=20 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- This article was sent to you by someone who found it on SFGate. The original article can be found on SFGate.com here: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=3D/c/a/2007/09/15/MN9ES6191.= DTL --------------------------------------------------------------------- Saturday, September 15, 2007 (SF Chronicle) Decency debate rages after Southwest shuns flier in skimpy attire Reyhan Harmanci, Chronicle Staff Writer After a summer of record delays and customer complaints, one airline inadvertently flew into a roiling cultural debate by busting passengers for dressing too scantily. Southwest Airlines has been on the defensive for a few weeks for demandi= ng that two women its flight attendants deemed unsuitably dressed change their outfits or, in the case of one passenger, exit the plane. Some columnists and commentators have lambasted Southwest for its action= s, pointing out this is a country where every day seems to be casual Friday and teen starlets are regularly photographed without underwear. Others have said that, given the surplus of skin out there, asking for more conservative attire isn't such a bad idea. Southwest, after issuing statements recently backing its flight attendants' decisions to ask the women to change or alter their outfits, apologized to one of the women, Kyla Ebbert, during a taping of the "Dr. Phil" television show on Friday. The statement from Southwest Airlines CEO Gary Kelly read, in part, "Kyl= a, you are a valued customer, and you did not get an adequate apology. We could have handled this better, and on behalf of Southwest Airlines, I am truly sorry. ... Our company is based on freedom even if our actions may have not appeared that way." As part of the apology, the airline offered Ebbert two free round-trip tickets to anywhere Southwest flies. The line between what's acceptable in public and private spheres is constantly shifting, but anger over "inappropriate" dress has been particularly heated lately. Atlanta's City Council made national headlines this month for considering a proposal to ban baggy pants in the city and levy fines for the "indecent exposure" of undergarments. Hillary Rodham Clinton's decolletage on the Senate floor caused endless pundit jabber about how a female presidential candidate should dress. School districts around the country have addressed the issue of skimpy skirts and loud T-shirts in various ways. Bay Area schools have debated for years about how to deal with the increasingly sexy and casual clothes worn by some students. Southwest passenger Setara Qassim, 21, clad in a green, low-cut halter dress with gold trimming, said in press interviews that she spent a flight from Burbank to Tucson wrapped in a blanket given to her by a flight attendant to cover the halter top. Ebbert, 23, was flying from San Diego to Tucson in July dressed in a wispy, frayed miniskirt, a white tank top and a short green wrap sweater. She was told she was dressed too provocatively for "a family airline" (her words, from her appearance on Sept. 7 on the "Today" show). Ebbert described to "Today" host Matt Lauer how she tried to hug her sma= ll cardigan around her chest and pull down her skirt "as far as it would go" before resorting to the airline blanket. Lauer delicately inquired whether she could have inadvertently exposed her underwear to passengers coming down the aisle of the plane. Her answer was no. Hot pants and white go-go boots used to be part of the official uniform = of Southwest in the early '70s, around the same time the airline used the motto "Sex sells seats," according to Time magazine. The company has had other problems with displays of skin recently: In 2003, the company fired two pilots for taking off all their clothing in the cockpit in a prank gone awry, USA Today reported. Southwest said the airline had no record of Qassim's complaint but confirmed that the incident Ebbert described took place. While no airline admits to an official dress code, wardrobe issues do fa= ll within the range of customer issues negotiated by flight attendants and crews on a daily basis. It is technically within the rights of an airline to deny service to people based on what they're wearing (or on the basis of body odor or inebriation). "I haven't personally heard of this before, but we're brand-new," said Abby Lunardini, director of corporate communications at Virgin America. "We haven't had any fashion faux pas yet." Lunardini added that Virgin American doesn't "have any kind of policy around dress code, but if there was something offensive to other passengers, like an offensive T-shirt or if someone was completely not clothed, in cases like that, we'd say something to the passenger." Patrick Smith, an airline pilot who writes a column for Salon magazine called Ask a Pilot, said in an e-mail that a number of conditions help to create confusion about flight etiquette. "Rules about passenger dress are usually subjective, allowing employees = to use judgment and common sense," he wrote. "You've got more and more people flying - and that includes many people who, in years past, would have driven or taken a Greyhound. "Granted, people rarely dress up to fly anymore, but there are certain standards and certain protocols, however casual." The idea that a passenger wouldn't be sufficiently garbed to fly is certainly a new one. Historically, airlines have worked hard to cultivate an air of exclusivity, and customers responded by dressing up for their flights. Randy Johnson, editor of United Airlines' Hemispheres magazine and co-author of "The Age of Flight: A History of America's Pioneering Airline," said, "When commercial aviation first captured the country's imagination, it was an amazing new leap for humankind, and people who chose to fly across the country in two days, rather than creep across in two weeks, felt like the elite group they were. "When United first brought women in the field as stewardesses on in the late '30s," Johnson said, "they were intended to make aviation a luxe-catered experience but also intended to increase safety. They have always played important role in arbitrating the environment of flight." Elliott Hester, a flight attendant, syndicated columnist and author of "Plane Insanity: A Flight Attendant's Tales of Sex, Rage and Queasiness at 30,000 Feet," wouldn't reveal his employer's name but said in an e-mail that "our passengers can be 'officially' denied boarding for a variety of reasons, including intoxication, rude behavior, offensive body odor and, yes, wearing inappropriate clothing." Said Hester, "I've never had to remove a passenger because of inappropriate attire, but on more than one occasion I was involved in the removal of passengers with horrendous body odor." He also pointed to changes in the flight experience as sources of increased crankiness and complaints among passengers. "After enduring brutal lines at check-in counters and security checkpoints, passengers come on board expecting services that are no longer there," Hester said. "When we say 'Sorry, there are no pillows' to a passenger who wants one, it's easy for them to become upset." Debates about dress codes are obviously not new - it's just unusual to hear them fought out in the air. University of Louisville English Professor Dennis Hall, who has written extensively about the cultural import of clothing, said the debate makes sense and invoked the phrase "privatization of public space" to describe the discomfort many feel at the increasingly lax codes of behavior and dress in the United States. "Running around in your apartment in states of undress is one thing, but on a plane it's something else," Hall said. "It's not that provocative outfits, especially worn by women, haven't been worn before. For example, you used to be able to go into any saloon or cocktail lounge, and those environments had women scantily clad. But it was understood that when you go there, that's what's going on. "If you're sitting on an airplane," Hall continued, "you'd be less fully comfortable with seeing that. The people on the plane who complained, although they probably wouldn't analyze it like that, they're responding to the privatization of public space." Sound off: Have something to say about this story? Call (415) 777-6268 to comment for an Open Mic podcast on sfgate.com. E-mail Reyhan Harmanci at rharmanci@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -------------------= --------------------------------------------------- Copyright 2007 SF Chronicle <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> If you wish to unsubscribe from the AIRLINE List, please send an E-mail to: "listserv@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx". Within the body of the text, only write the following:"SIGNOFF AIRLINE".