Patterico's Pontifications

2/24/2008

Beauty and the Luv Police (Updated)

Filed under: General — DRJ @ 6:27 pm



[Guest post by DRJ]

Two young ladies think they may be too pretty to fly on Southwest Airlines:

“Prejudice against pretty?

That’s the claim from a pair of 18-year-old best friends from Oldsmar who were escorted off a Southwest Airlines plane. USF student Nisreen Swedberg and friend Sarah Williams claim the flight crew was rude to them from the moment they stepped onto the plane at Tampa International Airport on February 14.
***
“I think they were just discriminating against because we were young decent-looking girls. I mean, nobody else on the plane looked like us except us,” she said. “[The flight attendants] were like older ladies. We were younger. Who knows, they could have been just jealous of us because we were younger.”

There are photos at the link and Breitbart has video here.

Paula Berg of Southwest Airlines responds in the comments.

— DRJ

51 Responses to “Beauty and the Luv Police (Updated)”

  1. Not this again.

    Paul (236e0e)

  2. My wife likes to watch the “reality” show Airline. It shows all the trials and tribulations that Southwest Airlines employees must go through during their day.

    Not once does the airline ever make a mistake: anything that goes wrong is always the customer’s fault.

    It’s nothing more than propaganda.

    That said, I don’t think the girls were discriminated against because of their looks. I don’t think they were discriminated against at all. They seem to have chips on their shoulders.

    Even if the girls were absolutely in the right, they could have handled themselves better.

    Steverino (3cbef4)

  3. Janie, the reporter who wrote the story, is a prettier girl than those two.

    PLC14 (f74534)

  4. Didn’t Carly Simon do a song about these girls?

    nk (669aab)

  5. I smell publicity stunt….these two want to become the next Obama Girls on MTV.

    driver (faae10)

  6. Before forming a judgment, I’d like to (1) hear the airline’s point of view, (2) hear from some disinterested passengers, (3) know what the young ladies were wearing on the plane (the video and pix aren’t necessarily at all what they were wearing), and (4) know whether they’d consumed any alcohol or other recreational substances.

    The notion that they were discriminated against because they are “pretty” is very hard for me to believe.

    Beldar (098090)

  7. OT: For those of you who don’t check often, Beldar’s resumed posting. At least for today. 😉

    Diffus (84f29e)

  8. “…I mean, nobody else on the plane looked like us except us”

    Yep, that says it all, they were discriminated against because they were clearly too… stupid, including nobody else except them. JM

    Manson48 (f19dd6)

  9. Wow, she was so pretty even the stranger man in the bathroom yelled at her after he got out, so the girl’s radiant beauty must have shone right thru the door! That clinches it.

    ras (fc54bb)

  10. Off topic, but outta curiosity, do any of you lawyers out there have experience with this sort of thing?

    British Columbia plans to begin seizing and selling vehicles of impaired drivers, Solicitor-General John Les says.

    Just curious as to whether experience has shown it to be a practical approach or a slippery slope. Or is its karma in the details?

    ras (fc54bb)

  11. Why not alchohol is a drug, it’s time it was recognized as such. JM

    Manson48 (f19dd6)

  12. Gosh. Beauty is such a burden.

    Dana (797297)

  13. “I don’t know what happened on this flight. I didn’t do anything wrong. I basically was discriminated against because of my looks.”

    Am I the only one who sees the contradiction here? She doesn’t know what happened, but, she was discriminated against because of her looks.

    Which one is it? And, no where in the video or the linked articles does anyone, including the girls, give us any reason to believe they were picked out because of their looks. She wanted something before the flight crew was giving it out and told to wait. Then, the other one wanted to use the restroom, but couldn’t, and decided to tell the person using it something afterwards. Why would she do that?

    reff (99666d)

  14. Yes, they are lovely…

    I’m sure they will become wonder mistresses, and then trophy wives, until they hit the age of 35 and get booted to the curb.

    I’m sure they were perfect angels, polite and civil the entire time.

    And Steverino, you’d be shocked… I’ve come to believe from what I see day to day that it’s USUALLY the customer’s fault. Civility long ago went away…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  15. Too many goggly eyed men staring at them and their wives ready to fit them with blinders

    krazy kagu (8d6a8f)

  16. Wow.

    Is anyone going to believe this?

    I mean, one gets in a profane shouting match, and then the airline doesn’t treat them nicely? The hardships of being an attractive young woman never stop, do they?

    Sigh.

    –JRM

    JRM (355c21)

  17. Must be a wrong link. The girls in the link are not attractive enough to cause any envy or commotion.

    Perfect Sense (b6ec8c)

  18. they look like mid-level vegas hookers, what you might see at the end of the bar at bally’s or bellagio making come-hither eyes at you. could one of them have turned a trick in the airplane loo and gotten stiffed afterward as well as during? that would explain the obscene shouting match. it’s a business doing pleasure with you!

    assistant devil's advocate (2ad350)

  19. I didn’t wanna go to the “they look like hookers” well, but they DO look like some of the “women” looking for “fun” on craigslist…

    Not that I check craigslist…

    DAMN!

