ChatterBank3 mins ago
What Are Your Thoughts On This?
148 Answers
Girl, 14, with nut allergy nearly died on flight after man ate peanuts
Was he in the wrong?
Is it survival of the fittest or should her parents not put her at risk by sticking her in a tin capsule?
Was he in the wrong?
Is it survival of the fittest or should her parents not put her at risk by sticking her in a tin capsule?
Answers
I've given this more thought and put the blame entirely on the parents. Yes, the man was a selfish buffoon but the parents were irresponsibl
07:46 Wed 08th Jun 2022
//That is the charmed life I suggested.//
It is not a necessarily a “charmed life” when one individual has no experience of a particular problem. I have had plenty of other trials and tribulations of different natures to deal with. I don’t consider I’ve lived a “charmed” life but neither have I lived one that was any more onerous than most people.
But that aside, I think I’m still having difficulty expressing my point. So let’s clarify a few things:
1. The oaf on the plane who insisted on continuing to eat his peanuts when advised of the problem is a bar steward of the first order.
2. I would not behave similarly under any circumstances.
3. The young lady in question cannot rely on everybody being like me. She and/or her parents need to accept that there will always be people like him.
4. Depending on the risk that (3) presents she should either desist from flying or wear an FFP3 face mask throughout her flight.
This is nothing to do with “ableism”. It is simply a pragmatic solution to a perceived problem. The solution takes into account the real world. It accommodates the unfortunate fact that we do not live some Utopian dream and there are lots of inconsiderate people about.
If we must harp back to face coverings during the pandemic, the vast majority of face coverings worn by most people were of absolutely no benefit whatsoever either to themselves or those around them. They were either of unsuitable design, ill fitting, badly worn or badly treated (and very often all four). Those insisting that others should wear them to keep those around them “safe” were foolish in the extreme if they believed they would. So, those concerned about infections could protect themselves by buying an FFP3 facemask, wearing it and treating it correctly. Then it would not matter a cuss what other people did and all the FFP3 wearers would be doing is what they were preaching others to do anyway (though without specifying that their masks should be effective).
This is indeed very similar to the peanut problem. Instead of depending on others to keep you safe (because you’ll often be disappointed) take effective measures yourself. It seems strange to me that whilst other people around the sufferer are expected to take measures to protect him or her and are castigated for not doing so, when it is suggested the sufferers themselves should take measures it is met with outrage.
It is not a necessarily a “charmed life” when one individual has no experience of a particular problem. I have had plenty of other trials and tribulations of different natures to deal with. I don’t consider I’ve lived a “charmed” life but neither have I lived one that was any more onerous than most people.
But that aside, I think I’m still having difficulty expressing my point. So let’s clarify a few things:
1. The oaf on the plane who insisted on continuing to eat his peanuts when advised of the problem is a bar steward of the first order.
2. I would not behave similarly under any circumstances.
3. The young lady in question cannot rely on everybody being like me. She and/or her parents need to accept that there will always be people like him.
4. Depending on the risk that (3) presents she should either desist from flying or wear an FFP3 face mask throughout her flight.
This is nothing to do with “ableism”. It is simply a pragmatic solution to a perceived problem. The solution takes into account the real world. It accommodates the unfortunate fact that we do not live some Utopian dream and there are lots of inconsiderate people about.
If we must harp back to face coverings during the pandemic, the vast majority of face coverings worn by most people were of absolutely no benefit whatsoever either to themselves or those around them. They were either of unsuitable design, ill fitting, badly worn or badly treated (and very often all four). Those insisting that others should wear them to keep those around them “safe” were foolish in the extreme if they believed they would. So, those concerned about infections could protect themselves by buying an FFP3 facemask, wearing it and treating it correctly. Then it would not matter a cuss what other people did and all the FFP3 wearers would be doing is what they were preaching others to do anyway (though without specifying that their masks should be effective).
This is indeed very similar to the peanut problem. Instead of depending on others to keep you safe (because you’ll often be disappointed) take effective measures yourself. It seems strange to me that whilst other people around the sufferer are expected to take measures to protect him or her and are castigated for not doing so, when it is suggested the sufferers themselves should take measures it is met with outrage.
I didn't say there was no alternative - please do not put words in my mouth and make me out to be a liar!
I said I carry peanuts for ease as they are long lasting! I also said long haul that I could not carry some of the foods mentioned!
I also explained it was for when a crash happened not that it happened every time I flew or travelled!
I said I carry peanuts for ease as they are long lasting! I also said long haul that I could not carry some of the foods mentioned!
I also explained it was for when a crash happened not that it happened every time I flew or travelled!
