John Kinnear parses the praise and cries of discrimination on Quiet Zones in economy class sections
Last September, Asia’s largest budget carrier, Air Asia, announced that, beginning this week, they will be offering a “quiet zone” on flights to China, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Australia and Nepal. By quiet zone they mean a sectioned off area of the plane with “minimal noise and disturbances, soft ambient lighting” and of course – no kids (12 and under).
This has caused quite a stir among some of my parent friends. One friend was even offended enough to compare the kid-free section to Rosa Parks being relegated to the back of the bus at the beginning of the civil rights movement of the 1950′ and 60’s’s. I stepped in and said that I didn’t think it was a very fair comparison and a LONG conversation ensued. In the end, we agreed to disagree and she agreed that she wouldn’t be flying on AirAsia in the near future. I don’t think that they are going to have trouble filling her and her kid’s seat.
I actually think the “Quiet Zones” are a good idea with some very practical reasons. I have had wonderful experiences with airlines trying to make families comfortable. Pilot pins, extra soda/pretzels/cookies, kids’ magazines, incredibly kind and caring flight staff. Still, airlines have a vested interest in the satisfaction of all their customers – even the ones without kids. I fully understand that there are some people who would prefer not to sit by me and my kids. I’m ok with that and I am OK with AirAsia’s “Quiet Zone”. I’ll explain why by answering some of the comments and questions I’ve seen bouncing around in my parenting spheres.
“This is ageism and should not be tolerated. If you’re going to have a “quiet section” you should just not let noisy people sit there – regardless of age.”
So let me get this one straight: Let everyone, including kids, sit in the quiet section and when they start to be noisy, they have to move. The logistics alone on this are staggering. What constitutes noisy? Who decides? Who tells the noisy people they have to move? What if the rest of the plane is full?
More often than not, kids are louder than adults. That doesn’t make me an ageist. That makes me a realist. Sure, I know plenty of kids who will happily bury their heads in an iPhone for a few hours of Angry Birds, but I know many more adults who can stare directly forward with no stimulation at all without breaking into a half an hour of high volume renditions of “The Wheels on the Bus.” Why not let those adults have seven aisles?
“My kid is quiet on planes. Why should I be forced to sit in a section with other, unruly children?”
That is fantastic, and I commend you. Fly enough with your kid, and at least one time they won’t be perfect. One time my nephew cried from Salt Lake City to Portland for two straight hours. Every other flight has been a cakewalk. When you have tens of thousands of people flying with kids every year, you are going to see a lot of kids’ “one time”. Maybe you and your incredibly well behaved kid could sit in the section with kids to set a good example!
Let’s be realistic. “The child-free area is sectioned off from the rest of the plane by toilets and bulkheads, the theory being you won’t be able to hear the kids who are toward the back of the plane,” CNN reported. The plane isn’t going to be divided into Masterpiece Theater and Lord of the Flies. The 90% of the plane that does allow kids is not going to be overrun by the lost boys. If anything the sleeping adults in the “quiet zone” free up the flight staff to get my kid an extra ginger-ale when her ears start popping. Win/win!
“People should just invest in noise cancelling headphones or an iPod.”
The people on that flight have already paid hundreds of dollars to be on the flight. That is a silly suggestion.
“This isn’t needed because responsible parents should have kids with manners who know how to behave themselves.”
Responsible parents don’t have kids with manners. Responsible parents have kids to whom they are teaching manners. There is a learning curve. Sometimes that takes some on-site training.
When I take my kids to a restaurant or a movie and they start misbehaving I do my best to calm the situation and teach them how to behave in public. When that doesn’t work and I can tell we’re a distraction to others enjoyment of their dinner/movie, I remove my child from the situation.
Leaving a plane is a little more difficult. Not impossible—but really difficult.
I prefer not to take my kids on planes at all, but sometimes it is needed. The times it is necessary don’t necessarily fall in the most convenient portion of a child’s manners training program. For instance, If my three-month-old baby is crying because rapid changes in air pressure make his head feel like it is going to explode, I can’t tell him that he’s being rude. You know what would be nice? A section of the airplane filled with like-minded adults who know they might be sitting by kids. Wait! It’s the entire plane except for one partitioned section of seven rows? Huzzah!!
And finally…
“How is this any different than Rosa Parks and the Jim Crow Laws of the South?”
I’m going to just set aside the fact that this isn’t happening in the US. I’m also going to ignore the fact that this is a company policy and not a law you can be arrested and thrown in jail for breaking. I don’t want to speak for a whole race of people either – so I can’t catergorically say that comparing the civil rights struggle of black Americans in the 1960’s to tiny screaming humans that poop their pants and scream a lot may be seen as offensive in some circles. The comparison between the two is about as unproductive as passive-aggressively saying that I’m not going to make specific arguments and then making said arguments in the same sentence. You know what? I’m just going to leave this one alone.
Look. Sometimes it is hard to see the forest for the trees. Aside from bars and strip clubs, I can take my kids pretty much anywhere I want. The world is literally their playground. Planes are a special beast. They are a nightmare scenario. You and hundreds of other people are trapped on a multi-ton machine, hurtling hundreds of miles per hour 30,000 feet above the earth. If seven rows of people would prefer to experience that scenario without my infant screaming, or my toddler kicking the back of their seat, then I am OK with that. I would rather worry about my kid than worry about bugging them. And, if for some weird reason, I have to travel alone on business from India to Nepal, I’ll be flying AirAsia.
—editor’s note: Passengers can opt for the “Quiet Zone” for an additional cost of anywhere between $11-$35, a standard fee for picking specific seats in economy class, according to CNN. If there’s a buck to be made, American carriers will find it.
—Photo by xersti/Flickr
Put the child-free “quiet” section at the back of the plane.
Problem solved.
Or children ride outside on the wings. Another quick solution….
You all hear about this creature who hurled racial slurs at a 19 month old then slapped him? On a plane, on its descent? He’d pay for the upgrade if he wasn’t going to jail, which really doesn’t justify the crime. http://abcnews.go.com/Travel/executive-charged-slapping-toddler-plane-loses-job/story?id=18529437
It seems like the central question is who has to pay what to get what they want. If two customers want things that may not be compatible, who gets their way and who has to pay more for “extra”? Who has to do more to accommodate the other – wear earplugs, have fewer choices, pay more money, etc. So, in this case, many parents argue that they have the right as parents to fly without additional restrictions, or that children should not face unnecessary restrictions. On the other hand, many others argue they have some right to ask airlines to… Read more »
It would be tempting to put them somewhere else. I am more concerned of bad behaviour like people kicking the back of your chair, etc. For the very young who can’t pop their ears properly (can they?) I accept that they may cry so I usually have earphones but for kids that are older and know better it would annoy me, of course if the kid is having a panic attack and not being Dennis the menace I could be understanding. Personally I’d like to see wider seats on planes for some areas, I am 6’6, very large body both… Read more »
I understand it, although it’s kind of funny from say, the perspective of conservative politics. The free marketeer types say “great, go ahead and segregate, if people are willing to pay for it, more power to you”. The pro-family types (and also the Ross Douthat women-should-start-breeding-because-fertility-is-economically-necessary crowd) might observe that our society lets people off the hook too easy when it comes to children. If our urge to stay away from kids is constantly enabled, does our society become even more child unfriendly than it is? Fewer God’s special little snowflakes, fewer native born youngsters working to support our increasing… Read more »
If we’re talking about “enabling urges” as a bad thing, then perhaps we should also address the ways that society enables the urge to reproduce. I heartily agree that we should not simply enable all urges just because they are urges. Add the urge to reproduce to that list. I heartily agree that we should avoid idealizing natural urges at the expense of common sense and the public good. Add the urge to reproduce to that list. Amen, brother.
As a parent of a three year old, I understand people’s frustration when a child acts up on a plane for more than a few minutes. I think all parents will agree it is even more frustrating for the parent than the other passengers. Though the idea of a “quiet” section sounds nice to kid-free travelers, the idea of being forced to sit in a section with lots of other kids who may or may not be acting up throughout the flight sounds like pure hell for those traveling with young kids. They’ll set each other off…if one cries, they’ll… Read more »
Kid free zones in planes = fantastic!! As a mother of almost 2 children (just 6 weeks to go!) I’d gladly pay the extra fee to not sit next to a little person (even though they may be incredibly well behaved with very prepared parents). If I’m paying out of my own pocket for a child free vacation, I’d spend the extra $50 to pick seats next to individuals who are less likely to vomit on me / try to eat my shoulder. On a 2 hour flight from Winnipeg to Edmonton our 1 year old decided to ‘give back’… Read more »
I hope they do this on every airline, especially for long-haul flights. Being surrounded by screaming brats does not make the heart grow fonder. The fact is that even when kids are not upset they are still pretty loud. Shrieking with laughter every 5 seconds is just as annoying as crying. I fly frequently and I wear earplugs on every flight. It’s not enough. Comparing a child-free zone to racial segregation is definitely offensive. It’s a white-priveledge comparison if ever I heard one. People can choose to be parents, they can not choose their race. When a person chooses to… Read more »
Not all people choose to be parents.
