|
Other than one example that I myself posted can you please cite one person here that says that this insults anyone? Perhaps you can tell me when I said that the 10% that didn't like it or were against it said that they were "insulted" by it? BTW, as it seems that you need it spelled out, of the 80% that like it, half thing flight attendant is demeaning and servile. A Steward/ess implies far more knowledge and competancy than any sort of attendant. IYV, it seems that you are really fighting to find an agenda to be against this proposal, but you keep coming up short, your rebel flag example which you keep ging is totally specious as it really does not relate to this subject in any substantive way whatsoever.
|
Originally Posted by skylady
(Post 8166756)
Call us anything you want, just don't call us ma'am.!:mad:
I have never minded being refered to a "Ma'am" (Indeed that is the way that we are supposeed to address Her Majesty the Queen and if it's good enough for her I'll cope thanks very much) and I would add that I do not mind most of what is said , the way that it is said is what draws or delivers the sting. In the past I have been referred to as Madam, Stewardess, Ms (pronounced Mizz which is a term I loathe - but that's me I am Mrs Galore as I married Mr Galore but that's just the Granny Clampett in me), You (that I really dislike) and not so long ago in a rather heated dispute with someone who considered himself entitled to an upgrade (along with his wife) as a f***ing old cow. This I objected to but told him that I was a Grade A, Good Housekeeping Approved, Tried and Tested bltch and that if he did not go to his seats immediately there would be trouble. Ill manners and foul mouths apart I really have no problem with any of the terms. We do not refer to our crew as Stewards and Stewardesses since I think that the Powers That Be decreed that because in this day and age it sounds a bit menial. Since they manage to get plenty else wrong I offer you this for what it is worth. The way someone asks or addresses you does not bother me or most of my colleagues, how they address you does. |
Originally Posted by PUCCI GALORE
(Post 8167442)
...and not so long ago in a rather heated dispute with someone who considered himself entitled to an upgrade (along with his wife) as a f***ing old cow. This I objected to but told him that I was a Grade A, Good Housekeeping Approved, Tried and Tested bltch and that if he did not go to his seats immediately there would be trouble.
|
Ancedote: I actually had a conversation about this once with a friend who is a flight attendant (well, she was then, has since gone to a different career). She said that she hated the word stewardess because often times it was used to her by guys who also still felt it was appropriate to touch her and hit on her while she did her job. So perhaps it's not anything inherently offensive about the word itself, but rather more with the type of person who is likely to use it.
(Incidentally, simply dismissing an analogy as specious or absurd isn't really a way to prove your point. If it's so absurd, tell us why. I submit that the analogy is apt because both that flag and the word stewardess used to have a meaning...to some people, they both mean something else today. And to those people, it can be offensive.) I also note that you didn't share your scientific method for conducting the survey. Anyway, I suspect that people will continue to address other persons in society as they see fit and that they will continue to deal with the consequences, good or bad. |
Originally Posted by JT8D-217
(Post 8149305)
You have convinced me: from now on, let's all agree to call African-Americans "Negros" again.It's the correct term for the race, isn't it?
|
Uhh, maybe because I said that is WASN'T Scientific?
Also, we already covered the few unfortunate years in the 70's where the whole "sex kitten" image was used. I think that this thread and its comments have proven that the majority see Stewrad/ess as more professional than FA and that most look upon the word as a classier word, which harkens back to a better time for the industry and the people involved in it. |
Way back in the days of DC-3s on US domestic flights, there was just one stewardess on the aircraft who was always known to the pilots as "The Stew".
And for those who think this was somehow demeaning, the guys up front, at the time invariably led by an-ex WW2 Air Force captain, always had the utmost of respect for the The Stew's capabilities, way beyond cabin service but extending to sorting the mail en-route, handling air-sick passengers as the old DC-3 rolled along, and rushing round at the airport to get them away on time. Which was reciprocated by The Stew to the pilots. All three regarded themselves jointly as The Aircrew. |
Originally Posted by skylady
(Post 8166756)
Call us anything you want, just don't call us ma'am.!:mad:
ma'am(mm) n. Used as a form of polite address for a woman: Will that be cash or charge, ma'am? (my emphasis) http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ma'am |
In the UK, ma'am is a form of address that implies deference to the person being addressed. It is inappropriate for a customer to sir or ma'am a person who is providing service. I know, though, the terms are used differently in the USA.
