orbitmic

HilFly

Tobias, if you forwent food to allow me to eat, I would thank you profusely, chow down, and offer to share it with you. But I'd take the big half!

I'd also thank you if you held a door open for me or stood up for me on a train. I would probably kiss you if you offered to put my bag in the overhead for me when I was struggling to reach. I am more than happy to be on the receiving end of chivalry.

In turn, I would forgo food or stand up for someone in greater need than I.

IAN-UK

Not before I've had a say

Women and children first was a dictum adopted in situations where physical struggle was likely to govern which lives were to be saved in the event of a disaster. Think Titanic, and other vessels where life-boat capacity was significantly below passenger capacity - meaning struggle could define chances of survival.

To cut and paste an out-dated code of conduct on the distribution of Twix on a couple of hours' delay is silly. It veers between charmingly anachronistic and grossly offensive.

By all means refuse your allocation, pass it on to others: but to adopt formally a system of distribution based on gender is bonkers.

Better to trust to common sense, make it clear that supplies are limited ..... and start distribution from the back of the aircraft

orbitmic

Well, for the record, I was not trying to prevent you from having your say, quite the contrary - it is more about separating the two discussions, so I still hope that this will be split into a separate one! My own preference is to use plastic glasses to be able to serve everyone a small drink. A small bottle of water will make 3 plastic glasses, a 330ml can will make 2, etc. I'm pretty sure that by sharing in such a way (and complementing by a carton of juice or a large bottle of water from C if need be) there would be enough to give everyone in Y something, even if they won't get their full cherished bottle/can.

I do agree that "women first" is anachronistic and a bit offensive as a stated policy. To clarify, I'd always personally let ladies get served before me, but that is a personal choice and a personal conception of what is right and which I hope that they would accept (we all remember a recent threads about some people being rather unimpressed that some of us would stand up for them in the bus on the basis of their age or gender). I do not expect someone else making that choice either for them or for me on anything else than a basis of need, which precisely gender does not predict. I would like/expect people to be polite and respect one another by not abusing a situation and prioritising people who are in greater need than them, but in fact, a caricatural priority system based on gender makes such politeness and mutual respect impossible (it's not politeness if it's "forced")

It's a bit like charity. I'm all in favour of generosity and I give money to multiple charities but I don't expect BA to decide for me whether that goes to Comic Relief or any other worthwhile organisation based on their own conception of their own preferred allocation. I'd rather be the one deciding to do the right thing, when, to whom, and whether it is a year when I can give a little bit more or one when my own circumstances make things harder and make me give a little bit less. It's just the same with drinks prioritisation - it's not for the captain to decide whether an 85 year old man, a middle aged guy shaking with high fever, or a 30 year old lady in good health is in greater need of a drink, and his/her attempt to prioritise blindly from the cockpit on the basis of as weak a criterion as gender will almost invariably lead to suboptimal prioritisation.

mario

So for sake of argument, let's say the captain decided that some other group, ethnic minority or whatever should be fed first. Should we all just be thankful and focus on the"good deed"?

That person was out of line in this day and age. Full stop.

scottishpoet

I do not believe this "ladies first" is a "stated policy"

The captain had to decide how to prioritise as there is not enough BoB for everyone, especially for food. Drinks less of a problem as you can raid the CE drinks trolleys, but everyone may not get their first choice.

I stated how this captain chose to do it. I am sorry if his decision offended people or felt discriminatory to others. I am sure the captain did it with the best intentions

I am sure if he had said BA Gold first, then silver, then bronze then blue, or boarding group 1 then 2 then 3 then 4 it would also have created some controversy.

Sometimes you are stuck between a rock and a hard place and just try to do your best in the circumstances you find yourself,

callum9999

I don't envisage that would cause any issues as they aren't likely to know you're letting them go first because of their genitalia - I would just assume you're being polite!

I don't really have issues with people discriminating against others in their mind (I still think it's unpleasant and anachronistic but it's ultimately completely harmless in the scenarios you've said you'll use it), as you point out, it's very different if a business is doing it.

mario

How about "we'll be coming through the cabin with a limited supply of food and drinks. If you can pass on food that would be appreciated as w have limited supplies and there are children and other passengers who may need it".

At the end of the day, this is BAs fault for not having thought this scenario through and implement an actual policy

Tobias-UK

People seem intent in wanting to draw me in to an argument. I was not the captain, I am not the captain's spokesperson so let's please reread my offending post that appears to have got someone's knickers-in-a-twist (I suppose I'm not allowed to say that these days either ):

This is the last I will comment on the subject.

CCayley

I really don't understand all this debate about who should be first in the pecking order - Golds, women, the elderly etc. because there is a perfectly obvious solution. The situation is merely an example of the problem of scarcity - too many people want too little food and drink - and that is exactly the type of problem that the forces of demand and supply are there to resolve. There is no need for the Captain, or any other self-appointed Leader of the People, to impose their own moral judgment. The crew should simply increase the price of the BOB goods on offer until what is demanded equates with what is available. This approach also has the side advantage of benefitting IAG shareholders.

P.S. If anyone thinks my suggestion is a little inhumane, I apologise - Just felt an overwhelming urge to channel my inner Thatcher today...

hsmall

Sorry but good manners is not giving an ordinary female preferential treatment over her male equivalent because of her gender. I understand why many females would feel insulted by this.

Ldnn1

The price of the goods is irrelevant here. This thread is about (or was originally about) crew being able to offer some basic refreshments free of charge during an extended delay onboard, as is required under EU261.

callum9999

Oh I've read your posts very well thank you very much. The reason you keep getting "drawn into an argument" is because you continually claim it's not discrimination to favour one sex above the other. Utterly nonsensical.

​​​​​ The fact you're now equating equality with political correctness speaks volumes!

chance88088

His intentions don't matter. It's unfortunate that people think there is no harm caused when people have good intentions. The rest of us get to live with the fact that they are wrong.

chance88088

Sexist behaviour is not a good deed.