Do you mean not all parents are parents by choice? Maybe not explicitly and consciously in all cases. But, when you hold your baby in your arms for the first time, that moment is the result of dozens of decisions that people have made, certainly in the mother’s case decisions that she has made, if she’s living in 2013 in the United States. (Except in those extreme cases, hard to believe, when a woman had no idea she was pregnant until she gave birth in the bathroom stall.) Some of the options might seem so inconceivable that they don’t seem… Read more »
wellokaythen, then everything that happens to us is a result of dozens of decisions we make. The father chose implicitly and unconsciously to be a father by trusting birth control (or his partner’s assurance that she has taken her birth is effective). The mother who’s physician had neglected to tell her that her oral contraception would not work if she got a stomach flu chose implicitly and unconsciously to be a parent. As we progress down this road we’ll arrive at vile statements like this: The date-rape victim chose implicitly and unconsciously to be raped by trusting the wrong person.… Read more »
I see your point, up to a certain point. Certainly there are cases in which there is complete ignorance or insufficient knowledge or accidents. I have to admit those cases are all too common. I should have avoided absolute pronouncements about reproductive responsibility. However, what percentage of children in America are born because of these factors that *seem* to be outside of human control? I suspect in the vast majority of cases, that baby on the plane is not there primarily because of an innocently failed birth control option. If these are extremely common cases, then that is a MASSIVELY… Read more »
When I refute a claim that “parents have made their choice” by saying that “not all people choose to be parents” I need only demonstrate the existence of people being parents without it being their choice. I have. I don’t see why I should have to demonstrate the percentage which I in this case find irrelevant. And no, we can’t logically remove IVF kods from this “accidental exception”: http://www.bionews.org.uk/page_13321.asp http://www.fathersandfamilies.org/2011/11/28/ny-man-sues-ivf-lab-in-paternity-fraud-case/ As for adoption: Alaska Who May Adopt Citation: Ann. Stat. § 25.23.020 The following persons may adopt: • A husband and wife together • An unmarried adult • The unmarried… Read more »
I think this is a great idea, most of my worst flight stories involve screaming babies and frazzled parents.
I think it’s a great idea, same as making smoking only cars on trains. It’s a convenience for customers. As a soon-to-be mother, I would hate it if someone had to listen to my kid scream through a whole flight. I certainly have never enjoyed listening to other people’s kids screaming on planes in the past. The person who compared this airline’s new policy to Jim Crow laws and Rosa Parks should be slapped silly – how dispicable to make that comparison! If you brought your child into the quiet zone on the plane, you wouldn’t be beaten, thrown in… Read more »
As a father of two young girls who (mercifully) been great on planes in the past, I see absolutely no problem with this. Attaching ageism or any other ism that easily categorizes this as something by which to be offended is nothing more than looking for something by which to be offended (see: Rosa Parks argument). It’s reasonable, understandable and applies no extra cost to those who would be affected by the policy.
Hmm… works for me, but it would be nice to see a “kids section” where there are toys galore, TV’s in the back of the seats, a real changing station, quick drink orders for frazzled parents and the like. That’s a section I’d pay a premium for.
I think this is a fine idea. Every time I travel in Europe by train I pick the quiet car. I don’t believe there are age restrictions, but for the most part, the “quiet” part is respected. Plus, it’s not like the whole plane would be sectioned off. Parents with children would still have the run of most of the plane. These are choices being given, not restrictions. Also, what about the business travelers that are suffering jet lag or are depending on the time during the flight for sleep? Don’t they deserve to have an option for that if… Read more »
I actually think this is a great idea. I have a baby who is five months old and in-laws who live overseas. The last time we flew my baby was perfect, but I spent much of the flight worrying that she was going to act up and ruin the flight for others. I think being in an area with other families would allow me the peace of mind to relax and enjoy the flight. I’m a little unsure of how it is discrimination as they have not ban children, just designated a section where if they make a little noise… Read more »
This is fine with me. In fact, I think it’s a good thing. If I were to fly on AirAsia with my baby and he cried or fussed, the rude adults around me would no longer have any reason to be upset–if they didn’t want to take a chance that they’d be sitting near children, they could have paid the extra amount to be in the quiet zone.
My first reaction was honestly, an ageist one. They’re going to let teenagers in the quiet zone? I reacted. Then I thought about it. My kid flew every year, all through his teens, and I know he was not a disruptive passenger, unruly and loud. He had headphones and manners. It’s a stereotype of teens that they lack impulse control to the point that you can reliably sort them this way and that teens are noisy. Teens and their parents should be able to decide whether they want a quiet zone or general pop experience. I am guessing most people… Read more »
Man, I don’t know about this one. I fully appreciate and sympathize with people who don’t want to be exposed for long periods to loud, rude, messy children. No one should have to go through that who didn’t make the choice to give birth to the little rugrats.
But on the other hand, I don’t like setting ANY kind of precedent that allows businesses to discriminate against a demographic segment of their customers. Sure, I’m happy that they discriminate against Group X, but what about when they exclude Group Y (which I belong to)?
Discriminate against? Are not ALL the rows on the airplane going to the same place? Did the airline say kids can’t fly? If the airlines provide 7 rows of kid free zone, does that mean First Class is discriminatory? After all, isn’t that a “special zone” only for “some people”? Or are you making it a race issue and reducing you’re entire objection to the logical fallacy of reducto ad absurbum? Cause that would be silly. It would also be like you have no merit of an argument if you’d do that. So clearly you’re not. So what exactly are… Read more »