It's exactly that, she's discrimating only because of skin colour.

 

He'd done absoluting nothing to offend her other than being born with dark skin.

 

 

 

Now if he was a fat slob sitting there sweating and smelling rank - i could understand the request for another seat. But her reasons are just screaming racist.

 

 

 

While I might not have a great like for certain races I'm not about to get moved unless they start pissing me off through their behaviour.

 

 

 

 

 

Her "right to move" as you call it, is pathetic abuse of the system. The airline stewards noticed this and so left her in coach and let the obvious victim into first class.

cool story, I did heard it before.

It's exactly that, she's discrimating only because of skin colour.

 

He'd done absoluting nothing to offend her other than being born with dark skin.

 

 

 

Now if he was a fat slob sitting there sweating and smelling rank - i could understand the request for another seat. But her reasons are just screaming racist.

 

 

 

While I might not have a great like for certain races I'm not about to get moved unless they start pissing me off through their behaviour.

 

 

 

 

 

Her "right to move" as you call it, is pathetic abuse of the system. The airline stewards noticed this and so left her in coach and let the obvious victim into first class.

 

 

 

Ok thats a good point and I agree with you BUT (theres always a but) if she doesnt like someone because of their skin colour its not exactly bad. Being a 'racist' in that sense isnt as bad as fellow tip.iters make it out to be, its just her opinion. Racism obviously only gets out of hand if people physically and verbally abused because of their colour. Her merely walking away from the black person is certainly not a cause for concern.

Her heritage is being insulted because of the colour of the man's skin? How is that not racist again?

 

 

 

The way I see it is: The woman is discriminating the man as she is insinuating that the colour of the man's skin is an insult to her, completely disregarding who or what this man actually is. If that's not racial discrimination mate, I don't know what is.

Whether or not it's bad that she doesn't like black people, think how you would feel if someone were to do that to you, whatever your hue. I don't think it's a question of how racist she was in not liking black people, but rather about how nasty it would be to make a scene like that about someone, based on something they cannot help (not that I wish to suggest that being black is something one should want to help, of course).

Her heritage is being insulted because of the colour of the man's skin? How is that not racist again?

 

 

 

The way I see it is: The woman is discriminating the man as she is insinuating that the colour of the man's skin is an insult to her, completely disregarding who or what this man actually is. If that's not racial discrimination mate, I don't know what is.

 

 

 

I have reconsidered. Her heritage being disgraced is a statement not backed up with any information or reasoning other than the mans skin is black which is just plain ridiculous.

Then again, why is the black man getting advantages over his skin tone considered fair?

 

Wouldn't that be reverse racism?

nice one,

 

 

 

stupid old racist cake

 

 

 

^lol....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

great story even if its an urban legend

 

 

 

its sad to see theres still people like that in the world :(

Her Heritage was a Southern plantation owner and got broke by the Civil War.

Then again, why is the black man getting advantages over his skin tone considered fair?

 

Wouldn't that be reverse racism?

 

 

 

No its not, the black man doesnt have any racism in his blood. He doesn't hate her for her skin, he hates her simply because she hates him!

 

 

 

The way the attendent treated her was fair too, because its a message for her and sets a presedent (sp).

 

 

 

Then again, why is the black man getting advantages over his skin tone considered fair?

 

Wouldn't that be reverse racism?

 

 

 

He got the advantage because he was a nice, not racist person, not because he was black. The lady was not nice and was racist, so she didn't get the advantage.

Then again, why is the black man getting advantages over his skin tone considered fair?

 

Wouldn't that be reverse racism?

 

 

 

He got the advantage because he was a nice, not racist person, not because he was black. The lady was not nice and was racist, so she didn't get the advantage.

 

 

 

He didn't get the advantage because he was nice, he got it because of she not being. He was just standing there and, if he was white, he wouldn't get a better seat.

 

I don't think it was fair that she kept her place without the black man to "injure her heritage" and he got a better place.

 

Both got what they wanted, instead, the lady should be penalized and kicked from the flight, and the man was supposed to stay on the seat he bought.

edit: meah. reread, i concur

Then again, why is the black man getting advantages over his skin tone considered fair?

 

Wouldn't that be reverse racism?

 

 

 

He got the advantage because he was a nice, not racist person, not because he was black. The lady was not nice and was racist, so she didn't get the advantage.

 

 

 

He didn't get the advantage because he was nice, he got it because of she not being. He was just standing there and, if he was white, he wouldn't get a better seat.

 

I don't think it was fair that she kept her place without the black man to "injure her heritage" and he got a better place.

 

Both got what they wanted, instead, the lady should be penalized and kicked from the flight, and the man was supposed to stay on the seat he bought.

 

 

 

I still fail to see how that's reverse racism. She didn't upgrade him because he was black, she upgraded him to spite the racist white lady.

Then again, why is the black man getting advantages over his skin tone considered fair?

 

Wouldn't that be reverse racism?

 

 

 

He got the advantage because he was a nice, not racist person, not because he was black. The lady was not nice and was racist, so she didn't get the advantage.

 

 

 

He didn't get the advantage because he was nice, he got it because of she not being. He was just standing there and, if he was white, he wouldn't get a better seat.

 

I don't think it was fair that she kept her place without the black man to "injure her heritage" and he got a better place.

 

Both got what they wanted, instead, the lady should be penalized and kicked from the flight, and the man was supposed to stay on the seat he bought.

 

 

 

I still fail to see how that's reverse racism. She didn't upgrade him because he was black, she upgraded him to spite the racist white lady.

 

 

 

But if he wasn't black, he wouldn't be upgraded.

 

Now imagine that same attittude on other enviroments, like companies, universities and any competitive situations. That would be an unfair advantage, pretty much the same (or worse, because it would be politically correct attittude to take) as the white have gotten for the last hundreds of years, which is considered racism.

 

Get my point?

For God's sake; it doesn't matter. It's a story.

oh no. let's not bring god into that ...

 

 

 

jk

But if he wasn't black, he wouldn't be upgraded.

 

Now imagine that same attittude on other enviroments, like companies, universities and any competitive situations. That would be an unfair advantage, pretty much the same (or worse, because it would be politically correct attittude to take) as the white have gotten for the last hundreds of years, which is considered racism.

 

Get my point?

 

 

 

if he wasnt black, he wouldnt have been upgraded, because the story wouldnt mean anything. the story is moot if he isnt a different race.

 

 

 

and you are talking about affirmative action, which is in effect.

We are going a little off topic here aren't we :D

 

Hmm, let's consider it just a story then.

We are going a little off topic here aren't we :D

 

Hmm, let's consider it just a story then.

 

 

 

:D

We are going a little off topic here aren't we :D

 

Hmm, let's consider it just a story then.

 

 

 

:D

 

 

 

Agreed

Her Heritage was a Southern plantation owner and got broke by the Civil War.

 

 

 

Man I hope you don't think that the Southern plantation owner style got crushed by the civil war. We're still fighting that battle.

 

 

 

On topic: The woman and man were secretly good friends who collaborated to get a better seat or possibly free schwag! :P

What a [bleep], reminds me of when I went snowboarding up in whistler and I got in line for the chair lift first then this skier comes and stands next to me when I was about to get on the lift. She said "sorry I don't ride chair lifts with boarders" so they made her go back to the end of the line. :?

The woman and man were secretly good friends who collaborated to get a better seat or possibly free schwag! :P

 

 

 

Now you are learning to think like a swindler, good job :mrgreen:

I heard that story in synaghogue :lol: