eat sweets once a month at the most, and walk for an hour daily as excercise. During my "lazy times", I take care of three very hyper active sons, clean my home, and do my gardening and yard work. Did I fail to mention that I also work full time, and help take care of my parents? I dont' do the "diet fads" because they are a waste of money from my experience, and gym memberships are to costly for someone on a limited income. To say or even to infer that all overweight people are lazy, or slovenly, or smelly, is just a gross generalization, and unfair to say the least. If the shoe were on the other foot, and it was said of skinny people that they are to stingy to buy food to feed themselves, or that they were underendowed, how would that seem to you? I dont' think it would go over to well with some. Suffice to say, that people come in all shapes and sizes, some controllable, some not.
Jenn!
Jun 29 2007, 03:53 PM
QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 04:50 PM)

QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 01:48 PM)

Good question. I do think that the airline has the responsibility to make the necessary changes so that the "average" passenger has a reasonable level of comfort. If that means widening seats by 2" or 3", then that's what they should do.
What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
Not the same thing! Those seats fit MOST people & I'm sure many weeks/months were spent designing them to fit an average sized person.
But that's my question/point. When was the standard for plane seat width set? If it was designed to fit the average person, and the average person is now larger than they were 5 or 10 or 20 years ago, does the airline have the responsibility to change their standard, if that standard is supposed to be based on averages?
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 03:55 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 01:50 PM)

QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 03:48 PM)

QUOTE(erekose @ Jun 29 2007, 04:38 PM)

Should the airline make costly concessions just for a few people who come predominantly from one world market? What happens if a person wants to fly who's larger than the new ideal?
Good question. I do think that the airline has the responsibility to make the necessary changes so that the "average" passenger has a reasonable level of comfort. If that means widening seats by 2" or 3", then that's what they should do.
What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
That would accommodate your average Chinese person. What if it's a Chinese airline?
Have we once discussed Chinese? No.
It's AMERICANS we are talking about!!!!!!! Geez.
PS: I'm quite sure it's a global standard size.
QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 01:53 PM)

QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 04:50 PM)

QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 01:48 PM)

Good question. I do think that the airline has the responsibility to make the necessary changes so that the "average" passenger has a reasonable level of comfort. If that means widening seats by 2" or 3", then that's what they should do.
What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
Not the same thing! Those seats fit MOST people & I'm sure many weeks/months were spent designing them to fit an average sized person.
But that's my question/point. When was the standard for plane seat width set? If it was designed to fit the average person, and the average person is now larger than they were 5 or 10 or 20 years ago, does the airline have the responsibility to change their standard, if that standard is supposed to be based on averages?
How many people
don't fit in seats today? Very few, I bet. It's kinda like those clothes that say ONE SIZE FITS MOST. It says that for a reason!
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 03:58 PM
I think people not fitting must be pretty common, considering we've almost all sat next to one.
mawilson
Jun 29 2007, 03:58 PM
QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 04:48 PM)

What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
I think they already did that. Seats used to be much wider back in the day.
Paul Daniels
Jun 29 2007, 03:58 PM
QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 04:55 PM)

QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 01:50 PM)

QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 03:48 PM)

QUOTE(erekose @ Jun 29 2007, 04:38 PM)

Should the airline make costly concessions just for a few people who come predominantly from one world market? What happens if a person wants to fly who's larger than the new ideal?
Good question. I do think that the airline has the responsibility to make the necessary changes so that the "average" passenger has a reasonable level of comfort. If that means widening seats by 2" or 3", then that's what they should do.
What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
That would accommodate your average Chinese person. What if it's a Chinese airline?
Have we once discussed Chinese? No.
It's AMERICANS we are talking about!!!!!!! Geez.
PS: I'm quite sure it's a global standard size.QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 01:53 PM)

QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 04:50 PM)

QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 01:48 PM)

