I swear they pulled that straight from here.

I think I should get togethe are bunch of women of various shape in size in that same exact outfit and take a flight.

God damn it. I am so, so, sick of women's bodies being pathologized like this. Yes, women have breasts and legs. Yes, in many cases you can tell we have them. GET THE FUCK OVER IT. It just makes me so irate that on the one hand, we're expected to flaunt our bodies, but then when we do we're punished. Was anybody else really disturbed by the part where she said she covered herself with a blanket? Because you know, since she's not "fat" or "ugly" she has to be made to feel ashamed of her body in some way...We can't have women walking around thinking their bodies are okay, dontchaknow!

At least she was able to still fly, I've been discriminated against numerous times but nobody cares and it doesn't make the news like this, why? Because I'm a man.

Personally I love how they had to mention that she's a Hooter's waitress. Because, you know, had she been a lawyer or a neurosurgeon, it would have changed the situation completely.

How have you been discriminated against, Steven?

Is this what has happened to feminism? I am a feminist, but is this really the kind of thing we need to get our panties all up in bunch about? Following are the reasons why I think the "feminist" reaction to this story is problematic:

1) "This would never have happened to a man." True, probably because a man wouldn't walk into the airport wearing a 6 inch long "skirt" and a tank top. Nor would most women. This attire is the special provence of coeds who work at Hooters.

2) Let's think about this: why would the airline not want her to wear this particular outfit? My concern is that a skirt this short cannot possibly provide adequate coverage when she sits down. In other words, wherever she sits her crotch is in direct contact with the seat. Additionally, I doubt she's wearing granny panties under that skirt, which makes it an even bigger issue. She may not care what she sits on, but I do. I'd like to think that airline seats are something more than cloth-covered toilets.

3) The elephant in the room: rather than talk about Southwest's "outrageous" demand that she put on some clothes, let's at least acknowledge the other issues in this case. For example, she works at Hooters and apparently feels compelled to dress the part when she's not at work. Where's the outrage that women increasingly feel the need to infantilize their minds and hyper-sexualize their clothing? Why aren't there any successful chain restaurants where male waiters wear hot pants and skin tight tank tops? What happened to one of the motivating concerns of feminism (women as objects)? Are we really arguing that objectification is okay, so long as the woman does it to herself (assuming, of course, that we can say she has done it to herself)? In an increasingly shallow society, ever obsessed with looks, that is a truly frightening prospect.

4) Bigger fish to fry: there are so many other things wrong in our country (for women in particular). The minimum wage, although recently raised, still keeps millions of people (including women) in poverty. While we have made progress, women are still underrepresented in leadership (political, economic) roles. Picking a white, skinny, blonde college student as something to rally around seems a bit ridiculous, if not indulgent. This sends a clear message to poor and/or minority women: feminism is not about you. We're more concerned with this woman's right to wear what she wants to wear than your right to (equality, feed your kids, take your pick).

I often wonder if feminism is dead, or if it's just been co-opted. Every day, I encounter privileged women and girls who feed into sexist stereotypes but then claim that they are feminists. Personally, I would like to think that feminism is about a little bit more than a woman's right to dress like a tramp.

Hey Tina, if she was a lawyer or a neurosurgeon, she whould not have dresses like a Hotter's Hooker.

She will look back when she becomes a "woman" and laugh at how stupid she looked.

Personally, doodoo76, I don't wear "panties" but whatever. And I don't describe women as "tramps."

I think you've missed the point. No one is saying that this is the most important feminist issue of all time. No one is saying we should focus on this woman to the exclusion of all else.

I AM sad that women feel the need to dress like strippers or whatever. But, that is their choice. I'm horrified that she works at Hooters, I'm horrified that restaurant even exists! But that doesn't mean she should be shamed and humiliated and not allowed on a plane!

As for "this would never happen to a man." I've seen men do lots of disgusting things on public transportation, including wearing really tight pants that completely show the outline of the penis and balls. I've seen men leering at women, sexually harassing them-but I've NEVER once in my life seen a man confronted for his behavior. Not once! Yes, you probably won't see a man in a short skirt-but if you did-would you stop him from getting on the plane?

Also, plenty of women other than "coeds who work at hooters" wear mini-skirts. I see them every day. Should they all be kicked off the subway that I take? That's just silly.

And Steven-wah wah wah.

Am I the only one who doesn't think that her outfit is all that revealing? The skirt is kinda short, but so what? Add a few inches and that's an outfit I might wear on any given hot summer day. If feministing has taught me anything, it's that sweaters are a signal that a woman wants to be sexually harassed.

buggle:

Well stated.

All I know is that my personal form of feminism doesn't include calling other women tramps and hookers.

What is with all the comments recently along the lines of "is this really a feminist issue" about stuff that is 101 feminism?

Are these are coming from the same place under different names?

This is a feminist issue, IMO, because it's a reflection of the damned if you do, damned if you don't standards in our society for women. Women are expected to be sexy, but not too sexy. Our society simultaneously sends the message to women that how attractive they are is the measure of their worth and also that if they actually want/enjoy sex (or "make" people have "sinful" thoughts) they are horrible people who deserve to be shamed. Does this woman participate in a sexist culture by working at Hooters? Definately, IMO. But don't we all in some way or another? I really don't think it's that radical of a position to say that even women who participate in perpetuating sexism can also be the victim of sexism.

As for the bigger fish to fry, the economic issues you mentioned are related to how women are viewed by our culture. Feminism is, at least partially, about making these connections, so we can see how discriminated against a woman for dressing "too sexy" is part of the larger tapestry of the ways that women are treated as second class citizens.

