Transgender artist arrested for baring breasts on plane Nina Arsenault and Lexi Sanfino sa

[Rockheart]

I don't think that the idea of my post was to promote Lexi's actions but rather to state the fact that for everything that we might view as unreasonable, there is an advantage! Now don't get me wrong, whether the advantages/disadvantages ratio is more or less in this case is something wholly different.

As for the flight attendants, how could you be sure that there was not harm intended?! None of us were there. It could turn out as you said and it could turn out totally different. Your whole conception/misconception is based solely in your prior knowledge of Lexi! While I totally respect that, I can't find it enough of a reason to be certain.

Additionally, what is the business of this flight attendant to go to a passenger and ask her about her make-up. Is that part of her job manual? In fact this is enough reason for the airline company to discipline her! She even go further to remind Lexi of her original gender? How in the hell is this relevant to her question?

That was the extent of my comment (i.e the flight attendant was inappropriate)! I am quiet confident if Lexi laid a complaint without resorting to what she did, she would have gained a personal benefit (i.e free ticket etc), but it could be that she wanted to deliver a message on behalf of all t-girls.

Last, as for you comments about Canadians not aware of TS! Well, on the assumption that your conception is applicable to the average Canadians from the west. I don't see this argument flying regarding a flight attendant that is supposed to be dealing with people from all sorts of life paths. I think that regardless of the actions taken against the t-girls in questions, this should ring a bell to the airline in question regarding educating their staff about such a minority as you said.

No flight attendant means to be mean or cause harm, i know this for a fact.
Sometimes they are wrong and sometimes they are bitchy but they don't mean harm ever.
Only TS think everyone is out to get them, ie: chip on your shoulder.

Women talk to each other about makeup, a flight attendant probably tells many women she likes their makeup and how did they do it. Nothing she said or did was so bad. A sane person may take her aside in private and tell her that some of the comments were not accepted well by TS, not cause a scene.

Plain and simple this was not a serious issue, only the TS involved made it one.
They have advertised publically they used to be men and do not hide it, why is it offensive to say it?
They are all over the Television acting extreme, who would expect them to freak out over this simple comment.
There is probably a re-run of one of these shows on right now.
Lexi was not offended, she just thought she would cause a scene over a marginal issue.

If Lexi knew the flight attendant used to be fat, she may say you look much better now, you used to be sooo fat.
The fact is that the person was fat before and they are not now.
They can take offense, but a fact is a fact.
Transgenders have no more rights than fat people or disabled people or any people.

I think transgenders and everyone should take a pill and up the level on what offends them.
Everyone is so fucking offended over nothing these days, it just makes me sick to my stomach.
Incidents like this do nothing for transgender rights.
The transgenders involved did nothing to advance transgender rights, they just acted like a couple of babies.
They could have done the right thing, but instead they caused a scene over nothing.
Absolutely nothing!

Sometimes you have to compromise with other people, TG's don't often do this.
Other people have the right to breath the same air too.

People live with all sorts of other minorites but they do not often come across TS if you don't live in a big city.
These 2 TS were Out and extreme, if they want privacy and anonymity they shouldn't do what they do.
There is a difference between a TS that wants to be unknown and passable and one that outgoing, flamboyant and doesn't care what people think.

My TS girlfriend who is completely passable got laughed at and made fun of because she is transgender by French immigration.
Now this is something to be offended by!
This is real hate, real harm intended.

I have a big scar across my face since birth.
A long time ago i learned that people do not treat me badly because i am deformed.
Either they are just jerks or they are not intending any harm.
I always assume the latter.

[Alexis]

No flight attendant means to be mean or cause harm, i know this for a fact.
Sometimes they are wrong and sometimes they are bitchy but they don't mean harm ever.

I dunno about that..

When I came back from Cancun last time on my way through TO the head flight attendant on the plane was a total cunt..

She was mean to everyone and especially picked on this one super hot guy that was sitting right beside me and my GF..

She did the first drink run as soon as the plane was at altitude so she could get to her Mexican food that she brought on the plane..

Then she consumed it in vast quantities and in a very non-ladylike manner..

After her buffet she rudely served the food and did the second drink run back to back and then sat on her ass the rest of the way..

I was completely disgusted with her service, attitude, manners and lack of etiquette..

and she continued to pick on the hot guy beside me with hateful eyes the whole way to Toronto every time he wanted a drink..

I even told her to lay off as she was being really rude..

Totally got the impression she would have preferred no passengers on the plane at all..

[xoxJanexox]

No flight attendant means to be mean or cause harm, i know this for a fact.
Sometimes they are wrong and sometimes they are bitchy but they don't mean harm ever.
Only TS think everyone is out to get them, ie: chip on your shoulder.

Women talk to each other about makeup, a flight attendant probably tells many women she likes their makeup and how did they do it. Nothing she said or did was so bad. A sane person may take her aside in private and tell her that some of the comments were not accepted well by TS, not cause a scene.

Plain and simple this was not a serious issue, only the TS involved made it one.
They have advertised publically they used to be men and do not hide it, why is it offensive to say it?
They are all over the Television acting extreme, who would expect them to freak out over this simple comment.
There is probably a re-run of one of these shows on right now.
Lexi was not offended, she just thought she would cause a scene over a marginal issue.

If Lexi knew the flight attendant used to be fat, she may say you look much better now, you used to be sooo fat.
The fact is that the person was fat before and they are not now.
They can take offense, but a fact is a fact.
Transgenders have no more rights than fat people or disabled people or any people.

I think transgenders and everyone should take a pill and up the level on what offends them.
Everyone is so fucking offended over nothing these days, it just makes me sick to my stomach.
Incidents like this do nothing for transgender rights.
The transgenders involved did nothing to advance transgender rights, they just acted like a couple of babies.
They could have done the right thing, but instead they caused a scene over nothing.
Absolutely nothing!

Sometimes you have to compromise with other people, TG's don't often do this.
Other people have the right to breath the same air too.

People live with all sorts of other minorites but they do not often come across TS if you don't live in a big city.
These 2 TS were Out and extreme, if they want privacy and anonymity they shouldn't do what they do.
There is a difference between a TS that wants to be unknown and passable and one that outgoing, flamboyant and doesn't care what people think.

My TS girlfriend who is completely passable got laughed at and made fun of because she is transgender by French immigration.
Now this is something to be offended by!
This is real hate, real harm intended.

I have a big scar across my face since birth.
A long time ago i learned that people do not treat me badly because i am deformed.
Either they are just jerks or they are not intending any harm.
I always assume the latter.

Thanks God Devil that you are not a law maker! Otherwise you would have given flight attendants immunity from lawsuits!

Let's say that we have some disagreements over some of the issues here, but that is fine. I stated my opinion and you have made yours and members of the forum have the benefits of both sides of the argument!

[Jim S]

LOL.. that would suck.. and I'd totally freak on them if they tried that shit with me..

I'll be wearing a nice summer dress and looking immaculate..

Just above the knee and lots of cleavage..

I'm good at pulling off stunningly sexy & classy without under dressing...

The long bleach blonde hair seems to turn a lot of heads..

That and I'm sure there's a westjet memo out by now not to say shit to trannies..

I hope it all goes well for you, I'm sure you'll be stunning, sexy and classy, from looking at your pics those descriptions are more than fitting, one never knows I may see you at Terminal 3 as I'm flying in tomorrow too. I know my head will turn xox

[Shyla Wild]

Thanks God Devil that you are not a law maker! Otherwise you would have given flight attendants immunity from lawsuits!

Let's say that we have some disagreements over some of the issues here, but that is fine. I stated my opinion and you have made yours and members of the forum have the benefits of both sides of the argument!

He doesn't have to make laws. About a year and a half ago, I posted on this forum a new restriction to the Canadian No Fly List or Identity Screening Regulations. Trans people were barred from a Air Travel.

5.2 (1) An air carrier shall not transport a passenger if …
(c) the passenger does not appear to be of the gender indicated on the identification he or she presents;

Now, I looked into the reasons for being added to the NO FLY list:
The no-fly or specified persons list is compiled by an advisory group led by Transport Canada. The group includes RCMP and Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) representatives and also gets input from representatives of other Canadian government departments and agencies.


Individuals who are considered to pose a threat to air travel security may include
-those involved in a terrorist group
-those convicted of one or more serious and life-threatening crimes against aviation security
-those convicted of one or more serious and life-threatening offences and who may attack or harm an air carrier, passengers or crew members.

According to this, Lexi and Nina are not part of a terrorist group, and even though Lexi was arrested and charged she was NEVER convicted of this crime and therefore they are imposing guilt without due process. Nina from what I read is not guilty of any of this. Therefore, the only reason they were added to the no fly list is because they are TS under section 5.2 section 1 of the Identity Screening Regulations.

My original Thread: http://tgirlforums.com/yabbse/showth...avel-in-CANADA

[xoxJanexox]

He doesn't have to make laws. About a year and a half ago, I posted on this forum a new restriction to the Canadian No Fly List or Identity Screening Regulations. Trans people were barred from a Air Travel.

5.2 (1) An air carrier shall not transport a passenger if …
(c) the passenger does not appear to be of the gender indicated on the identification he or she presents;

Now, I looked into the reasons for being added to the NO FLY list:
The no-fly or specified persons list is compiled by an advisory group led by Transport Canada. The group includes RCMP and Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) representatives and also gets input from representatives of other Canadian government departments and agencies.


Individuals who are considered to pose a threat to air travel security may include
-those involved in a terrorist group
-those convicted of one or more serious and life-threatening crimes against aviation security
-those convicted of one or more serious and life-threatening offences and who may attack or harm an air carrier, passengers or crew members.

According to this, Lexi and Nina are not part of a terrorist group, and even though Lexi was arrested and charged she was NEVER convicted of this crime and therefore they are imposing guilt without due process. Nina from what I read is not guilty of any of this. Therefore, the only reason they were added to the no fly list is because they are TS under section 5.2 section 1 of the Identity Screening Regulations.

My original Thread: http://tgirlforums.com/yabbse/showth...avel-in-CANADA

Welcome to Canada then! Is this why the Charter was created?

I am afraid that this law is unconstitutional. The airlines have the right as a matter of safety to verify the identity of the passenger. However, when the person carry a photo ID that is comparable to the status on boarding, then this concern must have been addressed.

This is one of the laws they create and keep in the shelves for discretionary use because they know that its wide implementation might at one point trigger a constitutional challenge!

[Shyla Wild]

Welcome to Canada then! Is this why the Charter was created?

I am afraid that this law is unconstitutional. The airlines have the right as a matter of safety to verify the identity of the passenger. However, when the person carry a photo ID that is comparable to the status on boarding, then this concern must have been addressed.

This is one of the laws they create and keep in the shelves for discretionary use because they know that its wide implementation might at one point trigger a constitutional challenge!

Law? What Law? These regulations are not actually a piece of legislation, which would have had to pass through readings and votes in the House and Senate. The Identity Screening Regulations are a set of rules implemented unilaterally by the Ministry of Transportation, as part of Canada’s so-called Passenger Protect, which is essentially the Canadian Federal Government’s equivalent to the U.S.’s “no-fly” list. As this is not a Law, there is no constitutional challenge. Even if there was, I do believe the safety of the many, outnumber the needs of the few.

In effect since July 27th, 2011.

[xoxJanexox]

A regulation is a "Law"!

Law? What Law? These regulations are not actually a piece of legislation, which would have had to pass through readings and votes in the House and Senate. The Identity Screening Regulations are a set of rules implemented unilaterally by the Ministry of Transportation, as part of Canada’s so-called Passenger Protect, which is essentially the Canadian Federal Government’s equivalent to the U.S.’s “no-fly” list. As this is not a Law, there is no constitutional challenge. Even if there was, I do believe the safety of the many, outnumber the needs of the few.

In effect since July 27th, 2011.

A regulation is a law. The word "law" is not only meant to reflect a legislation enacted by the Canadian Parliament or the legislative assembly.

E.g. Can OC transpo (Ottawa public transportation) make a regulation banning black individuals from using its buses? They all the time make internal by-laws or regulations to run their affairs. These are regulations=laws that could be challenged as they affect people rights.

[Rockheart]

I dunno about that..

When I came back from Cancun last time on my way through TO the head flight attendant on the plane was a total cunt..

She was mean to everyone and especially picked on this one super hot guy that was sitting right beside me and my GF..

She did the first drink run as soon as the plane was at altitude so she could get to her Mexican food that she brought on the plane..

Then she consumed it in vast quantities and in a very non-ladylike manner..

After her buffet she rudely served the food and did the second drink run back to back and then sat on her ass the rest of the way..

I was completely disgusted with her service, attitude, manners and lack of etiquette..

and she continued to pick on the hot guy beside me with hateful eyes the whole way to Toronto every time he wanted a drink..

I even told her to lay off as she was being really rude..

Totally got the impression she would have preferred no passengers on the plane at all..

This is called being bitchy which is different than being intolerant to transsexuals.

The claim made on this thread is that the flight attendant was being specifically intolerant to TS.
I think she was trying be really friendly like most West Jet attendants usually are 99% of the time.

[Rockheart]

Thanks God Devil that you are not a law maker! Otherwise you would have given flight attendants immunity from lawsuits!

Let's say that we have some disagreements over some of the issues here, but that is fine. I stated my opinion and you have made yours and members of the forum have the benefits of both sides of the argument!

There was no trangression against TS here, maybe bad judgement, at best. No law was broken by the flight attendant.
You are just acting like someone with a chip on their shoulder, assuming the worst in all cases.
These 2 TS are famous celebrities, they have been on TV ad nauseum discussing their TS status and going on about how they used to be boys. These 2 live in the public eye. If they are recognized and approached, it is 100% their own fault. They are not private TS goihng through a private transition. Their transitions are on public record.
There is pictures all over the internet with them as a boy and a girl, this is their life.
This would never have happened to a TS who was private and discreet about their life and transition.

Lawsuits and laws are not the same thing.
Lawsuits are Tort law and have very little to do with legislated laws.
Nothing stops Lexi from bringing a lawsuit against the airline, however, to me there is no case.
A lawsuit cannot be brought against the flight attendant directly because she was acting as an agent of the airline.
(And on Westjet is actually a owner)

Welcome to Canada then! Is this why the Charter was created?

I am afraid that this law is unconstitutional. The airlines have the right as a matter of safety to verify the identity of the passenger. However, when the person carry a photo ID that is comparable to the status on boarding, then this concern must have been addressed.

This is one of the laws they create and keep in the shelves for discretionary use because they know that its wide implementation might at one point trigger a constitutional challenge!

A charter is guideline for how the country will create it's laws and guidelines.
If new laws do not meet the charter guidelines they may not be passed and may be overturned.
Laws can be challenged by individuals if they think it violates their individual rights as listed in the Charter.

Your rights are only valid until they infringe on the rights of others.
In this case Lexi's actions did not fit the "crime". If she felt insulted by the flight attendant, why was everyone else on the plane subject to her "revenge". The passengers on the plane have a right not be subjected to her actions, which are illegal.
The flight attendant did NOTHING illegal.

A regulation is a law. The word "law" is not only meant to reflect a legislation enacted by the Canadian Parliament or the legislative assembly.

E.g. Can OC transpo (Ottawa public transportation) make a regulation banning black individuals from using its buses? They all the time make internal by-laws or regulations to run their affairs. These are regulations=laws that could be challenged as they affect people rights.

If you don't appear the same on your ID as your appearance you risk the rights of the other passengers.
The rights of one always gets nullified by the rights of the many.
No public company can make a rule excluding passengers based on race or sex.
But you can ban black people if there id has a picture of an asian or white person, shit has to match.

Private institutions can and have blocked anyone they like, legally.

[Ana_Jolie]

This is called being bitchy which is different than being intolerant to transsexuals.

The claim made on this thread is that the flight attendant was being specifically intolerant to TS.
I think she was trying be really friendly like most West Jet attendants usually are 99% of the time.

Maybe she was trying to be nice but lets keep in mind she was at work not hanging out at the local gay bar asking dumb questions that come off as being offensive and insensitive. I don't agree with Lexi's response but lets face it the flight attendant was being an idiot whether she meant to be or not. The fact that so much attention is being paid to this topic is just as stupid as the flight attendants questions.

[Rockheart]

Maybe she was trying to be nice but lets keep in mind she was at work not hanging out at the local gay bar asking dumb questions that come off as being offensive and insensitive. I don't agree with Lexi's response but lets face it the flight attendant was being an idiot whether she meant to be or not. The fact that so much attention is being paid to this topic is just as stupid as the flight attendants questions.

Damn right she was trying to be friendly.
These two have never ever hidden the fact they are TS or used to be boys.
In fact they advertise it at every turn.

Flight attendants are idiots and treat me wrong many times.
Usually they are overworked and have had to put up with assholes all day.
I don't take it personally.
They are not trying to intolerant to me.

[Shyla Wild]

These are regulations=laws that could be challenged as they affect people rights.

lol...ok,

And where would you like to challenge them? Maybe you don't understand. You can twist the words laws, regulations and whatever else you want to twist it into BUT like I said this is not a Law. Since the government as terms for everything, Law, Regulation, etc. each has it's own set of rules associated with it. If you consider an airline regulation as Law, then you must understand that the government and the system disagree with you. As such, this cannot be challenged in the House of Commons which controls The Constitution and your Bill of Rights.

Second, if transsexuals think this can be challenged in the courts then again we are wrong. This is controlled by the Ministry of Transport underPassenger Protectwhich since passed has mirrored the US's No-Fly List. Good luck fighting the FAA and TCCA on this. Canada and the US share many of the same securities and safe guards when it comes to airline security. In Canada, you can try to take the TCCA (Transport Canada Civil Aviation) to court but you can imagine what that would take.

Lastly, do you know why the gender issue on a plane? It's to stop terrorists from dressing up as women, faking passports and blowing up planes. This is a serious security issue to many airlines and to the people that fly. How do you argue against this? This is why it's on the no-fly list and this is why transsexuals will be fighting a battle in which the safety of the many out number the needs of the few.

Flight attendants are idiots

So are tons of jobs. Taxi drivers, Government workers, etc....

Why do we get insulted when these people do stupid things? I figured by now we would just be used to it.

[toban]

The other side of the story should be interesting

I am of the opinion that far too much is being written here when there is no hard information to back up the suppositions some folks are making about the causes of the incident and the deterioration of decorum.

The factual description here of the happening is minimal at best so really, what happened first and who said what to whom at what point in the conversation. Almost certainly this incident could not likely have happened spontaeously! I am inclined to wonder whether the flight attendant initiated the supposed conversation or did Amber and Lexi draw her attention by some unusual actions on their part?

Most importantly, they do not seem to have acted rationally as would normal air travellers. From what I make of it I have to wonder though if these girls were in their right minds at the time.

Regardless anything else though, Lexi's aisle walk was absolutely wrong, dead wrong! She has to take her lumps for that act of stupidity.

[xoxJanexox]

There was no trangression against TS here, maybe bad judgement, at best. No law was broken by the flight attendant.
You are just acting like someone with a chip on their shoulder, assuming the worst in all cases.

These 2 TS are famous celebrities, they have been on TV ad nauseum discussing their TS status and going on about how they used to be boys. These 2 live in the public eye. If they are recognized and approached, it is 100% their own fault. They are not private TS goihng through a private transition. Their transitions are on public record.
There is pictures all over the internet with them as a boy and a girl, this is their life.
This would never have happened to a TS who was private and discreet about their life and transition.

Lawsuits and laws are not the same thing.
Lawsuits are Tort law and have very little to do with legislated laws.
Nothing stops Lexi from bringing a lawsuit against the airline, however, to me there is no case.
A lawsuit cannot be brought against the flight attendant directly because she was acting as an agent of the airline.
(And on Westjet is actually a owner)

I think my words are taken out of their context again!
When I commented about you not being a law maker it was in a sarcastic manner as you were saying flight attendants in general never intend harm and you know that as a fact. With all respect, we are all human beings that are engineered to make and intend harm at times! We can't set out a class of individuals as they never intend to do harm.

No where did I say laws are equivalent of lawsuits, so this is just your own projection.

If you don't appear the same on your ID as your appearance you risk the rights of the other passengers.
The rights of one always gets nullified by the rights of the many.
No public company can make a rule excluding passengers based on race or sex.
But you can ban black people if there id has a picture of an asian or white person, shit has to match.

Private institutions can and have blocked anyone they like, legally.

I agree that if you don't fit the photo ID picture, then the airline can reject to board the passenger and I clearly made that in my reply post to Shyla earlier. But apparently I am perceived with a chip on my shoulders! lol

However, if the TS matches the picture in her photo ID, then the safety concern of the other passengers is met.

A charter is guideline for how the country will create it's laws and guidelines.
If new laws do not meet the charter guidelines they may not be passed and may be overturned.
Laws can be challenged by individuals if they think it violates their individual rights as listed in the Charter.

Your rights are only valid until they infringe on the rights of others.
In this case Lexi's actions did not fit the "crime". If she felt insulted by the flight attendant, why was everyone else on the plane subject to her "revenge". The passengers on the plane have a right not be subjected to her actions, which are illegal.
The flight attendant did NOTHING illegal.

So where is the disagreement here! I said the Ministry of Transportation regulation should fit with the Charter. Lexi, according to Shyla was banned by 5.2(1) of the Identity screening regulation:

5.2 (1) An air carrier shall not transport a passenger if …
(c) the passenger does not appear to be of the gender indicated on the identification he or she presents;

Let's please read the language up there carefully, it doesn't say that the passenger doesn't appear as the photo ID picture but rather of the "gender" in the ID. Do you see the difference! This means that even if I arrive with driving license or passport with a picture of me as a female, they can still reject boarding me because it says "M" in my gender section. How is this of any relevance to passengers safety! Please let's not mix things up.

lol...ok,

And where would you like to challenge them? Maybe you don't understand. You can twist the words laws, regulations and whatever else you want to twist it into BUT like I said this is not a Law. Since the government as terms for everything, