sany2

At least for me, it was entertaining for me too to see what my fellow country men (and I would say especially women) got their panties in a bundle over.

Maybe its because I am a northerner, but I have not met many people who were outraged over the nipple slip.

Crampedin13A

Perhaps this situation explains BA's CW seating plan

ozweepay

Ill-mannered brat? How do you figure?

Ok, let's take "kid" out of the equation altogether. Does my seatmate have to comply with my moral code (I'm 40)? I admit, my tolerances are quite high, but it IS possible to offend me. Are there absolutely no limits to what people can view when seated next to me?

I know in other threads you've agreed that actions, smells, and sounds can be rude and inconsiderate. But you're drawing the line at sight? If I don't like what you're doing, I can avert my eyes, you're saying?

If a nun is seated next to a guy watching porn, he's not being rude? Nope, according to your logic it's she who's being rude by noticing what he's watching! Brilliant.

J-M

Because he was snooping at someone else's laptop intentionally. It's rude no matter the age of the passenger doing this.

You're right on. There shouldn't be any limits. Why should your moral code be the deciding factor? What if I decide that someone should not watch a religious movie, or perhaps that they should not be reading a gay magazine because I don't care for those things? What if I don't like your movie for whatever reason? Should I be able to demand you turn it off?


Why can't you avert your eyes? Why is it necessary for you to observe someone's laptop? It's rude for you to even look over in the first place.

She's not being rude by noticing (happening to glance or whatever)... but why should the watcher have to stop? Surely if she's that offended, she would not continue to look at it...

SPN Lifer

@:-) If sexually explicit material is open to public view in a nearby seat, anyone objecting should promptly notify a flight attendant. @:-)

Under U.S. law, such depictions constitute a sexually harassing "hostile work environment," and the flight attendant would be fully within his rights to order it removed from public view.

As to the child, "A cat may look at a king."

The "staring is rude" folks seem to have forgotten that this etiquette only refers to other people, not newspapers, magazines, or videos.

If something is confidential or not intended for others to view, it shouldn't be placed in their line of sight, "forcing" observers to limit their field of vision or avert their gaze. That is significantly more rude than reading or watching something in plain view.

Remember, when in a closed, confined space, with a 150 degree field of vision, this region may take up 20% of the available view, and most people would rather not stare straight ahead for hours on end at a seatback. A significant proportion of people will read a seatmate's computer or periodicals. Don't like it? Get a privacy filter, fold your paper, or hold the magazine half closed.

Indeed, we even have a legal principle acknowledging this right to stare at things visible to the public, known as the "Plain View Doctrine."

PTravel

Read post #43.

That's right -- there are absolutely no limits. Your seatmate can look at what he/she wants, read what he/she wants and think what he/she wants. Want to read Playboy? Feel free. Want to memorize Mein Kampf? Go for it. Want to view "Andalusian Dog" on your laptop? Well, hello, Dali!

If your seatmate doesn't like it, he doesn't have to look.

And, to be clear, I'm talking about reading and laptop viewing. It's not okay to do something that's illegal, e.g. . . . I'm having trouble coming up with a good euphemism . . . okay, like Elaine's date did on the Seinfeld episdoe ("It was out?" "It was out!")

That's what I'm saying. Now, bear in mind that this thread was about a kid who was seated behind someone who was watching soft porn and who, obviously, had to make an affirmative effort to see the laptop in front of him. However, when it comes to reading, or the laptop equivalent of viewing, as long as headphones are used and no one is shoving their reading material in front of someone else's face, then as far as I'm concerned, the sky's pretty much the limit.

Again, we weren't talking about someone seated next to someone else. However, by your logic, if my wife is reading a copy of Cosmopolitan while seated next to a religious Muslim, she is being rude. We've just done a long thread in Omni about Jews for Jesus -- the consensus of virtually every Jew who posted in that thread is that J4J is offensive and insulting. Would it be rude for someone to read a tract about "Yeshua" while seated next to me? I'm offended by gangsta rap -- that rules out some videos I've seen on IFE.

You see where this leads, don't you? Everyone is offended by something, and no one has the right to force offense on someone else. However, we're not talking about screaming out obscenities, conducting live animal sacrifices in the aisle, or streaking through first class. We're talking about reading and viewing on laptops -- the material is held in front of the reader/viewer and can't be viewed by anyone else unless they want to view it. I can't avoid the miasma of jasmine from the heavy perfume wearer. However, I can escape my view of the new 50 cent video on my neighbor's laptop by simply minding my own business.

Of course, none of this has anything to do with this thread. The OP in this thread wrote about a brat who was peering over the seat to see what was on the laptop of the person in front of him. That's rude. And parents are responsible to make sure that their kids don't act rude in public.

PTravel

And any FA who tells me that I can't watch a PG-13 or R rated movie on my laptop is going to get a written complaint to airline and an immediate demand to speak with the purser.

Utter nonsense. What customers do does not constitue a hostile work environment.

I have no idea what this means. If you think it's not rude for your kid to peer over my seat and stare at what I'm doing, then you're the one who's going to have an unpleasant conversation with the FA.

You can't be serious. Do you really read your seatmate's magazine while he's reading it? Memorize the business memos that your seatmate is studying? You have a very strange definition of etiquette.

So you do think it's okay to read someone else's magazine. Interesting.

Not in my experience. I've never, not once, read someone else's material or watched what they were doing on their computer. I've also never had anyone do that to me.

The "plain view" doctrine applies to use of evidence seized by the police in criminal matters and has absolutely nothing to do with rude and nosy 10-year olds leaning over seats to spy on strangers. Sorry, but there's a social term of art for reading other people's material (and watching other people's computer screens): BUSYBODY.

And it's rude.

SPN Lifer

Remind me not to refer you any labor law matters.

PTravel

I'm an IP lawyer, so I'm not worried. However, if you think I'm wrong, then show me one airline that bans anything not rated G.

You didn't answer my questions, though.

Do you really read your seatmate's material?

Do you really think it's not rude for a kid to peer over the seat in front of him and watch a stranger's laptop?

krug

Exactly. If this seriously was full on softcore porn, then that's one thing.

But you may simply have caught a few glimpses of a movie which had a sexual undercurrent.

I was watching a French movie on my laptop once, and suddenly there was some full frontal nudity and then a highly charged homoerotic sex scene.

It lasted about five minutes; I guess if you had seen my scren then you may have thought I was watching softcore porn. And in such a situation I would have had a duty to ensure my screen was not easily visible to those who might have been offended.

But in the situation you refer to, it's just likely the kid would have had a great story to tell his friends when he went back to school.

10 o 14 year olds not little kids - I think back to my experiences at that age and I was far more worldly than probably my parents ever considered. We all get exposed to this sort of thing and I would put it down to a life experience.

Its only because there is a taboo on sex and a prudish attitude towards it that gives society this need to be shocked about sex; treat it as the most normal thing in the world, and move on.

there was probably an episode of everybody Loves Raymond on to take your mind of sex for a while!!

Interesting in the context of this article:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060401/...he_porn_divide

NEW YORK - The industry's VIPs mingle at political galas and Super Bowl parties. Their product is available on cell phones, podcasts, and particularly the Internet — there it's an attraction like no other, patronized by tens of millions of Americans.

It's pornography. And if you're a consumer, John Harmer thinks you're damaging your brain.

Harmer is part of a cadre of anti-porn activists seeking new tactics to fight an unprecedented deluge of porn which they see as wrecking countless marriages and warping human sexuality.

dizzy

I really couldn't care less. But if you did, you could always use those laptop privacy screens.

tkey75

It seems the kid was just being a kid. I'm sure if the computer screen was displaying the spreadsheet the guy was working on, the kid would be totally uninterested and back in his seat minding his own business. But as a 10 year old watching his (hopefully, likely) first lesbian sex scene he was the proverbial kid in a candy store. I like the idea from a previous post that there'd be something wrong if he wasn't checking it out, however rude it is to do, and I do think it is rude, but hey we all saw our first porn at one time and looked on totally agape thinking DAAAAMN!!! Nothing could have torn me away at that time...except for my mom in the seat next to me waking up and finding out what I've ben doing.

And as for the guy watching the porn, he 's just doing what dirty guys do - watching porn - however inappropriate the situation is. It'd really depend on the situation as to wether or not I'd say something. In this situation I likely would just because of the kid. Otherwise I'd mind my own business.

As for a guy having a wank in the seat next to me...oooh boy. I'd be sure and call this guy out and make a scene so as to humiliate him. That's not just unacceptable. That's f***ed up. He'd never be doing that again.

dizzy

I must have missed that one...who said it?

roadkit

What was it? An episode of the HBO miniseries "Rome"?

BOH

Was the pax name "Eric"?