All of this is setting aside the fact that there was nothing really that provacative about what she was wearing...and also, that if there's going to be a dress code for airlines, it should be clearly stated, otherwise it could very easily be used to discriminate against a certain group of customers.

Personally, doodoo76, I don't wear "panties" but whatever. And I don't describe women as "tramps."

I think you've missed the point. No one is saying that this is the most important feminist issue of all time. No one is saying we should focus on this woman to the exclusion of all else.

I AM sad that women feel the need to dress like strippers or whatever. But, that is their choice. I'm horrified that she works at Hooters, I'm horrified that restaurant even exists! But that doesn't mean she should be shamed and humiliated and not allowed on a plane!

As for "this would never happen to a man." I've seen men do lots of disgusting things on public transportation, including wearing really tight pants that completely show the outline of the penis and balls. I've seen men leering at women, sexually harassing them-but I've NEVER once in my life seen a man confronted for his behavior. Not once! Yes, you probably won't see a man in a short skirt-but if you did-would you stop him from getting on the plane?

Also, plenty of women other than "coeds who work at hooters" wear mini-skirts. I see them every day. Should they all be kicked off the subway that I take? That's just silly.

And Steven-wah wah wah.

Hey, Steven, take it from me: quit your bitching and find something productive to do. A man complaining about being discriminated against? I am not saying that it doesn't happen, but very rarily are discriminated against based on their gender. So, please, kindly take your male privilege and shove it.

Most men who claim to have been discriminated against are not really discriminated against - it's just that they've just managed to fall short in every category in life and can't quite make it. So what's the easy thing to do? Blame it on women. That's how misogynists like you do it, right?

Perhaps you're being discrimated against not because you're a man, but you're just a whiny asshole.

Marc

What is with all the comments recently along the lines of "is this really a feminist issue" about stuff that is 101 feminism?

Are these are coming from the same place under different names?

This is a feminist issue, IMO, because it's a reflection of the damned if you do, damned if you don't standards in our society for women. Women are expected to be sexy, but not too sexy. Our society simultaneously sends the message to women that how attractive they are is the measure of their worth and also that if they actually want/enjoy sex (or "make" people have "sinful" thoughts) they are horrible people who deserve to be shamed. Does this woman participate in a sexist culture by working at Hooters? Definately, IMO. But don't we all in some way or another? I really don't think it's that radical of a position to say that even women who participate in perpetuating sexism can also be the victim of sexism.

As for the bigger fish to fry, the economic issues you mentioned are related to how women are viewed by our culture. Feminism is, at least partially, about making these connections, so we can see how discriminated against a woman for dressing "too sexy" is part of the larger tapestry of the ways that women are treated as second class citizens.

All of this is setting aside the fact that there was nothing really that provacative about what she was wearing...and also, that if there's going to be a dress code for airlines, it should be clearly stated, otherwise it could very easily be used to discriminate against a certain group of customers.

I can't remember the last time I saw so many women-hating comments on Feministing in one day. And these people insist on describing themselves as feminists. This is really depressing.

I see girls dressed the way she is every single day. All over the place. It's not uncommon, and it's not that bad. The skirt was short, but not indecent. The shirt was barely low-cut at all. You could barely see the tops of her breasts.

I'm sorry that she works at Hooters. However, I'm willing to bet she makes really good money doing so (I've seen what guys leave for tips at those joints), and that's probably the reason she's doing it. However, that doesn't give us the right to shame her in all aspects of her life. She should have the right to dress as she chooses, so long as she meets legal decency standards (no public nudity). And she did. Humiliating her that way was totally wrong, and no amount of slut-shaming, tramp-blaming, hooker-accusing commentary from woman-haters here is going to change that.

I don't think that just because women have rights that they should be able to go around in public half naked.

Bazoo: A) I don't know where you live, but the prostitutes in Atlanta certainly wear far less clothing than that. And thanks for also adding in a comment implying that all southerners can't get a point across without being vulgar. It made everything you said even easier to disregard.

Half naked, Kyle!? Not so much.

What is going on here today? Did I wander into some alternate universe?

"because a man wouldn't walk into the airport wearing a 6 inch long "skirt" and a tank top."
No, he would walk in a tank top that showed the hair on his back and we would have to deal with it.

"this attire is the special provence of coeds who work at Hooters."

Way to slut-shame! And I thought "coed" went out of fashion years ago! Say it with me! COLLEGE STUDENT!

"she works at Hooters"

Your point?

"Are we really arguing that objectification is okay, so long as the woman does it to herself (assuming, of course, that we can say she has done it to herself)?"

See: intersection of feminism and sex work for some pertinent examples.

"This sends a clear message to poor and/or minority women: feminism is not about you. We're more concerned with this woman's right to wear what she wants to wear than your right to (equality, feed your kids, take your pick)."

Here is the one place where I will concede that you have a point.

"Personally, I would like to think that feminism is about a little bit more than a woman's right to dress like a tramp."

Personally, I think that someone who is a self-professed feminist wouldn't go throwing around words like "tramp." Shame on you.

KyleL: If you're not into that, move to Saudi Arabia. In this country, men and women are allowed to dress in whatever way they want (within the limits of the law). Regular feministing readers: there will probably be more idiotic comments because this news clip mentions the blog; I have a feeling we haven't seen the last of these brilliant "but she looks like a ho so she deserved it" messages. Also, hooters waitresses are definitely not the only people that dress like that; I KNOW lawyers and doctors that dress like that (which, lets be honest, was really not that shocking).
p.s. Don't you love in the piece how they say "and yes, she was wearing a bra?"

Bazoo, since when the hell did a woman dressed like that look like a prostitute? Perhaps she's dressed like that because it's fucking hot, and perhaps because she likes to look good? Maybe she's doing this for herself and not for you or anyone else to look at her.

If you find it offensive, look the other way, but somehow telling this woman to change her dress style because you're uncomfortable with it makes it a little misogynistic.

She doesn't live to make or anyone else happy. Get over yourself.

I suppose, by your argument, I can also say if it sounds like an asshole and has asshole ideologies, then it's an asshole.

Guess what you sound like?

I don't think that just because women have rights that they should be able to go around in public half naked.

I agree. In fact, the same goes for men. Let's legislate that men are not allowed to wear ball-hugging shorts or go topless in public.

What? That would never happen, you say? Gasp!

(Someone get me a towel to soak up all of this dripping sarcasm, please.)

On a related note, I like how the MSM feels it's relevant to mention that she works at Hooters.

Bazoo -

If she was a hooker, I suppose it would be totally OK to pull her off the flight?

Oh, I forgot that hookers deserve what they get. They are undeserving of rights. My bad.

To me, this boils down to women having the right to exist in public. Just like the lactivation issue- women and children having the right to exist in public.

Not hiding her breasts or legs to camouflage the fact that she's not a male? Shame on her! Breastfeeding in public? Shame on her!

Okay, first of all, doodoo's obviously not a feminist. I can sit around all day saying I'm Cleopatra, but that doesn't make it true. We're just seeing an infiltration by the same group of angry rejects who've been trying to take down every feminist website on the Net. It'll pass when their unemployment runs out and their parents kick them out of the house.

a skirt this short cannot possibly provide adequate coverage when she sits down.

Dude. There was a fucking picture of her sitting down. It covered everything. Why are trolls so stupid?

you are expected to dress in casual clothing on an airline

Huh. So you can't wear business attire on an airplane? Funny that. I've never seen any businessmen get kicked off for wearing business suits -- what planet are you posting from, Bazoo? Is the weather nice there? What are the primary imports and exports there? Are any of the animals there half as cool as the marsupials we have here on Earth?

And oh, as for your little hateful, bigoted comment about me being from the South? I'm from Minnesota. So, Bazoo, you can go fuck yourself, since I'm sure nobody else wants to.

Oh how I love the, "I swear I'm a feminist" anti-feminist trolls. Fuck off, guys.

Yay, Ann!!! Good job.

I am still baffled by this. When I first heard about it, I figured it must have been a rogue jerkwad employee... but to hear Southwest back up the actions of this employee really makes me question my devotion to them as a customer.

In regards to the CNN piece... it was mostly okay, though the "she's a Hooters waitress!" and "yes, she's wearing a bra!" parts obviously made me gag. What the hell does it matter who she is? She's dressed in a way that seems pretty average to me... but because she is a full-figured woman, even wearing slightly tight and fashionable clothes is "inappropriate." (As a full-figured woman myself, I feel her pain... you can wear the exact same thing a skinnier woman would wear, and it's "slutty.")

What's the worst that could happen, Southwest? Someone would look at her and find her attractive? Oh golly gee, the plane certainly couldn't fly then, could it?

It is scary having to argue such basic issues on this site. I would like the slut-shamers to explicate for me exactly where their positions intersect with feminism. Please?

I know I'm late, but WORD, Kimmy. Great response. I forgot what site I was on for a minute there.

but because she is a full-figured woman, even wearing slightly tight and fashionable clothes is "inappropriate." (As a full-figured woman myself, I feel her pain... you can wear the exact same thing a skinnier woman would wear, and it's "slutty.")

Exactly, coshea! Actually, I'm pretty skinny, but I have really big boobs, and I always get flack for "flaunting" my boobs. The interesting thing is, when I first developed breasts, I tried to hide them by wearing really big shirts, and I tried to hide my hips with baggy shorts. I looked like the fourth member of TLC circa 1992. By dressing like that, I actually got more shit than I do now for not dressing in a "feminine" enough way. Sadly, I was eventually cowed into stopping because the harassment was awful -- I got my ass grabbed at the gym, I got called mannish and a gangsta-wannabe, my relatives and friends' parents all voiced their disapproval constantly, and I got shoved around at school by guys.

But now that I dress how a woman "should," even though I get less harassment, I still get shit on and slut-shamed because, gasp, people can tell I have breasts! My experience has taught me that no matter how we as women dress, there will be throngs of assholes who will shame us for it. And the best thing to do is not give a fuck and dress in whatever way makes us feel happy and comfortable.

Same here, ponies and rainbows! Right down to the baggy shirts, sweatshirts, etc.

Because sexual harassment is not about attractiveness, but power- sex offenders search for people who are vulnerable and/or appear to have less social power (such as drunk women, people hiding in big baggy clothes, etc) to prey upon.

I just wanted to point out that the infiltration of these idiots is actually funny, because we're seeing these kick-ass emotional responses from feminsting.com readers, who in the normal crowd, is often very logical and polite. :0)

I did not know I needed to wear a bra to fly. Hmm.

This piece is the strangest story I have heard. Here are my questions:

1)Why is it relevant where this woman works?
2)Why is it that someone complains and the complainer does not have to change her/his behavior? Why must this woman change?
3)Why do we care if the woman was wearing a bra?
4)WOW!
5) This reminds me of the recent Applebee's incident where a breastfeeding mother was asked to cover herself. The request being a direct violation of Kentucky's law.
6) Whores? Tramps? What?!

