Article: Tattooed mum 'belittled' by Jetstar

Status
Not open for further replies.

sully

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
238
Points
0
Yada, ok apology accepted and do not delete the post. Goes to show that we can call our pm something and rely on our right to free speech. Wish some other members of the community could see the comic nature of life.
 

Lonely Flyer

Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2006
Messages
349
Points
195
I was not here when the original LOTFAP was posted

Does it mean "Land of the F*RT *RSED POLITICS
 

Yada Yada

Established Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,877
Points
0
sully said:
Yada, ok apology accepted and do not delete the post. Goes to show that we can call our pm something and rely on our right to free speech. Wish some other members of the community could see the comic nature of life.
Thanks sully. :D

Lonely Flyer said:
I was not here when the original LOTFAP was posted

Does it mean "Land of the F*RT *RSED POLITICS
I only learned about this on FT last year. It stands for Land Of The Free And Paranoid - i.e. the good ol' US of A. :wink:
 
M

MetroAir

Guest
Lonely Flyer said:
I was not here when the original LOTFAP was posted

Does it mean "Land of the F*RT *RSED POLITICS

No, but it could!

See the abbreviations thread.
 
Your simple solution to home security. Quickly view what’s happening at home when you're not there, giving you peace of mind.

Simple plug-in installation means you’ll be up and running in no time.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

MD

Junior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
35
Points
0
sully said:
Yada, ok apology accepted and do not delete the post. Goes to show that we can call our pm something and rely on our right to free speech. Wish some other members of the community could see the comic nature of life.

This is very ironical. Jetstar has humiliated this woman because the crew were offended by the image (tattoo) on her back, or because the crew determined that passengers might be offended. Several posters here have supported Jetstar in this action, presumably because they too thought the image was offensive. Sully in particular has denigrated her ("trailer trash", comments about Jerry Springer, and an assumption that she is ignorant of grammar "Them planes..."), and then basks in our right to free speech.

When I read this thread my immediate reaction was to observe how similar the posters' comments were to those of apologists for the Muslim reaction to the Danish cartoons.

MD
 

serfty

Veteran Member
Moderator
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
43,972
Solutions
14
Points
3,300
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Platinum

Yada Yada

Established Member
Joined
Dec 6, 2004
Messages
1,877
Points
0
MD said:
When I read this thread my immediate reaction was to observe how similar the posters' comments were to those of apologists for the Muslim reaction to the Danish cartoons.
Well, MD, this is a community like any other so you can expect to see a wide range of opinions. We all react differently and to different things. However we have enough in common to exist as a friendly group that can deal with differences. A sense of humour will go a long way.

Anyway, FWIW I laughed out loud at sully's earlier comments about TT. It was hilarious. :D I don't think we need to get bent out of shape over any of this. This is life. You only live it once. There are no dress rehearsals. cough happens. Let's move on. :wink:

Am I sounding like Mr Brady yet?. :roll:
 

gaia

Member
Joined
Dec 1, 2003
Messages
125
Points
0
Reminds me of a scene in the MASH TV show when Hawkeye is trying to talk Radar out of having a tattoo and he says something along the lines of "Why would you want a drawing on your body that you wouldn't dream of putting on the wall in your house?"
 

markis10

Veteran Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
30,449
Points
10
serfty said:
Mal said:
I prefer the article on the SMH site here which even shows part of the tattoo in question: http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/tatts-airraising/2006/02/06/1139074171403.html
Actually looking at the PIX, they must be doing it tough Mackay. (As I noted elsewhere) maybe a paper bag wold have been more appropriate ... :p

Actually it is one of the most prosperous cities in Australia at present, with the Holden dealer being the bigest seller of HSV models in Australia and there are ads on the telegraph poles for electricians - 120K a year, car and 4 flights home a year included. The mining boom is putting a lot of money into the town and it shows, although it has hardly extended to the QP at the airport (at least they have a toilet in there now)!

On another note, would the seat back not have covered the tattoo while she was sitting down?
 

sully

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
238
Points
0
OK, let me get this straight. The good doc (MD) equates the actions of Jetstar to those of the Muslims and their apologists who support a suppression of free speech. Therefore anyone who agrees with the 'cover up' is effectively saying that caricatures of a prophet are the same as distasteful and inappropriate body art and it is right to suppress both images. Hmmmm.

The TT body art is not the same as those of images of an historical figure. Society has standards and should enforce them. Caricatures are not about standards but are an attempt at humour, even if it falls flat on some members of the society. All of our politicians are fair game to the humourists as are Christian images, which while I may not support them in all cases I accept that we are able to freely express our ideas. This isn't basking.
 

sully

Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2003
Messages
238
Points
0
markis10 said:
[On another note, would the seat back not have covered the tattoo while she was sitting down?

Apparently when she does her in-flight exercises the action on the back is pretty raunchy.
 

MD

Junior Member
Joined
Sep 28, 2005
Messages
35
Points
0
sully said:
OK, let me get this straight. The good doc (MD) equates the actions of Jetstar to those of the Muslims and their apologists who support a suppression of free speech. Therefore anyone who agrees with the 'cover up' is effectively saying that caricatures of a prophet are the same as distasteful and inappropriate body art and it is right to suppress both images. Hmmmm.

No, actually what I said was

md said:
how similar the posters' comments were to those of apologists for the Muslim reaction to the Danish cartoons.

Now I have not seen the tattoo, only a small part of it. What I did see was no more offensive than anything that you can see on tv in the middle of the day. What remains may or may not be offensive. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I assume that you also have not seen the entire tattoo.

So my likening of some of the postings to what is occurring overseas relates to the posters' willingness to accept that the image was offensive, and the intolerance of somebody who does not conform to social norms.

sully said:
All of our politicians are fair game to the humourists as are Christian images, which while I may not support them in all cases I accept that we are able to freely express our ideas.




sully said:
Yada Yada, you either have no idea of human anatomy or have said something about the Prime Minister of the country that has no place in these forums.

If the former feel free to express your personal proclivities in the manner you wish. If the latter keep your political opinions to yourself.

Emoticons do not trivialise your comments.

Is that an example of your acceptance "that we are able to freely express our ideas" ???

MD
 

cpl

Intern
Joined
Nov 30, 2004
Messages
72
Points
0
sully said:
Tattoos do NOT equal trailer trash. Some can be tasteful and totally non-offensive.

I actually like tattoos (and dont mind explicit ones) but I thought coughpy tattoos like this should be banned indeed 8)
 

QF WP

Enthusiast
Moderator
Joined
Jun 20, 2002
Messages
18,013
Points
1,570
Qantas
Gold
Virgin
Platinum
Everybody has a right to free speech or expression; however they should also be mindful of others.

Now I have no idea what she was wearing on the day of the flight (indeed, whether that photo was taken on the day the incident occured). It's what happened. Did any of the pax sitting in the vicinity of the woman in the terminal or on the plane, complain?? If so, then I feel the hosties were within their rights to ask her to show some decorum and cover up.

People get tattoo's for all number of reasons - whether it's self-confidence, to obtain attention from others (good or bad, they are still attentionn), to portray an image to others (whether it be things like toughness, or even the tasteful ones that I have seen women wearing from time to time in magazines, in real life or on the internet).

Do I have tattoo's - no, neither does my wife nor any of my family. However I know friends who have them and respect their reasons for getting them. They just wouldn't get me ruining the fabric of my skin for eternity. Each to their own...via la difference.
 

serfty

Veteran Member
Moderator
Joined
Nov 16, 2004
Messages
43,972
Solutions
14
Points
3,300
Qantas
Platinum
Virgin
Platinum
Lindsay Wilson said:
...via la difference.
:shock:
Lindsay, Did you actually mean "by way of the difference" or did you omit a v from viva and really mean "Long live the difference"?
 

JohnK

Veteran Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2005
Messages
43,731
Points
3,070
What is offensive for one person may not be considered offensive by others. There is nothing wrong with tattoo's as long as they are tasteful and from what I have seen and heard so far this tattoo is definately not tasteful.

The crew made a decision to force her to cover up. It was a conservative decision which I feel they are entitled to make. Just accept the decision and carry on with life. Why drag the story all over the place now. Maybe an expectation of some form of compensation from the so-called "victim".

Please.... it is not a newsworthy item. We have much bigger problems to worry about.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top