@zoosermom I realize anyone can sit in them. My point was that you said handicapped folks got on the bus, and she should have to move at that point. Her pulling the "black"card is offensive to me, and I’m Black! Its not inappropriate to ask if you are in handicapped seating , and they need a seat.
For whatever reason, the handicapped people on that bus won’t ask her and will move further back, even the woman who needs to get off quickly. It is a problem for them, but they simply will not ask her. The prior bus driver did a couple of times ask her why she couldn’t move further back out of the handicapped seats and pre-empt the annoyance and she told him (she was not rude) that it was not appropriate for him to ask her to move back. The real issue comes when all of the other seats are filled because she really doesn’t want a man sitting there. She politely refuses until pushed and then asks someone to switch with her, but most men will get off rather than press her on it, and there is a driver at night who will tell passengers that there are no seats left when the seat next to her is the only one because he doesn’t want to deal.
I would be heated if I rode that bus, granted Im a woman, but I would dare her not to scoot over, if I needed a seat!
She will remove her bags from the empty seat for a woman after determining that there aren’t any (or many) other seats available. If asked when the bus is mostly empty she will ask the person to choose a different seat and most do because let’s face it, who wants to have a fight at 6:30 in the morning?
Sorry, I would purposely sit there! Her sense of entitlement is beyond the pale.
If a woman like her would refuse to let a handicapped person sit in the seat designated for such riders on a Metro bus, she would be dealing with Metro transit police, and not the driver (granted, the driver is the one who has the authority to call them). I am almost positive there is an RCW addressing that…
I may be explaining this badly. She is a very nice person and explains why for religious reasons she prefers not to be in such close physical proximity to non-Muslims and why it is very much against her faith to sit up against a man. She is very sincere and wears a full abaya.and head cover. I don’t think she is being entitled, but maybe a little inflexible in the situation. Thankfully it has only happened that I have seen 3 or 4 times.
She may be really nice, but public transportation does not have to accommodate her, other than providing a seat. Unless there is some law there I am not aware of. It is not acceptable for her to incovenience others because she doesnt want to sit next to non-Muslims. If she is so strict in her beliefs then she should live in a majority muslim country. If I traveled to the middle east then I would have to adapt to some of their customs.
No you’re right, of course. I just didn’t want to leave the impression that she is awful. she isn’t and it is mostly not too big of a problem. But sometimes it is. However, there are people who are equally rude in other ways like eating stinky breakfast sandwiches or blasting their music or talking loudly on their phones.
lmao, you are right! I abhor loud talkers! I would probably rather deal with her, than someone talking on the cell phone!
Interesting difference. For Haredi Jews, I think the main issue is touching someone of the opposite gender that is not a spouse, but sitting next to people of another religion is not an issue. Devout Muslims have similar restrictions on being physically close to the opposite gender besides a spouse, but I have not heard that sitting next to non-Muslims is a problem. For the record, the comment on sitting on the seat where someone on her menstrual cycle was sitting isn’t accurate either.The marital purity laws are more complex than that.
These people also represent a small fraction of two major world religions. A Muslim friend gives me a big bear hug when I see him. This is probably more common- and people getting along doesn’t tend to make the news.However, there are a lot of different people with different religions and ideas all occupying the same planes, busses, and the line where one crosses over into someone else’s personal space and beliefs can be blurred. Still, we need to find some way to coexist.
For those of you who remember.
@VeryHappy IMHO many genuinely held religious proscriptions are deeply sexist and misogynist.
Well no, there isn’t. I am a secular humanist westerner. I do not admire everything about the intellectual heritage I spring from, but I do think that in some areas it is clearly more beneficial for human beings and for women in particular. This does not mean that I have no imagination. Of COURSE I can understand their world view and their religious precepts and understand that within their world-- medieval, sexist, and misogynist as it is, but they are far, far from the only ones who embrace that sort of thing–they are considered perfectly correct. Honestly, I’ve read enough literature and non-fiction about the various strains of Orthodox Judaism to have a decent idea of what’s going on. That doesn’t mean I have to share their views or even respect their views, especially when their views put ME down. I respect their right to HAVE those beliefs, of course, but I don’t have to go along with their attempts to limit my personal freedom. Especially when respected rabbinic authorities say it isn’t a problem. If the man wants to move to a seat next to another man, that’s fine with me. In fact, I would welcome it, because I don’t want to sit next to him at this point.
"Would I change seats if requested? Yes, if I reasonably could, and not because I won’t sit next to someone of the opposite gender. Basically, because this concept isn’t about me, or women, but an extention of a person’s personal commitment to their own beliefs. "
Just because someone has personal commitment to their beliefs doesn’t mean I necessarily to have to be impressed by it. The Tsaernaev brothers and Mohammed Atta had personal commitments to their beliefs too.
“The issue, IMHO, is with the religious travellers and the airlines that sell them tickets. The secular person who buys a ticket has as much right to keep it as anyone else. If someone buys a ticket on a secular airline, then one needs to know that the airline will not necessarily accommodate them. However, it is possible to ask a customer to change seats, and that customer can decide to do so or not. That alone doesn’t have to be seen as offensive. Standing in the isle refusing to sit is, and disruptive passengers need to be dealt with accordingly no matter what their reasons are.”
You still don’t get it. These men are not finding other people and saying - do you mind if I switch with you. They are standing there, refusing to sit down and let the plane take off, until the WOMAN moves.
They didn’t just decide the moment they boarded the flight that they were Orthodox and unable to sit next to women. They KNEW that, but instead of buying an extra seat as a buffer, etc. they stand there and refuse to budge. It is every obnoxious Jewish stereotype come to life - arrogant, entitled.
“Sometimes I think the press can’t resist an opportunity to present this topic in a negative light and expose a foreign concept to modern secular interpretation such as “sexist”, “mysogynist” and more”
I don’t care if it’s “sexist and misogynist” " or whether it is driven by believing women are such superior creatures that they cannot be sat next to. The bottom line is - it’s not my problem to “solve.”
If this is a huge issue for certain airlines…perhaps they should dedicate a section of each plane…women only…men only. How about at the very back where this would likely be easy to do, because no one chooses those seats otherwise.
“It is every obnoxious Jewish stereotype come to life - arrogant, entitled”
Is this where we are today, that a statement like this is acceptable?
The danger that I mentioned- of framing others through our own western/secular perspective isn’t that we can’t be accurate, or have our own opinions. We can. The danger is that by dismissing other people’s feelings and ideas, we then develop the sense of superiority- the right to invalidate others. The irony is that people are also calling for tolerance. Tollerance doesn’t mean tolerating bad behavior, however, it could mean making an attempt to understand cultures that think differently and to be civil in the face of disagreement.
Standing in the ailes is disruptive and that behavior should not be tolerated. The idea of tolerance would be to attempt to pre-empt disruptive behavior by looking into solutions before booking customers. It’s not your problem to solve. Disruptive passengers are responsible for their own behavior and the airline is responsible for the safety/rights/comfort of all passengers. So are there possible solutions?
It’s a big world out there and there are different ideas and perspectives. It is impossible for everyone to agree. Can we be civil? Can we resist stereotyping and insulting others?
@Pennylane2011, if I were asked to move by someone for “religious” reasons, I would be civil. I would feel perfectly free to debate the subject, though, and tell him that if he wishes to sit next to a man, then he had better move. After that, they would probably want to move. Not only is the unknown harlot not suitably covered up, but she is unbecomingly vocal, too!
In the case of a man standing in the aisle and refusing to sit down, I would suggest that security be called and he be removed from the plane, as anyone else exhibiting such behavior would be.
I’m wondering why this kind of thing seems to be reported only with male travelers. Well, except in the case of zoosermom’s Muslim woman. There are obvious conclusions one could draw…
ETA: I have no problem with airlines allowing people to request a seatmate of a certain gender. On flights that have a predicted high percentage of such travelers, it would make sense for them to reserve a couple rows in the back for this purpose.