United Airlines refuse to let two young girls board a flight wearing skin tight "leggings" or yoga pants

A leftist woman who is passionate about denying American citizens their second amendment rights was outraged when she saw United Airlines refuse to let two young girls board a flight wearing skin tight "leggings" or yoga pants until they put on something to cover up. Sites like the Huffington Post milked the outrage, saying that a double standard applied because men were allowed to board wearing shorts, and leftist men immediately tweated that they would be quick to fly United in yoga pants to show their solidarity. (I have decided to stop flying on airplanes effective immediately.)

No, girls should NOT be allowed to wear yoga pants on airplanesA leftist woman who is passionate about denying American citizens their second amendment rights was outraged when she saw United Airlines refuse to let two young girls board a flight wearing skin tight "leggings" or yoga pants until they put on something to cover up. Sites like the Huffington Post milked the outrage, saying that a double standard applied because men were allowed to board wearing shorts, and leftist men immediately tweated that they would be quick to fly United in yoga pants to show their solidarity. (I have decided to stop flying on airplanes effective immediately.) The only thing missing from this wall to wall coverage was photos of what "leggings" or yoga pants can actually look like. While the very last thing I would ever want to do is to disseminate photos of women in revealing clothing, it is impossible to discuss a controversy about yoga pants without actually showing visually what we're talking about. Think of it like a visit to your...http://newsmachete.com?news=2057
Cezars avatar Politics
Share
0 30
This user has been banned.
@2532001

Your last statement - excellent comment!

Apparently, the girls were told they couldn't board the plane unless they put something over their "leggings". They either didn't have anything else available, or refused.
They were traveling, or attempting to, with a United employee pass. They wouldn't have been turned away, if not for the specific dress code of those flying with such a pass....
Seems sort of nit-picky to ME, since the girls were not employees representing the airline, but it IS in "the rules".

I don't know if any of that was in the link provided, since the last part of it was all blurry. As an unashamed "leftist", I do like to confirm facts before even considering getting all outraged.....

This user has deactivated their account.
@2532051

I see now that Neanderthal beat me to adding more details about this story.....guess we posted about the same time. :)

From what I read, the girls were in their early teens, but the airline did require a 10 year girl to cover up her "leggings", as well. I had that thought too...I don't see how anyone would know they were "representing" the airline, either.

They wouldn't, I figure, but I agree; they should have read and respected the rules. Not that big of an imposition, I'd say, when one is flying for free or at a sizable discount.

This user has deactivated their account.
@2532344

There are several people here, who seem to be omniscient that way. ;)

In this case, I think he might be referring to that "whinny leftist little bitch" who first tweeted about the incident. That would be Shannon Watts, a mother of 5 who founded Moms Demand Action for Gun Sense in America after the Sandy Hook tragedy, a "grassroots movement of American mothers fighting for public safety measures that respect the Second Amendment and protect people from gun violence."

This user has deactivated their account.
@2532466

Just a guess, since I'm guessing that's who the OP was referring to in that "Explained by" part....

If she's street legal, let the bimbo fly!

I'm confused... why is this posted? Is this informing us? Asking a question? Asking an opinion? Advertising for the linked site? Or what?

It seems like it's either informing or advertising because there are no questions, or are we support to be responding to the opinion of the article writer?

If that's the case, why are we responding to the opinion of someone who isn't on here? ... or are they on here? And if they're on here, isn't this like using amirite for advertising?

Anyways, yoga pants!
Image in content

@Cezar Read the link.

You're wrongly assuming I haven't already...

Like I said, there is no question or amirite posted opinion, so this seems like an advertisement to me.

I don't know what to response too... some article writers complaining about other people complain about not being allowed to wear yoga pants on a plane... that's not a question nor a opinion.

Anyways, yoga pants!
Image in content

This user has deactivated their account.
@2531812

Just because you can, doesn't mean you should!

This user has deactivated their account.
@2531966

And probably from the people who want to put their eyes out after seeing them.

This user has deactivated their account.
@2532050

Now I want to scrub my brain with bleach to get that image out of my mind!

This user has deactivated their account.
@2532346

I guess after awhile, you just go blind.

@2531812

From my personal experience I would completely disagree with your 85% number...

BUT... I also realize that I work very near a college and almost all the women I see in yoga pants (at least outside the grocery store) are in their 20s... and I might not see a large percentage of others wearing them.

Dress codes by a business is perfectly okay. If you want to take advantage of a business' service, you need to follow the dress code. I wonder how many Judges would allow a lawyer to appear in his/her court in an official capacity in 'leggings' or yoga pants? And what about the person who always goes barefoot wanting to enter a place that requires shoes? This is SO STUPID!

Anonymous