Why not go with Pucci's suggestion of addressing cabin crew by name? It's what I do and it seems to work OK. And if you don't know their name, you can just say "excuse me" and even if it attracts the attention of more than one person, your posture and/or the nature of your subsequent comments will probably clear up any ambiguity. |
Originally Posted by Mr H
(Post 8168682)
...Why not go with Pucci's suggestion of addressing cabin crew by name? It's what I do and it seems to work OK. And if you don't know their name, you can just say "excuse me" and even if it attracts the attention of more than one person, your posture and/or the nature of your subsequent comments will probably clear up any ambiguity.
"Sir" and "ma'am" are polite, respectful ways of addressing adults in the USA. They are inapproriate only where a person has a formal title, such as "Rev.", "Sister", "Dr.", "General", etc. |
Originally Posted by dhuey
(Post 8168637)
You think that "ma'am" is an inappropriate way to address a woman? Why?
ma'am(mm) n. Used as a form of polite address for a woman: Will that be cash or charge, ma'am? (my emphasis) http://www.thefreedictionary.com/ma'am |
Originally Posted by PUCCI GALORE
(Post 8167442)
The way someone asks or addresses you does not bother me or most of my colleagues, how they address you does.
Often, in my experience, one of the best ways to get the measure of a person's character is by observing their dealings with people in the service industry. If someone is a "kiss up, kick down" type it will often show in the way that they address FAs, waitresses, cashiers, secretaries, etc. It is a sad and pathetic man who makes himself feel important by belittling others. In general, I would not purposefully address someone with a title that they found offensive. I use "steward/stewardess" by default, but if I knew that a particular FA found the term demeaning, I would not address her so. However, I wouldn't cease general use of the term based on the feelings of a particular person. |
Originally Posted by hfly
(Post 8146452)
I like retro words, I also have never understood why the terms Steward and Stewardess were eliminated by most peoples lexicons over the last 30 years, to be replaced by "flight attendant" or "cabin crew". Yes I know its gender neutral, however we do not call waiters or waitreses, waitpersons, waitroids or restaurant crew.
Therefore over the last year or so I have been doing my own real word research by either calling Stewards or Stewardesses by these names or when speaking with them in the galley ask them what they think of the term. Truth be told, I would estimate that over 80% of female flight crew like the word stewardess as either 1) They just like it better than other words 2) Older flight crew, will tell me things like "that's what I was when I was hired, and as the industry has become worse, we have been depersonalized with these new terms". 3) Some feel that it brings "class" and harkens back to a more elegant time for the industry. 4) The only people that still regularly use these terms are generally older passengers that have much more respect for them as they to come from another era. 10% are against the word and another 10% don't really care. I tend to find that Stewards are more neutral on this matter than Stewardesses. In any case many tell me that they are often reffered to as "Purser' even though it is NOT there position (as on many carriers it doesn't exist) and in any case Purser is supposed to also be gender neutral, but much of the flying public only uses the term when speaking to males! Now here is a really crazy idea, both as an experiment, but also to gauge the influence of FT on the broader flying world. Imagine if a large proportion of FT members were to start using these expressions regularly on every flight? Would it catch on in wider society? I wonder, I really do. If anything it would be an interesting experiment. What does everyone think?? My vote: BRING EM BACK!! (And this is from someone who has been doing the job for around 20 years!) In fact at UA, our department code is still "SW". Guess what that stands for.....not Southwest! Nice post OP ^ |
Originally Posted by ClipperClub
(Post 8169952)
Im a UA flight attendant (male) and would actually RATHER be called STEWARD than 'flight attendant'. ...
|
Originally Posted by hfly
(Post 8167768)
I think that this thread and its comments have proven that the majority see Stewrad/ess as more professional than FA and that most look upon the word as a classier word...
As a former FA, yes, I was insulted by someone calling me stewardess, because 99% of the time they meant it to be belittling. (Same scientific method you've been using!) |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 8:15 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.