You bet.

....but I don't want to be the person to tell them that...

Ok I fly again tomorrow.....I admit to hoping that a normal sized person is seated next to me..or a larger person with two seats purchased. When I flew last week, I noticed passengers glancing nervously at large sized passengers...Ive been a large sized passenger...and I still agree that if you dont fit in one seat you need to buy 2.

This is such a touchy subject, but maybe one solution would be a 'measuring space' like they have at rides for height requirements.

It could be like one of those walk-through metal detectors. If you can walk through the space, you can fit in one seat. If you can't fit through the space, you need to buy two tickets, and you get two seats. Simple.

It accomodates tall, wide, muscular, overweight, whatever. No judgement-calls by ticket agents, no embarrassment (hopefully). It would just be standard procedure.

And everyone would be comfortable. We pay more for larger sized clothing, why not airline seats?

In my view, the issue really isn’t whether or not a very large person requiring two seats should have to pay for both. If a person is too large to fit in a single seat, then he or she should pay for two. How can anyone dispute that? A person who has paid for a single seat has every right and expectation to fully expect the space paid for to be entirely his or hers for the duration of the flight.

The people here who are arguing against this reasoning aren’t doing so based on reason, but rather emotion. I can understand. No one however large, small, smart, dumb or different should ever have to endure being humiliated in public in front of others. There can never be a justification for the sort of uncouth, crass, and unsavory behavior or policies, which results in direct embarrassment opening others to widespread ridicule. I think this is the real reason why some argue against this policy. There is no argument based on the merits that if you require two seats, then you should have two, irrespective of whether you or the airline company absorbs the cost. The problem is the manner in which this policy is enforced subjects a segment of the people to intense mockery belittling them in front of others in the open public. This is unacceptable, and should never be tolerated under any circumstances.

I have no solutions. The seats were designed in an era when height and weight parameters were vastly different. All I know is any solutions subjecting people to humiliation is not the answer.

Like anyone else here, I feel aggrieved when having to squish in between two persons taking part of the space that I had paid for in full. It certainly isn’t pleasant, at all. It also isn’t fair. However, when I take a moment of pause, I realize the large person feels much worse knowing that he or she is the cause of the my predicament being the subject of derision, scorn, and the source of amusement being the butt countless jokes for the entirety of the flight.

Not sure about you, but being squished for a few hours engendering sympathy from my fellow passengers appear to be the far lesser of two evils.

With kindest regards,

Frederick

A different angle: my sisters (both big women, as am I) actually bought three seats for a flight to Ireland--and the airline personnel kept trying to put someone in the third seat. "Oh, no one's sitting there." "I'm sorry, we paid for 3 seats and have the tickets to prove it." "But no one's SITTING there!"

So, even though they did exactly what they should have, they STILL got hassled. Something's very wrong with this picture.

I'm a big fan of Southwest Air....recently booked an online round trip ticket from Tampa Bay to Manchester, NH for $137.50 including all fees and taxes. That's really hard to beat.

If you can't fit in the one seat, booking two tickets is still going to be an incredible deal compared with United, etc.

I can handle being a bit squished on a short trip. Just so long as you don't want to talk to me for the whole trip about something boring.

kay

I posted a link earlier in the thread about two women who were refused to board with 3 tickets. A Southwest employee said they each must buy 2 tickets, even though 3 seats was ample enough, and not bothering anyone else, since the side only had 3 seats.

So there's more to it than our lucky, thin friends here think, based on the same statement being repeated every other page

Wa'il

That sounds more like robot-like idiocy than anything else to me. It reminds of a story I heard years ago from a woman I worked with. She went to a restaurant that offered a "combo" consisting of a burger, fries and a soft drink. She asked for the combo but specified no drink. Well the braindead robot behind the counter was very insistant that she must take the soft drink because it was part of the combo. Finally after realizing she wouldn't get her food until she agreed, the woman took the drink and poured it out in front of the employee.

Obviously the Southwest employee simply was not using her walnut-sized brain.

You've hit the nail on the head. How mortifying.

I notice that too. For whatever reason my recent trip South was packed with an inordinantly large number of obese people. I felt bad for them as they came down the aisle; they looked sheepish and some people seemed clearly unhappy to be placed next to them.

Ugh. It's kind of a bad moment for everyone, I think.

I like locarbbarb's idea of a measuring space. This would eliminate the guess work and arbitrary decision. They could even have it behind closed doors. The airline employee could politely ask the customer to step inside a room and thus avoid them the embarassement of "failing" the test in front of everyone. It would still be embarassing but not as much. Afterall....large people know they are large.....usually.

Sure, the best solution would be to have extra wide seats what would accomodate everyone comfortably, but that would mean a huge hike in price for everyone and how fair is that.

Why not just put us through a cattle chute?

I'd just grease myself up and have someone wave a doughnut in front of me. I'd GET through....

Actually, if one would consider me "thin," "LUCK" has NOTHING to do with it. Not if you consider three years of ultra-strict Atkins, chronic exercising, and no cheating to be "luck." I think some of the "lucky, thin" people here giving their comments provide a really unique perspective; considering this is a weight-loss forum (hey, you're forum founder, you already know that ), the "thin" people giving their opinions were once those same obese people trying to squeeze into airline seats. We know how it feels on BOTH ends of the spectrum. Like Frederick, I don't have a solution. However, I do know it feels a helluva lot better to slip into an airline seat at 153lbs. than it does to squeeze in at 5'10" and 216lbs. Unfortunately, whether you are the "lucky, thin" person in the seat or the larger seatmate, both seats are equally uncomfortable.

It's amazing, really. Either you're embarrassed because you're the obese person encroaching on another person's paid space, or you're the "lucky, thin" person who is embarrassed for the obese person crowding your seat.

You seem to have taken my post as personally addressed to you, while I don't know who you are. At 200 lbs as a before weight, you may not encounter such problems with Southwest. I personally have not been on Southwest.

The luck part is there, and has nothing to do with weight. It's how you strike the employee and how they classify you into thin or huge. If s/he thinks you're big for their taste, your penalized regardless of any common sense, and regardless of Atkins or Jenny Craig.

But if you think those two women need to purhase 4 tickets instead of 3, and they must be separated into different sides of the plane, then fine, I'll respect your opinion, even if it doesn't make sense.

Wa'il

Tamarian, I didn't take your post personally, I merely used myself as an example to fit into your generalization. I also never mentioned the two women who need to purchase four tickets instead of three. I also think my opinion makes perfect sense and is perfectly valid.