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  20. ….

    *tries to figure out why Patt has pictures of her classmates up as being outstanding beauties*

    I’d kind of like to hear what other folks think, because these females strike me as dishonest idiots.

    Foxfier (74f1c8)

  21. I really do not understand why people flying do not dress themselves for the potential crash.

    Dang things are cool enough for most heart patients, and if they do go down, one thing you aint gonna desire to have on is a nylon/rayon mini skirt.

    I notice the reel that I did not finish did not show images of what actually appeared on the plane.

    Wear some frickin clothes when you travel, amazing how many might actually come home again and not like disappear. Ok not a huge challenge.

    Soooo who would you vote for a young chick or a young chick wearing almost nothing? 🙂

    If your desire is to join the mile high club, then wear a name tag with the stated intention. I’m sure some helpers will offer.

    TC (1cf350)

  22. TC:

    I travel with plastic utensils, and salt and pepper packets, just in case. 🙂

    Gotta be ready for a worse-case…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  23. And Steverino, you’d be shocked… I’ve come to believe from what I see day to day that it’s USUALLY the customer’s fault. Civility long ago went away…

    Scott, I used to own a restaurant; I know just how wrong the customers can be. Sometimes it’s a misunderstanding, sometimes it borders on deliberate fraud (like one patron who ate an entire steak before complaining that it was bland and inedible).

    However, I have flown on Southwest in the past, and will never again do so because of the rude and semi-competent employees. Their reality show portraying them doing nothing wrong is an insult to the intelligence.

    Again, I don’t think the girls were the wronged parties.

    Steverino (3cbef4)

  24. Still, this is the third incident with pretty, or provokative, or both, women with Southwest.

    I have a weird feeling that the following is going on:

    In the ’70’s, Southwest dressed its flight attendants in HOT PANTS. Anyone remember that?

    Here is a reminder.

    So, all those formerly hot, now aging stewardesses from the ’70’s are reminded of how good they used to look when they see something like this, and being the catty women that pretty women can be, are giving these passengers attitude, which they get back, and then the whole thing escalates, but it’s never the airline’s fault because at some point in reaction to the attitude of the flight attendant, these women do or say something to get kicked off.

    Really. I really think it’s just a bunch of formerly hot women who can’t handle that they’re getting old.

    otcconan (c51b46)

  25. Oh my god, that’s provocative.

    otcconan (c51b46)

  26. Yeah, but even people from the 70’s were at least sometimes polite. Finding a pair of pretty girls who don’t act like bitches because, by golly, WE should all bend over backwards for them, is a rare feat…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  27. Discrimination because of being too pretty does exist. My daughter was kicked out of a magnet school because of “failing grades”. The grades were because she stopped caring about school. The reason she stopped caring about school was the teachers who treated her like she was too pretty to be smart. Those teachers hurt a vulnerable, sweet teenage girl because they were jealous of her looks. That was years ago now, but thinking about it hurts almost as bad as when my wife died.

    tyree (fedfcb)

  28. “Wow, she was so pretty even the stranger man in the bathroom yelled at her after he got out, so the girl’s radiant beauty must have shone right thru the door! That clinches it.”

    – reff

    Heh. And also: Heh.

    I agree with ADA: two minimally attractive, foul-mouthed, utterly boring girls.

    Leviticus (43095b)

  29. Levi…I didn’t say that…

    But I wish I had….

    And, I agree with you and ADA….

    reff (bff229)

  30. Whoops! It was “ras”…

    You lower-case “r” handles are all alike! Way to go, ras.

    Leviticus (68eff1)

  31. #24…
    Is that a shot of SouthWest stews, or PSA (Pacific Southwest Airlines, now defunct)?
    PSA was famous for the hot outfits late 60’s, early 70’s.

    Another Drew (f9dd2c)

  32. Sorry for the delayed response, folks, but honestly, I was surprised to see this story get so much traction.

    Clearly, we would have gone out of business a long time ago if we discriminated against beautiful women. We carry 96 million Customers a year, and they’re all beautiful in our eyes!

    Beldar (#6) – you raised several fair questions in your comment, and I can give you the airlines’ point of view.

    After an inflight disruption involving the two ladies, another Customer, and several obscenities, our Flight Crew requested that Law Enforcement meet the flight upon its arrival in Los Angeles. Officers met the flight, then questioned and released the two ladies. We cancelled their return flight as a result of their behavior. The return portions of their tickets were refunded.

    It is important to clarify a few points:
    1. The two ladies are not “banned” from ever traveling on Southwest in the future.
    2. Our Crews’ decision had nothing to do with the ladies’ appearance, but rather their behavior and interaction with another Customer onboard.
    3. Our Employees have an obligation to maintain a safe environment onboard.

    Our number one priority must always be the safety of all of our Customers.

    Paula Berg
    Southwest Airlines

    p.s. Another Drew (#31) – Those were our Flight Attendants in the hot pants. In fact, in 1971, in an effort to get some buzz for what was then just a small upstart airline that not many people had yet heard of, Southwest ran an advertisement playfully recruiting “Raquel Welch look-a-likes” to be Flight Attendants.