That's exactly what I meant, ponies and rainbows. With large breasts (or hips or butt for that matter), you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't... I was also very self-conscious about my breasts as a teenager, and still am today, to a certain extent. And it's largely because of situations like this, where a woman's body and appearance is interpreted as an indicator of who she is as a person. ("Girls with big breasts = sluts!") And where a woman is responsible for how other people around her may feel about her body, even when it is not actually "obscene" in the public nudity sense.

"At least she was able to still fly, I've been discriminated against numerous times but nobody cares and it doesn't make the news like this, why? Because I'm a man."

No, Steven, my guess would be that your instances of discrimination (assuming they occurred) didn't make the news because you're not a young blonde woman with big boobs whom the camera can ogle.

Except for the vintage Southwest footage they showed, demonstrating the company's hypocrisy, I thought the piece was actually really gross. They mentioned that she works at Hooters, they made a point of actually *zooming in* on her crotch and especially her breasts -- the piece seemed to purport to be neutral or in support of Kyla Ebbert, but the leering way her images were presented completely undermined that.

Girl deserves better than to be humiliated by some misogynist airline employee and then objectified on the news.

I feel sorry for this poor girl. And to the individual who said when she was a "woman" she would look back on this and laugh or see herself as foolish, screw you. She IS a woman. She's in her 20s! She is not a child who should be punished and she has a legal right to wear whatever the hell she wants! I hope she does file a lawsuit and I hope she wins. I will NEVER fly southwest again. They have a lifetime boycott from me. Freaks.

There was a show about Southwest airlines day to day operations a few years ago. Men were stopped from boarding because they were drunk, forced to buy another ticket because they were fat, and delayed from going on their flight because they had strong body odor. SouthWest has a standard of travel that seems to be administered across both sexes. Ann's quote is incorrect and uninformed.

Well, the second half of that quote was cut off. I went on to say that if said schlubby guy was wearing a tight tank top and pants showing his buttcrack, he wouldn't be asked to change his clothes.

Being asked to step off a plane because you're drunk is quite different then being asked to leave because you happen to be in possession of two legs and a pair of breasts.

Public drunkenness can be dangerous on a flight. Fatness? I'm assuming they wanted them to buy two tickets? A separate and more complicated issue. Strong body odor? I wish I'd been on the flight that banned the BO men. I always seem to be right in the midst of an unshowered soccer team flying between matches.

The point isn't that private businesses can't set basic standards for their customers, it's that this standard is absurd. Subjective and absurd.

ponies and rainbow,

I know how the whole, 'big breasts makes you a slut' thing goes. :(

I want to know what her wearing a bra or working at hooters has anything to do with the story??

I haven't flown on Southwest since I was 12, but I certainly am not going to start up again. I am sure they would have had issues with the tank tops I like to wear while traveling. If I am going to be on a plane for hours, I am going to be comfortable damnit.

I got the feeling that those pictures of her were the "after" pictures - i.e., after she had rearranged her clothes(at which point they let her take the flight). I'm guessing that the tank top was originally pulled down to show half of her breasts and was pulled up to show her hipbones and the top of her pubic area (which would also show off the fact that she had removed her pubic hair, because that area can only be exposed hairlessly if the hair has been removed). I've seen the look on a few teenagers lately, and it's really distracting - not appropriate for anyone at all, men or women. I do agree that it's far more difficult for women to walk the line between sexy and indecent than it is for men, and that sucks, but I still don't like seeing people's exposed pubic areas as I'm walking down the street.

I just went to Southwest's website to see how I can complain. This is their mission statement:

The mission of Southwest Airlines is dedication to the highest quality of Customer Service delivered with a sense of warmth, friendliness, individual pride, and Company Spirit.

HA!!! HA!!!! HA!!! I'd say they really failed their mission with this woman.

Ya know, you might not like seeing people's exposed pubic bones, but I'm a vegetarian and I don't like seeing people eating meat.Should I complain about people eating meat near me? Should I get them kicked out of a restaurant because "I don't like to see it?" No, because me not liking something isn't a valid reason to humiliate another person.

Everyone who is talking about how short her skirt was or wasn't, or if she had her shirt pulled down, is MISSING THE FUCKING POINT! We live in America, and no one can tell us how to dress! Why is this so fucking complicated?

SHe was headed to Tucson, AZ! I live in Phoenix, and it has been around 105 F all this week. And just to stay sane, I often wear less clothing than that woman. Where she was headed, her outfit would have been appropriate attire for the weather.

I hate flying SouthWest anyway. I got hassled last time because of my hair color (blue), but the drunk cad sitting across the aisle from me, loudly making offensive comments about the stewardesses, the female passengers and his ex wife was left alone.

Emmers, your comment is totally speculative and unsubstantiated. You're just guessing how she looked "before" (if those are the "after" pictures) to justify a fully-clothed adult woman being thrown off a plane for just being too damn good-looking. You're brainstorming ways in which she would have DESERVED it, in your mind.

Which leads us right back to another round of slut-shaming.

Get lost, trolls.

@roethke - Hassled? As in, they wanted you to leave the plane? I'm actually interested - I don't have blue hair, and while I can imagine someone with blue hair getting dirty looks for being a nonconformist, I can't imagine a flight attendant actually doing any concrete hassling. And did you ask the flight attendants to do anything about the drunk guy? Because that's probably part of this whole story too - someone may have complained that the woman wasn't wearing enough clothing, so Southwest did something about it, whereas there's not much you can do mid-flight about an obnoxious guy who's not presenting a safety risk. Maybe more conservative people feel more confident asking to have their desires complied with, and so they ask. Squeaky wheels and grease and whatnot.

Oh, god, you did not just call me a troll. Just because I don't agree that anyone should be able to wear whatever they want, whereever they want? And "DESERVED it", like she was raped or something? They asked her to cover up! I do not subscribe to the idea that anyone can ever deserve rape. But I do think that if people dress like idiots (sexy idiots or not), they can "deserve" to be told to change what they're wearing.

Very bad comments thread. If you aren't outraged, you're not a feminist. If you think it's not that important a story, you're a feminist. If you're a man, you're a whiny misogynist. Bad all around.

They show the woman sitting, presumably after she'd "pulled down" her skirt. If you look at her when she's standing, the skirt is unbearably small. I can't say for a fact that her asscheeks were showing, but IF THEY WERE, I'm glad someone mentioned it to her. She wasn't arrested and she wasn't beaten -- she was asked to adjust her clothing before boarding a plane. I don't think this is an outrage.

Oh please. I've seen skirts that short on dozens of girls. Hell, I've seen at least two or three of them today. And their ass cheeks do not hang out. Unless the girl was sitting with her knees three feet apart, she wasn't showing anything indecent at all. My god, what is wrong with people? It's a woman in a skirt. She has legs. Get the hell over it. She certainly didn't deserve to be publically humiliated just because her clothing wasn't demure enough for the sexuality police in the crowd.

I wonder when O'Reilly is going to ask her to appear on his show so he can ogle her. (This reminds me of the Miss NJ slut-shaming fiasco in a way.)

Yes, I'm calling you a troll. And you didn't read my post. I said nothing about rape, and plenty about you adding facts (she was showing her pubic bone?? She was showing the tops of her BREASTS, omg, omg?) to justify her treatment, which I can confidently say that I agree was arbitrary and unfair.

Let me point out your slippery slope argument: Are you saying that as long as this idiot at the airport didn't rape her, everything's ok? Because I'm saying that sexist and misogynistic treatment includes a helluva lot more than the act of rape.

And to be fair, I wouldn't be caught dead in that skirt, but it's not my prerogative to tell her to change her clothes. It is also not the airline's prerogative, which is the whole point of Feministing's coverage of this story.

Ok, this is what I still don't understand. What does the word "revealing" mean when applied to clothing? What does her outfit "reveal" that shouldn't be "revealed?" Her legs? Men and women show their legs. Her arms? Ditto. Her feet? Ditto. Her upper chest area, going to the the tops of the breasts and possibly cleavage? My freaking GRANDMOTHER wears shirts that show that much. So, what is she revealing? Her labia? No. Her full breasts? No. What is it then? What? I really want to know.

DrkEyedCajn - do we differ in our definition of "troll"? Because I think of a troll as someone who posts not to further the discourse, but to hinder it, or to hijack it. I don't believe I was doing that. I was just responding to people who had posted with the opinion that what she was wearing was reasonable. I thought it was quite likely that it had not been reasonable when Southwest intervened. So yes, I was speculating, but is that so bad? Does that make me a troll? And the comment about rape - that was in response to your statement about whether or not she deserved it, with the "deserve" bolded. Because the "she deserved it for what she was wearing/saying/doing" is a common argument people make to let rapists off the hook. I was not saying that Southwest could do anything to her short of raping her. But I DO think that it is quite possible that she was dressed inappropriately, and I do think that it is permissible for a person who is dressed inappropriately in a quasi-public venue to be asked to cover up by the figure of authority in that quasi-public venue. You do not agree, you think people should have more freedom in what they wear. FINE. But don't call me a troll because I disagree with you, or because I speculated about something instead of adhering to strict standards of journalism (which, as a COMMENTER ON A BLOG, not a journalist, I believe I'm allowed to do).

If she was flashing people when sitting down or something, then I could see the company making a comment.

Other than that, it seems outrageous that someone would be kicked off a plane for an outfit (unless it totally reeked or something).

Emmers: Are you SERIOUS? Is that how you make your point? You just fantasized a bunch of facts about the woman and tried to use them to bolster your argument. Geez, you really have problems.

You say she probably had the top pulled down to expose her breasts and then pulled up to show her pubic bone. Do you even wear clothes? That simply would not work. You can't pull a shirt down to show off your boobs AND yank it up to show off your "pubic bone". If someone did that, the shirt would just slide back to it's original place.

While we're on that subject, I have never seen anyone proudly showing off their pubic bone (I wouldn't be surpised if you're just confusing the pubic bone with a different area of the body and mean something else, though).

Back to your accusations against the tank top, the clothes she's wearing look to be of the fairly pricey, preppy variety. Why would she not simply purchase a belly shirt that was also low-cut rather than a long shirt that covered her entire midriff and chest area that needed to be rolled up and down? Your logic is just flawed and bizarre.

And speculating about the state of her PUBIC HAIR? I'm not even going to go there, that's such a weird thing to assume about someone.

To all the other "feminists" who claim she wouldn't dress like this if she didn't work at Hooters: Bull. I regularly wear short skirts like that and small, low-cut tank tops (sometimes without a bra! Gasp, shock, horror!). I would never set foot in a Hooters restaurant, let alone work there.

