UA Passenger is given new boarding pass as Pakistani Monks "did not want to sit next to a woman"

Mary Campos was leaving California on a plane bound for Houston when a member of the gate staff reportedly informed her that her pre-booked seat had been changed. "I don’t know how to tell you this," he said. He then explained that due to the two passengers’ "cultural beliefs", they could not sit next to or talk to a woman.

In a letter to United Airlines, she wrote: "What if I were handicapped or transgender? What if your entire crew were female? Any belief that prevents individuals from interacting with females should not travel on commercial aircraft." The airline responded to say they would look into the matter. In a statement, the airlines wrote: "We regret that Ms Campos was unhappy with the handling of the seat assignments on her flight. READ MORE Muslim woman kicked off plane as flight attendant said she 'did not feel comfortable' with the passenger Shirtless man kicked off plane after 'urinating on fellow passenger' and starting 'massive brawl' Woman kicked off flight for wearing 'inappropriate shorts' "United holds its employees to the highest standards of professionalism and has zero tolerance for discrimination."

As a woman I was highly upset after reading this article. Who decided that this woman should be the one who had to change seats? Why were the Monks not the ones who had change seats? I don't want to hear the argument that there were two of them so they had to be seated together. I have flown with a companion before and we have been separated. My main concern here is the discrimination and oppression of this woman in favor of appeasing Muslim men which does appear to be a trend in America now. Exactly where do we draw the line? Women have fought long and hard in this country to be seen as equals even though we aren't there yet. I hope this isn't taken away from us all because of a religion.

Cultural enrichment. Get used to it.

a reply to: ReAdY2AsCeNd
They should have booted the two men and made them wait for another flight that would pacify their ignorant needs. This planet gets more silly by the hr.

I agree that it should be the complainers that are inconvenienced rather than the subject of their protests regardless of reason or class-based hierarchy.

a reply to: ReAdY2AsCeNd

I am sorry.

I say this to make you feel better.

My regards,

bally

Who decided the woman had to be the one inconvenienced and discrimnated against?

A 6th century psycopath named Muhammed and his imaginary allah hallucination, that's who.

originally posted by: Konduit
Cultural enrichment. Get used to it.

I have no problem with cultural enrichment and welcome it. It is always good to broaden your horizons to see what you have been missing out on but when it comes to something like this I will not get over it.

originally posted by: gottaknow
I agree that it should be the complainers that are inconvenienced rather than the subject of their protests regardless of reason or class-based hierarchy.

Agreed it should have been them. It just upsets me because it appears Muslim men can do as they wish and to he!! with anyone who gets in the way of them and their beliefs.

originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: ReAdY2AsCeNd

I am sorry.

I say this to make you feel better.

My regards,

bally

Thank you. I appreciate your sympathy but I still worry as a woman what the future holds - especially since I have a 1 year old granddaughter. It is quite frightening.

Most likely bhuddist not Muslim. Some believe touching a woman, even accidentally, can result in sensual pleasure resulting in desire which they are trying to abstain from. One could argue that you cannot conquer desire by hiding from it.

a reply to: ReAdY2AsCeNd

Why did she not say , they are the ones with the problem , shift them .

I don't know why we tolerate women-hatred from backward cultures. Very sad that companies cannot take a stand against this type of behaviour.

a reply to: paraphi

Well there was a high school soccer team in the states that refused to play a team because the had two girls on the team. Basically saying girls shouldn't be out playing soccer.

Oh and these were monks, not sure where everyone is getting muslim from.

originally posted by: paraphi
I don't know why we tolerate women-hatred from backward cultures. Very sad that companies cannot take a stand against this type of behaviour.

Very true, just look at the backward culture here!
www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: ReAdY2AsCeNd

Your Granddaughter is the future.

Gently show her the right way.

Kind regards,

bally

originally posted by: Deny Arrogance
Who decided the woman had to be the one inconvenienced and discrimnated against?

A 6th century psycopath named Muhammed and his imaginary allah hallucination, that's who.

No, the airline.

OP, where is the link to the original article. If they were monks they probably weren't muslim as they don't have monks.
Regardless of what religion they were slaves off, it isn't a nice belief if other humans have to change or get inconvenienced by them.
After all it is THEIR belief and hence the onus is on them to get inconvenienced. How dare any religious types drag others into their folly.

Also what I don't understand is, if they were indeed Buddhists, what kind of buddhism are they practicing? It certainly has nothing to do with the acceptance of everything and the finding and giving of peace that I have learned by reading about it.
Humans are such fu**wits.

Alas I don't know of what religion they were unless I can read the original article.

a reply to: ReAdY2AsCeNd

I'm not sure who she's really upset with - the airline or the the monks. Both?

The monks (certainly not Muslim) are avowed to avoid interacting with women, for whatever reason. I will say that I don't think it has to do with hatred toward women as much as maintaining purity of spirit (or mind, or whatever). They are not my vows and I won't judge them. They were not violent or demeaning towards the woman. As far as I could tell, the monks simply stated that they could not interact with women, not that they wanted the airline to reassign her seat.

Taking that into consideration, it seems that her real issue is with the airline, for defaulting to moving her rather than the monks. She has every right to be upset about that, especially if she booked a specific seat in her desired location in the cabin.

In a more perfect world, the monks would have notified the airline of their special request at the time that they booked the flight.

a reply to: ReAdY2AsCeNd

"UA Passenger is given new boarding pass as Pakistani Monks "did not want to sit next to a woman"

Let the bastards sit on the wing if they don't want to sit next to other people.

As someone who flies every week I have seen some similar situations but every time it is the person who has the issue either moving or taking a later flight. I think the gate agent handled this improperly and United will end up making this up to the woman in question.

I've also seen a few reports in the past of Ultra Orthodox Jews kicking up a fuss for the same reasons.

Crazies all over the place!

I'd like to stick them all on an island somewhere and then watch the ensuing mayhem. They could make it pay-per-view and make some cash out of it as well from us atheists as we sit munching our popcorn and laughing at the unfolding hilarity!

originally posted by: Britguy

I've also seen a few reports in the past of Ultra Orthodox Jews kicking up a fuss for the same reasons.

Kinda what I was referring to in my post. This is where a well trained gate agent can make the difference. If someone does not want to sit next to another person for religious purposes it should only inconvenience the person whose religion has rules about airline travel.