Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I'm on the fence. If they followed their published rules then I side with the company.
On the other hand, I think she looks fine. What if some 60 year old lady came in wearing a velour track suit (very common)?
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
She's not taking issue with the rules. She's taking issue with the double standard in how the rules are enforced.
Exactly this. It’s not a discussion about whether her outfit was appropriate or not, it’s why they let her husband in with his rule breaking outfit but denied her. It’s not about the outfit. It’s about the gender discrimination.
She's not taking issue with the rules. She's taking issue with the double standard in how the rules are enforced.
She is, now. But at first, her beef was simply about the rules:
Quote:
"In 2020 @qantas airlines Melbourne won’t allow a woman holding a business class ticket to enter their business class lounge in active wear," Coyle, who was wearing an orange athletic jumpsuit at the time, tweeted about her experience. "My business IS fitness and an active lifestyle. Qantas prefers their women in a dress. #genderdiscrimination #qantas."
Something made her change her tune from the original tweet to her amended "complaint."
The rules clearly state that "head-to-toe exercise clothing" is prohibited, so there is that. Both of their outfits violate that rule so there is clearly a case of gender discrimination here since he was let in while she was prohibited.
That said, what a ****ty, classist rule. They both look more than decent in clean, well-fitted clothes. They don't look like slobs, not obscene. Not my style, but who am I to judge.
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,690 posts, read 57,994,855 times
Reputation: 46171
Quote:
Originally Posted by ABQConvict
The rules clearly state that "head-to-toe exercise clothing" is prohibited, so there is that. Both of their outfits violate that rule so there is clearly a case of gender discrimination here since he was let in while she was prohibited.
That said, what a ****ty, classist rule. They both look more than decent in clean, well-fitted clothes. They don't look like slobs, not obscene. Not my style, but who am I to judge.
but how did they smell?
BTW, 'he' was not head-to-toe (Billboard material), he 'broke up the wear with the shorts. I can see a lounge employee quickly missing that correlation.
"Just following the rules ma'am, You're OUTTA here, scram before I have you arrested..." (And why I am not in a Customer Service Role). " Oh, you don't like the rules?, whoops, you just got cancelled from your flight. See ya, have a nice trip finding an alternative way home!"
No doubt she did it deliberately to draw attention to herself. Social media diva.
That's not the issue. She was dressed appropriately for a comfortable flight.
In my 30 years of 2-4 flights a week, I've seen much worse (men and women) 300 pounders trying to mash themselves into the same outfit she's wearing, skirts so high that belly buttons were showing, men with tees that wouldn't cover there bellies and shorts that were so short that their johnsons were on display
Look around next time you are in the airport and airport lounges
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.