What's with this notion that if feminists are concerned about *this* issue, they must be ignoring *every other issue*?
It's entirely possible to advocate for this airplane passenger AND domestic violence victims AND SAHMs AND Iraqi women AND a living wage, etc., etc.
The Feministing women (and men) are dedicated to A LOT of important feminist issues; there's plenty of concern to go around. Focusing on this for a minute does not mean we're not also focusing on a whole host of other issues.

If the shirt is tight enough, and the skirt is low enough, you can have the shirt riding at the top of your hips, and several inches between the top of your hips and where the skirt starts. So you've clearly never seen the kind of outfit I was talking about. Swear to god, skirt pulled so low that it rides about where the hip sockets are. It leaves a good six inches or more between the bottom of the shirt and the top of the skirt. When I first saw a girl wearing a skirt like that, it really odded me out, and I realized that the reason was I had NEVER seen a woman wearing a skirt so low before, probably because in order for the skirt to be that low without showing pubic hair, she would have had to have removed her pubic hair. So the skirt is pretty friggin low. I know it's creepy to be thinking about whether or not some random woman on the street has removed her pubic hair - which is EXACTLY WHY I don't think anyone should be wearing their skirt that low. I don't want to be enlighted as to ANYONE's pubic hair removal practices other than my sexual partner or someone I see in a gym bathroom. And I've seen the jacked up shirt/low skirt fashion trend a few times now. So... I was just sharing. It seemed relevant. Clearly not, I'm just supposed to blindly accept her right to dress however she wants, even if the way she's dressing is a manifestation of a completely screwed up gender role system that devalues women as anything other than sexual objects. Oh well.

Did anyone's grandmother ever tell them to wear clean undies in case they were in an accident? While her clothing's perfectly acceptable to me in terms of everyday wear, has anyone ever gone down one of those inflatable slides with bare legs? Not comfy (fairground ride in my case, not plane crash). There's a general assumption that passengers will be ready for the worst (like my 6'5" uncle who has to sit by the emergency door & knows how to operate it).

I don't think this point even entered the mind of the guy who made the original objection, but it's the reason I never wear skirts or heels on flights.

"I'm just supposed to blindly accept her right to dress however she wants, even if the way she's dressing is a manifestation of a completely screwed up gender role system that devalues women as anything other than sexual objects. Oh well."

And how exactly does pulling her off a plane and humiliating her help to deconstruct that gender role system?

You can object to what she's wearing on whatever grounds you please, but actually, she does have the right to dress however she wants. What she's wearing in those photos is not indecent, and you're only speculating that they might have been more inappropriately revealing.

Besides, I would suggest that her outfit is not so much the manifestation of that fucked-up gender role system as are the pearl-clutching reactions it elicited.

ankathry: "Besides, I would suggest that her outfit is not so much the manifestation of that fucked-up gender role system as are the pearl-clutching reactions it elicited."

I'd argue they both are. But fair point.

I so agree with doodoo76. I could not have said it any better. Amen sister

Emmers-
Whether you've seen women dressed like that or not doesn't matter. What matters is that as far as YOU know, as far as ANY of us on this site know, the woman in question wasn't. There are simply no pictures of her dressed in the manner you describe. So if I were you I'd stop airing my grievances against every dress habit you find to be less than acceptable and focus on the issue at hand.

Emmers, you are still the one who has the problem. How is the way she's dressing a manifestation of our screwed up gender roles? An outfit does not mean that someone is trying to make themselves a sex object.

She was wearing a skirt, top, and sweater. You're the person who FANTASIZED a bunch of bizarre facts about her (like whether or not she removed her pubic hair). You're the one who imagined that she had her skirt pulled down to show her pubic bone and her top pulled down to show off her breasts. Frankly, I think you're probably just a pervert or a troll.

NekkidNancy-
I'd say she's a troll. Considering there was no mention of pubic hair or lack of it before she commented, and that there have been several instances of it now, the fact that she mentioned it means that she has diverted us from the main issues at hand, therefore making her a troll.

"We live in America, and no one can tell us how to dress! Why is this so fucking complicated?" - Buggle

Of course people can tell you how to dress in America. In public spaces, there are decency codes and almost all businesses have dress codes, even if they are not always explicitly posted.

Oh, for fuck's sake, I'm not a troll. I made a speculation. Someone jumped down my throat for doing so. So I tried to justify myself. I'm not spouting bullshit about fathers' rights, or women deserving rape, or anything ridiculous like that. I was simply responding to some people that said what she was wearing was fine. I speculated that MAYBE it hadn't been fine, and gave my reasons, and I get people telling me I'm a pervert. I'm a 28 year old woman. I believe in equality and women's rights, but I don't believe that dressing however you want, whereever you want, is an inalienable right. CLEARLY some of you don't agree with me. But I didn't level personal attacks at anyone on this board, and it sucks that some of you found it necessary to attack me.

Emmers, it's not a personal attack. I attacked your first poor argument (she deserved it), and then I attacked your second argument (it's not like she was raped).

I don't even know if it's possible to level a personal attack against you here, since I don't know a single personal fact about you, except now I know that you're a 28 year old woman. Which is irrelevant to the discussion, anyway. I'm a 25 year old woman, for the record.

When people (vehemently) disagree with your arguments, it's not a personal attack. I and the other posters are trying to point out how un-feminist I THINK your argument was. I am not calling you a "bad feminist" or "not feminist enough." I am also not asking you to adhere to "strict standards of journalism," but by adding facts that are not there, you are distorting the discussion. Which is trolling.

Incidentally, it is perfectly OK to voice an opinion contrary to the popular opinion on this board. However, other people here have the same right to disagree with you.

I voice contrary opinions all the time here, when I feel like some stories are attacks on my religion as a whole, which is Catholicism. And yes, other posters tell me to quit being so sensitive, or being a bad feminist, or whatever. But you know what? It's not personal, and I feel good for speaking my mind. I'm ok with people voicing contrary opinions, even when they do so disrespectfully.

So, what I'm trying to say is, you're entitled to your opinion. But, when you air your opinion in a public forum, other posters are equally entitled to disagree with you.

DrkEyedCajn, thanks for the nice response. Disagreeing with me is fine. But I see calling someone a troll as a personal attack. You are, essentially, saying that my ideas are useless and my motivations are false. So isn't that sort of personal? But I know I should grow a tougher skin (I'll work on it!).

Then let me clarify, which I am making a great effort to do respectfully:

I do not think your ideas are useless. But, I disagree that anyone "should" dress a certain way, and that this woman was ASKING FOR a reprimand in her dress. I think that clothing is a personal decision, and in the absence of a universally-enforced and clearly articulated dress code (which, in this case, I think it wasn't), she can dress however she wants, even if you or I or anyone else finds it tacky. I think it is unfair to assume she lacks self-respect because of the way she dresses. That assumption is passing judgment on her character by her outward appearance. Other posters have pointed out that they have dressed much like the woman in the picture, and that they are neither lacking in self-respect nor deserving of public shaming/sexual harassment.

That is why I think your speculation of how she COULD HAVE been dressed, and therefore deserved to be singled out, is particularly counterproductive and un-feminist.

I AM NOT CALLING *YOU* A BAD FEMINIST. I just think that cooking up ways in which she deserved to be reprimanded reinforces the patriarchal idea that women should be ashamed of their bodies and cover them up accordingly. As other posters pointed out, she wasn't flashing sexual organs or breaking any public decency laws. She was wearing a miniskirt, the likes of which I also see all over town in the hot summer months (and, I reiterate, I wouldn't be caught dead in) and which I have seen for sale in every department store in town.

Now, let me go a little further- the reason I won't wear shorts, when I live in one of the southernmost places IN THE COUNTRY, is because of the leering looks I get from creepy men, usually older men. (Yay Deep South.) I can't stand it. I don't wear anything that comes above the knee- in the summer, I live in knee-length skirts and capris. So, I guess I could say I sympathize with the woman in the picture, because she is wearing what I would consider a perfectly normal outfit, and was publicly humiliated for it. Moreover, I think it's awesome that she went public with her gripe against the airline, instead of taking her public shaming like a good girl, and changing her clothes into something less "shocking." (As if folks on the airline had never seen leg before.)

Ann Friedman's comments made absolutely no sense and were completely off the mark. You guys don't get the point.

Ann said that the same thing that happened to this woman on the plane wouldn't have happened to a man. The reason is because society doesn't allow men to wear short skirts and revealing outfits. Men's bodies have been increasingly degraded as something to be hidden from public view. Men don't have the right to express their sexuality by the clothing we wear. I'm a masculist (an advocate for men's rights), so maybe I'm one of the few people who see the illogical and irrational nature of Ann's comment, but the hiding of men's bodies from public view is something that needs to be changed. Men should be allowed to wear skirts and dresses in public. No longer should clothing be gendered...until it is not, the clothing equation will continue to be unfair to men. Why do men have to sweat more in the hot summer by having to wear long shorts and shirts to cover their legs and arms? Why can't we wear short skirts and tank tops? Please consider that. I'm quite a feminist myself, but as a man, I see the inequalities from a male perspective as well. I would hope that you as women would try to do the same.

The CNN report was also far from being biased against the woman, because all the interviews it gave to the public and to Ann herself were skewed towards the woman's defense.

Simply put, the woman on the Southwest flight, who is the same age as me (maybe older if she was born before March 18, 1984), covered up and then was given a Baptist-like lecture on proper attire. This woman got a raw deal, plain and simple. I sometimes wear butt-length shorts. And I know for a fact that nothing will happen to me -- because I'm a man and I am considered covered up. If I was naked or if I was a woman wearing the same attire, then it would be a totally different story.

Yes, I know that men are discriminated against, Steven. But, women are the victims of discrimination the most often, by almost a 3 to 1 margin at the very least. So, Steven, you can take your MRA argument and shove it.

As for the Applebee's incident, this is what happens when we legislate morality instead of doing the right thing. Women should be allowed to breastfeed and people in the nudist industry should be allowed to be in their "birthday clothes" -- in public -- whenever they want to. That is all I'm gonna say about that.

Back to the airline incident, as I mentioned in the first part of my post, this woman is about the same age as me (23) -- which means she should be able to wear whatever she wants. Just because she works at Hooters, which I would go to, that doesn't give Southwest or any other airline the right to discriminiate against her. The airline used her place of employment as an excuse to justify their actions.

Hi Tina, sorry for the delay, I've been pretty busy between my house, work, and girlfriend. And yes, I've been discriminated against, and yes even though I'm a man, I enjoy wearing skirts, and for this I've been blacklisted, discriminated against, removed, or otherwise treated harshly.

Before you go all crazy, I support Womens Rights and places like this, I see how women are treated unfairly and most assuredly such things are needed. Trust me, I know first hand in how my mom has been treated at her jobs, I also know sever others and hear there stories and it boils my blood. But as a guy who wears non-traditional clothing from time to time, I don't have any rights, and when I do get discriminated against I have to fight tooth and nail to be treated equally and with respect. I dare a female to say she had to defend herself in court for talking to a young boy while wearing pants saying she was not a child predator. But I've had to do it because I was talking to some young girls with their parents while wearing a skirt. Some other people didn't like it, complained to management, and I was subsequently asked to leave.

I can't go to a club or bar in a sleeveless shirt, have a bare back, wear short shorts, or show my belly button, I also would have to pay more in a cover charge and for drinks then my gf for the sole reason that I'm a male. I can't wear shorts to court or wear open toed shoes yet females can wear short skirts and open shoes. Same thing if I want to go to a fancy restaurant, I would have to wear a suit and tie with ankle length pants, yet my gf could be pretty skimpily dressed or wear the same thing I was and nothing would be said.

Sure, this lady made the news, I don't know how as whats the big deal really? And thats exactly what happens to me, "You got thrown out for wearing a skirt? To bad" or "You should have worn pants" and when you tell people with authority to correct such discrimination they just laugh at you and say it's your own fault. Mens rights? Such a thing does not exist, I've gone to the ACLU, GPAC, ERC, senators, congressmen, the media, etc, etc, five years running now, any replies? Nope.

While a female can flaunt herself through clothing and even make herself feel special, a male doing the same thing would be considered gay or something worse. I actually own more skirts then my gf and she doesn't care. Sure, I know not all males out there are the greatest thing since sliced bread, but why am I lumped in with them when I'm outside the box when there inside it with all the other so called "normal" males?

So yeah, I've been discriminated against, stolen from, lied too, and otherwise treated unequally for the simple fact that I don't always wear pants.

I'm not saying it's all bad, I've had good luck visiting places outside my home city and not face the same discrimination.

And sure some of you may say that males can do anything they want, but your not me and you don't know what I've had to go through so don't judge my book by it's cover.

And yes, it does happen to men, been there, done that and had it happen, but unless I'm drunk or trying to molest a kid, you'll never see it on the news.

Steven

(I know I opened a can of worms here, it's usually what happens, but the comment that "This would never have happened to a man." just bothered me because it's just not true.)

Steven, thank you for explaining your statement. When you first said you were discriminated against as a man, I thought it was a common argument I hear that straight white males are now feeling "discriminated" against because they're entitled to less privilege than before. I even heard this from a guy at school, who felt "discriminated" against when he didn't get into a top law school, when he had inferior numbers (LSAT). He told me that if he had not been a white male, he would have gotten in. I said, bullshit. And rightfully.

However, you're bringing up some gender identity issues that are very closely aligned with feminism. So thank you for sharing your perspective.

As an aside: You may have guessed I'm a law student. I can assure you I'm not "allowed" to wear skirts in court- I am required to wear them. And I hate it. I despise the fact that I have to show some leg while I'm making my arguments. (I have great legs. Men regularly point this out to me- and I don't mind, as long as I know the guy. So it's not like I'm insecure about my looks.) Also, open-toed shoes, at least in my area's courts, are taboo for women.

"I despise the fact that I have to show some leg while I'm making my arguments. "

When did they pass the must-show-leg law?

It's not law, but at school they've told us that for job interviews and for appearing in court, that suits with skirts, not pants, and close-toed shoes are required. We've been told that the judge may see pants as a sign of disrespect to his/her court, akin to a male lawyer not wearing a tie.

Is there a different professional dress code where you live?

Thank you DrkEyedCajn for your reply, I agree with you on there required instead of allowed rule. Unfortunately a Judge can dictate a decorum for their courtroom and can say what each person can and cannot wear and discriminate based on sex even though discrimination based on sex is illegal.

I have seen some judges allow for a more relaxed dress code but as I said it can vary from judge to judge. One would think such discrimination in courtroom would exist, but it does.

Steven

Steven, I think I can safely say that feminists (myself included) are opposed to the rigid rules of dress men are expected to follow. Men should be able to wear skirts; women should be able to wear cleavage-bearing shirts.
We're about dismantling strict gender norms / roles. We're with ya.

Yes, this post is a bit off-subject (the Hooters waitress kicked off the SW airplane), but the specter of feminism has shouted loud at at least one comment (Steven, I believe), that I just had to weigh in.

I read enough of these posts to see that most feminists seem to think that there is no (or so very little) discrimination against men.

But it's not true - there is discrimination against men particularly in divorce courts and child custody cases where most women seem to think the ideal is to have the man pay child support, alimony and turn over the home to the woman. And unfortunately for men (and the kids), that is often true and men get taken to the cleaners, instead of having a fair split.

Read "The Liberated Man," "The Myth of Male Power" and/or "Why Men Are The Way They Are" by Warren Farrell (the only man ever to have been elected three times to the board of directors of N.O.W. in New York city) and find out how men get shafted in so many ways in our society.

For instance, in the 25 worst jobs rated by physical risk, almost all are exclusively performed by men. Virtually all war casualties are men. In the justice system, men are typically sentenced to harsher terms than women for the same crimes.

Unfortunately most feminist groups - men's groups, too - continue to foster sexism, the very thing they say they want to defeat.

There will always be gender differences, and we'll always have to deal with them. But doing it by calling names, belittling people and complaining do nothing to further anyone's cause.

"When a concern is brought to our employees' attention, we address that situation directly with the customer(s) involved in a discreet and professional matter. Fortunately, as an airline that carries approximately 96 million customers a year, those situations are extremely rare."

This quote from an NBC article (http://www.nbc6.net/news/14090043/detail.html) made me wonder how often such requests are made and women discreetly comply. Are these two cases news because they are the only two, or because these women spoke up? Even if they only spoke up because they wanted their 15 min of fame, that takes courage, no?