Passenger sues Easyjet after crew asked her to move seat for ultra-Orthodox man refusing to sit next to women

[stumbledin]

I cant believe this is still happening. There have been court cases about this for at least the past ten years which have always support women.
www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/easyjet-sue-luton-tel-aviv-discrimination-orthodox-melanie-wolfson-a9693641.html

Earlier cases:
2015 www.nytimes.com/2015/04/10/us/aboard-flights-conflicts-over-seat-assignments-and-religion.html
2017 www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/el-al-israeli-airline-orthodox-jewish-men-women-seats-flights-gender-segregation-a7804716.html
2018 airline says it will no longer accommodate Orthodox Jewish men who refuse to sit next to women
2020 www.dutchnews.nl/news/2020/07/klm-breached-discrimination-law-by-asking-woman-to-move-for-orthodox-jewish-man/

@JurgenKloppsCat

There have been official airline policies of asking men to move for the crime of being sat next to kids on a plane that they aren't related to;

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Airline_seating_sex_discrimination_controversy

I've seen discussions on here when such cases arise, and nobody was sympathetic to the male passengers. Nobody said that the parent booking the ticket should book extra seats to keep their kids safe. So to pretend that only women are subject to discrimination on a plane just isn't true.

For the record, I think the men in the case of the OP are idiots and should not be accommodated. If you don't like it, you move, or get off the plane.

Why can't they just move the child?

@toilenstripes No, I'm not from NY or LAI'm also not willing to "accept prejudice". I've already said that I wouldn't have moved seats if I was in the same situation. If challenged I would have then made my feelings entirely clear, explained that I would not inconvenience myself for these two men and settled in my seat for the rest of the flight home. I wouldn't have gone on to sue the airline unless they tried to force me to move, harassed me or did anything else that I felt infringed my rights. I don't think that asking me a question does any of those things. I shouldn't have been asked to move in the first place for sure but I wouldn't take legal action because of it. Apparently this makes me some kind of traitor to my sex and too dimwitted to understand prejudice.

@chocaholic9 Your experiences are yours and mine are mine. Please don't tell me I'm seeing racism where there is none. When White women try and shoot me down for suggesting my experiences of racism are not the same as their experiences I will call that what I want. I'm not sitting back and allowing myself to be talked down to and schooled in what prejudice looks like. If you don't feel the same that's fine. You do you.

@Mariel I do have Black friends who engage with and are members of Feminist groups. However many quickly become disillusioned. Although we are told our voices are welcomed, if we don't toe the party line and accept that the experiences of all women are equally as bad regardless of race we are drowned out. The 'good' Black women who smile and nod and embrace the teachings of the predominantly White leadership are welcomed. We are now facing accusations from Black trans women who claim that we are part of the oppression if we don't accept them as women. Assailed from all sides, many of us have just withdrawn from the whole movement.

Eastie you seem determined to make this all about you. I agree with the poster who said you are seeing racism where none exists.

You are perfectly entitled to think that if you want- others are perfectly entitled to disagree. Your saying so doesn’t make it true.

It’s not like they find women distasteful, it’s that (weirdly) they feel they might be tempted to have improper thoughts about women so avoid looking at female non-family members

Then it might be a good idea to pack a sleep mask in their carry-on (I do when I travel, though obviously for different reasons) rather than expect women to accommodate their pathological lack of self-control.

It’s not like they find women distasteful, it’s that (weirdly) they feel they might be tempted to have improper thoughts about women so avoid looking at female non-family members

TL;DR - "I might not be able help myself" ?

Sure I've heard that before. Never in a good way, mind you.

Although we are told our voices are welcomed, if we don't toe the party line and accept that the experiences of all women are equally as bad regardless of race we are drowned out.

I think maybe part of this is that if women are meeting or talking together about feminism, they will naturally look for common ground in terms of their experiences as women. Of course if you are subjected to racism or disablism as well as/combined with sexism, you have a right to talk about those experiences and it's unfair to be drowned out when you try to share those. Those experiences shouldn't be dismissed and you shouldn't be talked over just because they're not experiences that all women have - that's inexcusable.

I do think it's a tough call though to assume that any woman automatically has it worse than any other woman (not saying anyone in particular is assuming this but seems to be a theme in the thread). We just don't know what individual women have been through so it doesn't even seem fair to have that kind of discussion. We also don't know how each woman has dealt with the things that have happened to her - some women are broken by oppression, others seem to sail through it all despite horrendous hardship. There aren't really any rules about who has things worse.

In this case, it's a clear example of sex discrimination - the woman should never have been asked to move. She was asked to move because men found her presence to be contaminating and unacceptable. She has every right to demand compensation for the fact that her legal rights were not upheld in this situation. And I think that kind of sex discrimination could happen to a woman of any race or ethnicity, so it's fair enough to think about it in terms of our commonalities and universal shared experience.

It’s not like they find women distasteful, it’s that (weirdly) they feel they might be tempted to have improper thoughts about women so avoid looking at female non-family members

The logical response to that is to learn how to control their thoughts rather than to expect women to be inconvenienced because they can't be bothered to try.

@Pobblebonk

It’s not like they find women distasteful, it’s that (weirdly) they feel they might be tempted to have improper thoughts about women so avoid looking at female non-family members

The logical response to that is to learn how to control their thoughts rather than to expect women to be inconvenienced because they can't be bothered to try.

It's just patriarchal nonsense.

The logical response to that is to learn how to control their thoughts rather than to expect women to be inconvenienced because they can't be bothered to try.

Coveting your neighbour's ass is also a sin, right? So does that mean that people can't have an ass (or the modern equivalent of one - iPhone maybe) next to them? Or they might get all covetous. That would mean men with nice stuff would have to move, right? No? If course not because that would be patently ridiculous, expecting men to change their behaviour to suit the religion of others. That's how you know it's the patriarchy, not just religion.

It is always difficult when views clash. However here she is in the right - why should she be asked to move. If someone asked to move away from a black person because they were a white supremasist the airlines would not be allowing that I assume.

If they have problems travelling with women they can book an extra seat or not travel or arrange their own planes.

It is always difficult when views clash. However here she is in the right - why should she be asked to move. If someone asked to move away from a black person because they were a white supremasist the airlines would not be allowing that I assume.

Well, let's put it this way ...

while it's unlikely, I submit it's more unlikely if it were a female white supremacist and a black man, than it it were a male white supremacist and a black woman.

@Chocaholic9

I am saddened by the comments on this thread, by women, minimising the impact of this sort of discrimination against women.

I can only conclude that they are so used to it, they've started to accept and embrace it as a survival strategy? It's deeply fucked up.

Glad you said something. Hard agree.

To the 'BAME' women stating it is all the same - that's your experience. You don't speak for me.

No one is trying to speak for you - your torrents of misogyny and attempts at downplaying sexism and staying outright that sexism isn’t a big deal for various reasons more than speak for themselves.

The time I was chased by a group of White men in a car screaming racist abuse is the same as my experiences of sexism. Okay.

I genuinely find this baffling. I’ve had men scream racist abuse at me and have also had men scream misogynistic abuse at me. The two experiences are exactly the same, actually the second is more frightening due to increased threat of sexual assault. Why are you so determined to force your views that sexism isn’t as big a deal as racism onto everyone, rather than acknowledge that the reason intersectionality exists is because of misogynoir? (A concept I strongly recommend you explore.)

Your comments on this thread have been pretty nasty and yes 100% oppression Olympics. What you’ve done is the equivalent of gatecrashing a thread about breast cancer support and screaming “LIVER CANCER IS WORSE SHUT UP.” Like... yeah maybe liver cancer is worse than breast cancer, doesn’t mean every single cancer thread has to be about liver.

I think it's a worry if she wins this case. I agree with @Eastie77 that the airline didn't do anything wrong. They weren't the ones to ask her to move, and as Eastie says the men only asked. They didn't order her to move or insist on it. People are entitled to ask politely.

Those points aside my concern is over the potential impact on women. Mainly traumatised DV or rape survivors, who might feel safer not sat next to a man. They might feel the need to ask a male passenger to move seats. Whilst a different reason than religion, it's relevant because they generally won't want to disclose distressing experiences to strangers and would probably simply politely explain they feel more comfortable sat next to a same sex passenger.

If this woman wins her case it has potential negative impact on vulnerable women.

I don't see this having an impact on vulnerable women. That's not the issue here. If you don't want to sit next to someone, move. No one is saying you should be forced to sit next to someone you don't want, just that you can't expect them to move for you. You can still ask to move seats yourself.

But women will no longer be allowed to ask (politely) if a passenger would be willing to move seats. If this case succeeds it sets a dangerous precedent.

People should be allowed to ask. As long as there's no demands or aggression or expectation of a definite yes. No-one was forced to move, no-one insisted on anything.

I think you have totally missed the point here. The men refused to sit next to her because she is a woman and their religion says women are unclean and to be avoided. The airline staff supported the men by requesting the woman to move to accommodate them, which is illegal. The law says they have no right to make women move for them.

Equally I would say a woman has no right to ask a man should move seats because she doesn't want to sit next to him. She can ask to move herself. I think it would be extremely rude and entitled to expect another person to move for you.

Also you're mistaken, in that the case doesn't set any precedent. The precedent has already been set and the law is clear. The airline broke it. Winning the case doesn't change the law.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I believe that anyone should have the right to politely ask another passenger if they'd mind moving for whatever reason. It's part of freedom of speech in my view.

From what I read in this case there was no entitlement but simply a polite request. If I'm wrong and someone was forced to move that's clearly not ok, but that's very different from a polite request with no expectation of a definite yes.

I also thought (having read a pp explanation) they don't believe women are unclean but rather they shouldn't mix with the opposite sex other than their spouse. That's not my beliefs but they have the right to their view, however much I don't agree, as long as they don't force it on anyone else. A request is not the same as enforcing anything. People are free to request, the same as others are free to say no.

You're wrong. The law clearly says you are not allowed to discriminate against women because of their sex. This includes the expectation that they should go away just because you have a problem with them. So no, it's not okay. Did you read the article?

Apart from this, I really don't understand why, instead of moving yourself, you'd expect another person to move for you. What would you even say? "Sorry but I don't want to sit next to you, can you move please?" I'd tell you to get tae fuck. You have every right to try and move your own seat but zero right to inconvenience me.

It was clear discrimination according to Israeli law. She was asked to move on the basis of her gender. Doesn't matter what we think, the asking was against the law. The lsraeli law mentions race and gender in the same phrase, so they are treated as identical issues. She is going to win, and they need to stop catering to Orthodox Jewish men as the line of least resistance and let them do what everyone else does who has a very particular requirement on a plane, and book the seat next door.
If I founded a religion tomorrow that required a 1 metre distance from all men at all times, would easyJet cater for that I wonder? I think not. So why are they catering for this?!

I also thought (having read a pp explanation) they don't believe women are unclean but rather they shouldn't mix with the opposite sex other than their spouse.

Exactly. THEY shouldn't. THEY have the religious obligation, THEY have the impure thoughts FFS, THEY have the beliefs. THEY can move. But they don't want to. They want women to move to accommodate them. And EasyJet shouldn't be facilitating that discrimination.

I don't tend to spend a lot of time in places where my sex is the source of legal issues. Luckily Israel has already made it very clear that legally, if you want to sit beside other men, you must arrange it that way whilst not inconveniencing women. Good for them. And as it says in the article, ultra orthodox communities have ways to do this, buying rows for example. Good for them as well. Everyone gets their needs and wants accommodated, without women having to move to accommodate men and their propensity to impure thoughts.

It's not just Israeli law. UK law says the same thing. You can't ask a woman to move when you wouldn't ask a man to do the same thing. It's the basic definition of sex discrimination.

I guess it wouldn't be against the law to ask someone to sit somewhere else if sex/race etc were irrelevant. It would just be extremely bloody rude.

We'll have to agree to disagree. I believe that anyone should have the right to politely ask another passenger if they'd mind moving for whatever reason.

They can ask sure, but they don't have the right for the airline to try and talk the woman into moving on their behalf. He asked, she said no, which she had every right to. Funny how his first course of action though was to expect the woman to move, rather than solving the problem himself. If not sitting next to a woman is so important to him, why didn't he book an extra seat? There are ways to ensure he wasn't sitting by a woman, he chose not to do that. Why? Gee, i don't know, maybe he's just so entitled and misogynistic that he expects women to do whatever he demands.

That's not my beliefs but they have the right to their view, however much I don't agree, as long as they don't force it on anyone else. A request is not the same as enforcing anything. People are free to request, the same as others are free to say no.

But by demanding women move for them, they are forcing their beliefs on others. And the man didn't just request did he? The airline enforced his so called request for him by convincing the woman to move. They could have just said "the lady said no, there's nothing we can do." Instead they took his ridiculous request seriously. He has a right to his beliefs, he doesn't have the right to expect the rest of the world to fit into those beliefs.

The airline shouldn't even ask. The law is clear. They should have said, no we won't be asking the woman to move as that would be against the laws on sex discrimination.