Article: Tattooed mum 'belittled' by Jetstar

[sully]

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]

I was not here when the original LOTFAP was posted

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

 

[Yada Yada]

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.

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:

 

[MetroAir]

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.

 

[MD]

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]

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 ...

 

[Yada Yada]

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. 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]

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?"

 

[Yada Yada]

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 ...

LMAO!!!!!! :mrgreen:

 

[markis10]

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 ...

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]

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]

[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.

 

[Kiwi Flyer]

Some of the logic expressed here eludes me.

 

[MD]

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

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.

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.

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]

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]

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]

...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]

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.

 

[Yada Yada]

We have much bigger problems to worry about.

Exactly. Like why isn't there better food in the QPs.

 

[JohnK]

We have much bigger problems to worry about.

Exactly. Like why isn't there better food in the QPs.

Eggsactly. :roll: