5 thoughts on “Southwest Airlines removes L-word actress

  1. This seems unfair. I don’t see that Southwest keeps changing its story, either from the article you linked or from the two Southwest releases, http://www.swamedia.com/releases/9063e4d3-dabc-4ab2-9016-fa4c19895894 and http://www.swamedia.com/releases/9b8360a2-d68a-4012-b511-0a9579b24b7d. It looks to me exactly like what you’d expect it to look like if Southwest was doing its due diligence — reports getting updated as Southwest looks into things.

    Both those two links and virtually everything that Hailey has said suggests that, for some reason, other passengers complained and that, when a Southwest employee spoke with Hailey about that, Hailey got furious, and when she got furious, she used offensive language.

    If that’s so, then it is dissembling to say that she was kicked off the plane for a same-sex kiss. All the evidence that I’ve seen suggests that she was kicked off the plane for being loud and unruly. That’s not the same thing.

    It is, of course, possible that the initial conversation should not have happened, that the initial conversation was predicated upon another passenger’s complaint about a rather mundane same-sex kiss. That isn’t clear – but in any case, that’s a different story. She’s not complaining that Southwest’s people talked to her. She’s complaining she was kicked off. Unless significantly different evidence comes out, it seems to me that she’s just being petulant.

  2. Anonymous, when you say “she was kicked off the plane for being loud and unruly,” that also leaves out important information. She was kicked off for kissing her girlfriend and getting angry because she felt she was being discriminated against for her sexual orientation. She wrote: “I didn’t realize a small peck on the lips is regarded as excessive and never once did your stewardess mention other passengers.” If she was asked not to give her partner a small peck on the lips, she was 100% justified in responding angrily.

  3. Jennifer,

    Thanks for pushing me – it helped me reflect more on this. Three thoughts: First, I still don’t see the rush to judgment here. Why not “She _claims_ she was kicked of for kissing her girlfriend and getting angry because she felt she was being discriminated against for her sexual orientation”? Maybe this situation will always remain a matter of credibility. So far, though, it has only been a day. Why not wait to see if witnesses come forward, etc.?

    Second, let’s assume that she was a regular passenger who gave her partner a rather innocuous peck and that she was then asked to “Cool it.” I agree that she would be justified in her anger, and I also agree that there would be some justified response. However, I don’t think that such discrimination would be a blank check for unlimited anger and unlimited response. (I think it would probably justify some of both and excuse some more of both – but that’s a tentative thought.) Was _this_ anger/response justified? That it seems to me is an open question, one which requires more moral thinking as well as more facts regarding just how the request was posed and what the response was. So here, again, I don’t think we’ve got yet anywhere near enough of a story (even just from Hailey) to know what to say.

    Third, assume that we can answer those questions, and assume that she was kicked off for a justified response in anger to the “Cool it” request. Still in that case it seems to me that she’d be better off saying that than saying she was kicked off for the kiss. Saying “I was kicked off for the kiss” seems elliptical in a misleading way — and one which is almost certain to backfire (as this one is). Now it is Hailey who is having to change her story (if this is how things actually play out) from “I was kicked off for kissing” to “Oh yeah, I did say all that stuff in front of a 9 year old and _that_ was when they said, ‘When we land, you’re done lady.'”

  4. @”Anonymous”

    Plainly you didn’t read the previous post containing this line: “In a nation with the racial history of the United States I am baffled by the idea that non-racism would be the presumption and that it is racial bias which must be proved beyond reasonable doubt.” Replace “racism” with “homophobia,” and you’ll understand why I consider your comments disingenuous at best.

Comments are closed.