Racist?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You have no control over how a person interprets what you say.

That's evident every day on VJ.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Poor dog, and I suppose attitude has a lot to do with how people react to one's words.

In the stewardess case her attitude didnt matter, the passenger still got very upset when the stewardess was just trying to fairly seat the passengers. Thats the real world, welcome and enjoy your stay.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Why didn't she just "tell" the people where to sit? There's no need for an effin rigmarole.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Why didn't she just "tell" the people where to sit? There's no need for an effin rigmarole.

I dont personally know her but I guess she was just trying to diffuse the situation by doing it in this manner. She probably thought it was a cute and fair way to do it.

[HAL 9000 96]

Poor dog, and I suppose attitude has a lot to do with how people react to one's words.

In the stewardess case her attitude didnt matter, the passenger still got very upset when the stewardess was just trying to fairly seat the passengers. Thats the real world, welcome and enjoy your stay.

Then its the pax with the problem. I would assume the case likely got thrown out. There are experts for everything pending actual data.

I suppose the easy way to solve the seating issue would have been to look at the boarding passes.

[_Simpson_ 250]

You have no control over how a person interprets what you say.

That's evident every day on VJ.

If you dont say it, example - catch a tiger by the toe, then there is nothing to misinterpret. Once again just use caution when talking about these things.

[HAL 9000 96]

... because an attitude can be read by the observer...

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You have no control over how a person interprets what you say.

That's evident every day on VJ.

If you dont say it, example - catch a tiger by the toe, then there is nothing to misinterpret. Once again just use caution when talking about these things.

Sure - but you can't to that to the ####### degree that you're suggesting.

Few people I suspect approach conversation with a choose-your-own-adventure laundry list of particular phrases to avoid.

[STEPHnRIA 2]

Im sick of all this talks about racism. I once participated in a forum here in VJ and it really got so messy. We were just running in circles. So I hated talks about racism.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Poor dog, and I suppose attitude has a lot to do with how people react to one's words.

In the stewardess case her attitude didnt matter, the passenger still got very upset when the stewardess was just trying to fairly seat the passengers. Thats the real world, welcome and enjoy your stay.

Then its the pax with the problem. I would assume the case likely got thrown out. There are experts for everything pending actual data.

I suppose the easy way to solve the seating issue would have been to look at the boarding passes.

Right and my point wasn't the legal ramifications of the situation but the ramifications of the person in the situation at that given time.

Regardless to if she looked at boarding pass or not, the situation happened. Sure she could avoided this by looking at the boarding pass, then maybe again there were on standby and didn't have a designated seat, I don't know why she did it but had she known the orgins of this she probably wouldnt of used it. I dont blame her at all I just think that being informed of this is a asset and will keep one out of some sticky situations

Edited February 23, 2009 by looking_up

[HAL 9000 96]

I hate talks abouts nasty, tricksy hobbitses.

OK... lunch.

Poor dog, and I suppose attitude has a lot to do with how people react to one's words.

In the stewardess case her attitude didnt matter, the passenger still got very upset when the stewardess was just trying to fairly seat the passengers. Thats the real world, welcome and enjoy your stay.

Then its the pax with the problem. I would assume the case likely got thrown out. There are experts for everything pending actual data.

I suppose the easy way to solve the seating issue would have been to look at the boarding passes.

Right and my point wasn't the legal ramifications of the situation but the ramifications of the person in the situation at that given time.

Regardless to if she looked at boarding pass or not, the situation happened. Sure she could avoided this by looking at the boarding pass, then maybe again there were on standby and didn't have a designated seat, I don't know why she did it but had she known the orgins of this she probably wouldnt of used it. I dont blame her at all I just think that being informed of this is assest and will keep one out of some sticky situations

Knowing is half the battle. The other half comes from having enough sensitivity to others to have a clue.

[_Simpson_ 250]

... because an attitude can be read by the observer...

I doubt the stewardess was barking orders, her attitude was not what set the passenger off, it was the phrase. I think she was just trying to be fair.

Edited February 23, 2009 by looking_up

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

So everyone should be actively aware of any and every phrase that could be interpreted in such a way as to cause argument?

These things happen. Its called a "Faux-Pas"

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

.

Edited February 23, 2009 by Paul Daniels

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

.