Good question. I do think that the airline has the responsibility to make the necessary changes so that the "average" passenger has a reasonable level of comfort. If that means widening seats by 2" or 3", then that's what they should do.
What if they narrowed the seats by 2" or 3", would you still think they were justified in making people who could not fit into the new seats pay double?
Not the same thing! Those seats fit MOST people & I'm sure many weeks/months were spent designing them to fit an average sized person.
But that's my question/point. When was the standard for plane seat width set? If it was designed to fit the average person, and the average person is now larger than they were 5 or 10 or 20 years ago, does the airline have the responsibility to change their standard, if that standard is supposed to be based on averages?
How many people
don't fit in seats today? Very few, I bet. It's kinda like those clothes that say ONE SIZE FITS MOST. It says that for a reason!
Actually I don't think it is - a lot depends on when the plane was built, how long its been in service etc.
rkl57
Jun 29 2007, 03:59 PM
I have flown several Chinese airlines - the seats are about the same as US airlines.
2nd and 3rd generation Chinese living in America are now reaching record levels of obesity because of their American diets
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 04:00 PM
Customer of Size Q&AIs the policy unique or new to Southwest Airlines?No, other carriers have similar policies, but to the best of our knowledge, no other carrier offers a refund after travel. We’ve followed this policy for 26 of our 35 years of operation, but only became more vigilant regarding the additional purchase over the last two years when we began seeing an increase in the number of valid complaints from passengers who traveled without full access to the seat purchased because a large Customer infringed upon the adjacent seating space.
Why ask large Customers to purchase additional seating?We could no longer ignore complaints from Customers who traveled without full access to the seat purchased due to encroachment by a large seatmate whose body extended into the neighboring seat. These Customers had uncomfortable (and sometimes painful) travel experiences, and it is our responsibility to seek resolution to prevent this problem.
What is the cost of the additional seating?If the Customer is holding an advance purchase, discounted fare, the second seat will be sold at the same discounted fare. If the Customer has purchased one of our low, unrestricted full fares, the second seat will be sold at the Child's Fare.
What is the definitive gauge for a Customer of size?The armrest is the definitive gauge, as it serves as the boundary between seats. Customers who are unable to lower the armrests (the definitive boundary between seats) and/or who compromise any portion of adjacent seating should proactively book the number of seats needed during initial reservations.
Are all overweight people subject to the policy?Many Americans are "overweight" or "clinically obese." A number of overweight or obese people occupy only one seat. In fact, many Customers may use a seatbelt extension but occupy only one seat, and these Customers would not be asked to reserve a second seat. If a Customer cannot lower the armrest (and is unable to comfortably travel with it in the down position), he/she is required to pay for the additional seat occupied. Again, we will offer a refund if the flight does not oversell.
I’m large but can be seated with the armrests down. Aren’t your Employees wrong to question me?If a concern exists, we shouldn’t ignore it even if it’s difficult for both parties to discuss.
Condoning an unsafe, cramped seating arrangement onboard our aircraft is far more inappropriate than simply questioning a Customer’s fit in our seats.and for Alex:
Why not make your seats wider or add a few wide seats on your aircraft?Our ongoing goal is to operate a low-fare, low cost airline, and
the costs of reconfiguring our fleet would be staggering and would ultimately reflect in the form of higher fares for our Customers. Purchasing two seats on Southwest Airlines is significantly less expensive than purchasing one first class seat on another airline.
Jenn!
Jun 29 2007, 04:00 PM
QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 04:55 PM)

How many people don't fit in seats today? Very few, I bet. It's kinda like those clothes that say ONE SIZE FITS MOST. It says that for a reason!
I honestly have no idea. But from this thread, one would get the impression that even an average to slightly overweight American might have a hard time fitting. I would guess that while they're not the most comfortable things around, plane seats are adequately large for most people, yes.
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 04:01 PM
QUOTE(robinklake @ Jun 29 2007, 03:59 PM)

I have flown several Chinese airlines - the seats are about the same as US airlines.
2nd and 3rd generation Chinese living in America are now reaching record levels of obesity because of their American diets
I was only saying, I think an airplane should accommodate its most common passengers. A smaller seat for Chinese nationals might be possible since they are on average quite small compared to Americans (including Chinese-Americans). Likewise, I think seats should be comfortable for American customers on American airlines.
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 04:03 PM
http://www.independenttraveler.com/resourc...amp;category=13The Standard Seat: 17.2 Inches Wide; 31-32 Inch Seat Pitch During the development of the 777 family of planes, Boeing took their findings and decided to add 5 inches to the width of the plane. It permitted them to put in wider, 18.5" seats without diminishing the overall capacity.
The standard airline seat is 17.2" wide, while seat pitch ranges from 28" on some short-haul, down-and-dirty charters, to 33-34" on some planes.http://www.seatguru.com/
Jenn!
Jun 29 2007, 04:06 PM
QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 05:03 PM)

http://www.independenttraveler.com/resourc...amp;category=13The Standard Seat: 17.2 Inches Wide; 31-32 Inch Seat Pitch During the development of the 777 family of planes, Boeing took their findings and decided to add 5 inches to the width of the plane. It permitted them to put in wider, 18.5" seats without diminishing the overall capacity.
The standard airline seat is 17.2" wide, while seat pitch ranges from 28" on some short-haul, down-and-dirty charters, to 33-34" on some planes.http://www.seatguru.com/ Ok, now how wide is the average a$$?
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 04:12 PM
Boeing 757-200 Economy seat
Delta:
31" pitch
17" width
Continental:
31" pitch
17.2" width
US Air:
32" pitch
17.1" width
Airbus 300 economy
Cathay Pacific:
32" pitch
17.5" width
Asiana:
32" pitch
17" width
American:
32" pitch
17.8" width
Air France:
32" pitch
18" width
illumine
Jun 29 2007, 04:15 PM
QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 02:06 PM)

QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 05:03 PM)

http://www.independenttraveler.com/resourc...amp;category=13The Standard Seat: 17.2 Inches Wide; 31-32 Inch Seat Pitch During the development of the 777 family of planes, Boeing took their findings and decided to add 5 inches to the width of the plane. It permitted them to put in wider, 18.5" seats without diminishing the overall capacity.
The standard airline seat is 17.2" wide, while seat pitch ranges from 28" on some short-haul, down-and-dirty charters, to 33-34" on some planes.http://www.seatguru.com/ Ok, now how wide is the average a$$?

bend over!
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 04:16 PM
QUOTE(jenn3539 @ Jun 29 2007, 04:06 PM)

QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 05:03 PM)

http://www.independenttraveler.com/resourc...amp;category=13The Standard Seat: 17.2 Inches Wide; 31-32 Inch Seat Pitch During the development of the 777 family of planes, Boeing took their findings and decided to add 5 inches to the width of the plane. It permitted them to put in wider, 18.5" seats without diminishing the overall capacity.
The standard airline seat is 17.2" wide, while seat pitch ranges from 28" on some short-haul, down-and-dirty charters, to 33-34" on some planes.http://www.seatguru.com/ Ok, now how wide is the average a$$?

Hehe, that's all we need to know...
PS shouldn't the seat be bigger than the average ###? (I'm assuming it is, considering my formidable one still fits.)
rkl57
Jun 29 2007, 04:17 PM
QUOTE(devilette @ Jun 29 2007, 04:12 PM)

Boeing 757-200 Economy seat
Delta:
31" pitch
17" width
Continental:
31" pitch
17.2" width
US Air:
32" pitch
17.1" width
Airbus 300 economy
Cathay Pacific:
32" pitch
17.5" width
Asiana:
32" pitch
17" width
American:
32" pitch
17.8" width
Air France:
32" pitch
18" width
I've noticed Scandi and Dutch airlines have the same pitch as everyone else, in spite of being the world's tallest people.
charles!
Jun 29 2007, 06:05 PM
they just need one of those things at the ticket counter - the "can your bag fit in this" - same thing for butts. if not, pay for an upgraded seat. a person's rights end when they infringe on mine - everyone remember cigarette smoking?
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 04:16 PM)

(I'm assuming it is, considering my formidable one still fits.)

a formidable butt!
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 06:08 PM
QUOTE(charlesandnessa @ Jun 29 2007, 06:05 PM)

they just need one of those things at the ticket counter - the "can your bag fit in this" - same thing for butts. if not, pay for an upgraded seat. a person's rights end when they infringe on mine - everyone remember cigarette smoking?
LOL I don't think you read the whole crazy thread, didja?
mawilson
Jun 29 2007, 06:14 PM
QUOTE(charlesandnessa @ Jun 29 2007, 07:05 PM)

they just need one of those things at the ticket counter - the "can your bag fit in this" - same thing for butts. if not, pay for an upgraded seat. a person's rights end when they infringe on mine - everyone remember cigarette smoking?
I love it!
"Can your butt fit in this box, Ma'am?"
"Yes", Alex says, forcing it in, "its going to fit!"
"It fits but I cant get it out." Alex struggles with her butt for a minute.
"Better take the box with you then," says the check-in agent.
Alex+R
Jun 29 2007, 06:32 PM
ok, it's not THAT big! anyway, i suggested that on like page 1.
mawilson
Jun 29 2007, 06:35 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 07:32 PM)

ok, it's not THAT big! anyway, i suggested that on like page 1.
Just kiddin'
~Nini~
Jun 29 2007, 07:11 PM
QUOTE(Alex+R @ Jun 29 2007, 02:01 PM)

QUOTE(robinklake @ Jun 29 2007, 03:59 PM)

I have flown several Chinese airlines - the seats are about the same as US airlines.
2nd and 3rd generation Chinese living in America are now reaching record levels of obesity because of their American diets
I was only saying, I think an airplane should accommodate its most common passengers. A smaller seat for Chinese nationals might be possible since they are on average quite small compared to Americans (including Chinese-Americans). Likewise, I think seats should be comfortable for American customers on American airlines.
I dunno about that. I know when flying Cathay Pacific (based in Hong Kong), I've had slightly more room than those seats than other airplanes from United or US Airways. I'm a pretty petite girl and I honestly find the American airline seats to be incredibly cramped; I couldn't imagine how average or larger people could feel comfy in them!
Maybe slightly off-topic, but what bugs me is when my neighbors try to squish into my space because they notice that I don't fill mine out. Just because I'm not in it doesn't mean that I don't want it!
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please
click here.