    Paula Berg - Southwest Airlines (d97801)

  33. Cool… a spokesperson who speaks like a person.

    Go figure…

    Leviticus (3c2c59)

  34. Thanks for your response, Ms. Berg. I’ve posted most of the Southwest stories here. I notice them because my West Texas family regularly (and happily) flies Southwest Airlines, so I’m interested in what Southwest does.

    DRJ (3eda28)

  35. Remember this jingle? “At Continental Airlines, we really move our tails for you”. Hot pants were a sign of the times, as most travellers were businessmen.

    Viktor (f57946)

  36. DRJ – Glad to hear you’re a fan…especially if you’re the one posting the stories (wink). You seem to have quite a bit of traffic…congratulations.

    You don’t have to post this comment if you don’t want to, I just wanted to let you know that you can contact me anytime if you need any assistance with your stories (i.e. interviews, historical info, etc. I’m guessing you’ve got my email address?…And, if you want to email me your contact information, I’d be happy to put you on my mailing list for SWA news, etc.

    Paula Berg - Southwest Airlines (d97801)

  37. I see your site isn’t modearted. Very nice. pb.

    Paula Berg - Southwest Airlines (d97801)

  38. Ms. Berg,

    I weren’t already a frequent flyer of Southwest, I would be now simply based on your informative and thoughtful response. Not many companies would take the time, nor feel the need to reassure customers. Kudos.

    Dana (b4a26c)

  39. oops, I meant, if I weren’t already….

    Dana (b4a26c)

  40. Still, this is the third incident with pretty, or provokative [sic], or both, women with Southwest.

    One, I presume, was the Hooters exhibitionist who was so traumatized by being singled out for being semi-pretty that she went out and posed nude. Who was the other?

    Xrlq (62cad4)

  41. I doubt that the nude spread that results from this broohaha will be in Playboy, though. Or does Playboy now do girl on girl stuff?

    nk (669aab)

  42. heh

    I would wager it would be hustler… Playboy does still retain some level of class…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  43. Thanks, Dawn – That’s the nicest thing I’ve heard all day!

    Paula Berg - Southwest Airlines (9641fd)

  44. Sorry…I meant Dana…it’s getting late 🙂

    Paula Berg - Southwest Airlines (9641fd)

  45. I must admit, I’m VERY impressed… Someone from SWA coming her to lay out their side?

    Next time I have a flightto take, I’ll have to mke sure to make at least part of the trip via your airlines…

    Scott Jacobs (d3a6ec)

  46. I, too am impressed by SWA’s response.
    The lawyerly output of most corporations in response to potentially embarrassing events almost universally prevents this kind of interaction.
    When I say almost always, I think that this is the first and only time I’ve been witness to such a response. Amazing.

    j.pickens (53ee7a)

  47. Paula, Patterico seems to have turned off trackbacks, but I wanted you to see my reaction to your participation in this comment thread. As someone who has dealt with blogs criticizing my own company, I was impressed with your response.

    Doc Rampage (01f543)

  48. The guy is still digging. Tell me someone has screen shots of the not being the “iowahawk.com” at the bottom of the post…

    And yeah, my comment went the way of the dodo bird…

    He doesn’t seem to big on “open and honest”…

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  49. whoops. Wrong thread…

    Scott Jacobs (fa5e57)

  50. Wow, those girls really aren’t that great. I don’t even think I’d turn my head to check them out. The dark haired one is not even cute. Yep, they were discriminated against… for being complete idiots. Chalk them up as the new Omarosa or whatever that other worthless girl’s name is from The Apprentice. They’re all just wasting our oxygen.

    merkon (bba6d1)

  51. The smallest bit of research about Southwest Airlines flack Paula Berg tells us this:

    http://www.blogsouthwest.com/2007/06/15/behind-the-scenes-blog-queen/

    Now, never mind “wacky”, and “off-the-wall” – “behind-the-scenes Blog Queen” and “Nuts about Southwest” says it all for me.

    So, to Paula Berg of Southwest Airlines, the airline company’s “behind-the-scenes Blog Queen”, who says, regarding the events of March 6-7, 2008, and the now-record US$10,200,000 in fines racked up by Southwest:

    “…this situation was never and is not now a safety of flight issue”.
    Nonsense, Paula. Cracks in airplanes? Nonsense, Paula.

    I’ve been around publicists and other entertainment folk for over 20 years, and I have heard better publicity emanating from self-plugging screenwriters on acid.

    And, Paula, as for:

    “[t]he FAA approved our actions and considered the matter closed as of April 2007”.

    Nonsense, Paula.

    It’s not “closed”, until WE the PUBLIC say it is closed! Take that back to your superiors for me – and tell them that we are just getting started.

    Oh – and, congratulations on staying behind the scenes.

    John J. Tormey III, Esq.
    Quiet Rockland

    John J. Tormey III, Esq. (5546e5)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.0883 secs.