On the sexiness of flight attendants: Discrimination?

Post Reply New Topic

It's total discrimination. What percentage of the passengers even care? Most flights have women, children, and other people completely disinterested in the appearance of the flight attendant. Why should there be catering towards the minority at the expense of the worker?

I'm not sure how it is today, but I knew a couple of women who were in this line of work back in the 1960's, when it was run like a modeling agency. They had to endure constant weight checks, uniform checks, charm classes, the works. Men don't have to go through this crap. Could you imagine if women started demanding that their bus drivers look like Brad Pitt? Would men ever be accepting of such scrutiny in a field completely unrelated to appearance? What does serving drinks and following safety procedures have to do with appearance?

I don't know about the FAA, but Transport Canada would never license a flight attendant with a hip replacement.

There have been quite a few demonstrations of flight attendants making the difference in survival, and regulatory bodies have studied this issue.

Consider this case study: http://www.atsb.gov.au/publications/200 ... 40239.aspx
And this article based on it: http://www.casa.gov.au/fsa/2005/aug/44-47.pdf
The NTSB covered the subject with a detailed study of some 46 evacuations over a 21 month period: http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/safetystudies/ss0001.pdf

Flight attendants make a difference, and assertive flight attendants make a bigger difference.



Historically, most female flight attendants were compelled to resign upon marriage--that, more than aging per se was their career limitation. But I see absolutely nothing wrong with the point of view that says, "so long as I am qualified for my job and meeting the bona fide performance expectations of my employer, I should be allowed to continue in my work."



I guess it depends what you regard as the "chief" job. While passenger service may be the most usual activity of flight attendants, I don't believe that makes it "chief." The chief job activity is the activity that takes precedence when activities come into conflict--and service always takes a back seat to safety.

That may have been the job of flight crew decades ago. It might even be the job of flight crew in 1st class and in private jets. But for all other air travel, keeping the passengers happy isn't one of their jobs at all. These are their jobs, as far as I can see:

1)keeping the passengers safe in the event of an emergency and also for routine safety such as making sure all seatbelts are buckled

2)preventing passengers from causing incidents: this involves both de-escalation of potential incidents in progress and removal of passengers before a plane takes off if they are dangerously unruly

3)providing whatever amenities the airline has such as beverages and snacks and blankets

Happiness doesn't even enter into it. Given that airlines have decreased legroom and made nothing available for free except water, customer happiness is completely irrelevent. People don't fly because they enjoy the experience. They fly because they need to get from point A to point B. If US airlines were able to hire only pretty flight attendants in their 20's and fire at 30th birthday without getting sued, this wouldn't help them at all financially. The scant number of men who would book with them for that reason wouldn't make it worth it. Even a man who really thinks of pretty flight attendants as a perk is going to choose his flight based not on what the attendants look like but on a combination of ticket price and flight convenience (will he have to change planes, etc.) If he's got the extra money for first class, he'll do that. But what is the real amenity he gets? It's getting spread out seats and not being shoved right next to a snoring/chattering/crying/fidgeting fellow passenger.

I grant you all of that, but my point is that the job was created for young and attractive single women. That was the key to getting and keeping the job. There was never the intention of hiring average or unattractive women, regardless of ability, and it really runs to the whole impotent effort by the EEOC to force Hooters to hire men as servers. The business model is about big breasted beauties bringing you beer and wings. EEOC might not like that, but gender and attraction is a bona fide factor in why you are or are not hired.

Many foreign airlines want attractive women because businessmen are paying for the service in part because of how they are cared for during the flight. Sexist? Likely so. But if that's your business model, so it should be. If the flying public does not approve, you'll lose money to other airlines.

I don't care what stewardesses look like and I'm attracted to women. Honestly, I'm usually more absorbed in my book or trying to sleep.

It makes me sad to realise that heterosexual men always seem to automatically assess a woman's 'hotness' and where she falls on their scale. I like to ignore the fact that some of you guys think that way. I know hetero women do it to men, too. Gay men do it to men, etc. I think I don't do it because I know I wouldn't rate highly on my own scale if I used it on myself; so it seems to cruel to rank other people on an attractiveness scale when I know what it's like to be at the bottom of it.

Eurgh, I'm not like other people.

If you gave the flying public a sheet of paper at the end of a flight with the question, "What would be the one thing you would change about this flight, if you could change any one thing" I bet the number of responses answering "I would rather have more attractive flight attendants" would be vanishingly small. It would run probably 20th place after such front runners as "I would go back to serving meals and have them be free" and "I would rather not spend an hour layover in Atlanta" and "I wish I had more legroom and didn't have to share an armrest with that guy who never once let me use the arm rest" and on and on and on. It would appear just above "I wish the uphostery were a different color".

I realize that hetero men like to look at attractive women. But of the things that make today's air travel unpleasant, I bet even the most hot blooded hetero man would like to get an actual free meal, stretch his legs out and not have to fight for arm rest use and not have to change planes in Chicago and not take his shoes off just to get on the plane (although the airlines have no say in that, no matter how much it detracts from the experience) and not pay a 200$ surcharge to change his reservation etc. I bet even the OP, if told he could only pick one, would pick a non-stop flight with a middle aged flight attendant over a flight with a plane change where he has to race from one end of O'Hare to the other or miss his next flight....but it will have a 25 year old attendant.


To abuse that Hooters analogy a bit, imagine if Hooters made the following changes, analogous to flying a plane these days:

1)unnattractive waitresses wearing frumpy uniforms

2)triple the prices of the food and quadruple the prices of the beer

3)the food is cold and comes in boxes

4)the tables are right next to each other and nobody can get up to use the bathroom without everybody else at the table also getting up and pushing in their chairs

5)you can't get in without a reservation. Reservations made months in advance will be reasonably charged. Reservations made any later than that will be significantly more expensive. Any attempt to change reservations will require a significant surcharge. Any attempt to pay cash at the door instead of making a reservation will be extremely expensive and will get you extra security checks

6)you get frisked at the door and have to take your shoes off to get in. All women's purses will be checked. Everybody will have to empty their pockets and security will look through the pocket contents publicly. If you aren't vigilant, they'll steal something that looks interesting or valuable

7)In the middle of your meal, to have to leave the Hooters you are in and drive to a Hooters on the other side of town to continue your meal


If all those things happened, do you think it is the disappearance of the hot waitresses that people would be irate about the most?

Last edited by Janissy on 15 Aug 2011, 2:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Just as an historical note, the job was entirely male from 1912 until 1930, when the first woman was hired. And as far as women were concerned, the job was created for nurses, and that requirement didn't disappear until World War II. (Air Canada was the last airline to require flight attendants to be registered nurses, dropping the requirement in the 60's).

Now that's not to say that airlines haven't used attractiveness of cabin crew as a significant part of the business model (the Singapore Girl being the most obvious and most successful example of the type). But when you compare incidents like SQ006 with AC797, TW843 or AF358 one is left to wonder whether there is something inherently wrong with the business model.

The comment about controlling irate passengers gave me an idea: in this day and age, maybe all flight attendants should be required to be armed and certified in some martial art. Course, since martial artists are predominantly male, it will be mostly the hetero females rather than the hetero males who get the eye candy.

I think the attractiveness of the attendants appeals to children as well.


Today, that seems to be the case in asian countries.

...most of which won't be of any use in such a confined space.

I dunno, women who do martial arts are pretty hot (to me).

Cynthia Rothrock!

They already do that in Hong Kong.
http://www.globalpost.com/dispatches/gl ... -bruce-lee

Just googled her. Woah.

Damnit, now I look shallow.

Also check out Sandra Bullock in Miss Congeniality

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=111t9lIY8Fc[/youtube]

(yeah, I'm shallow. 52 years old, and still turned on by attractive women).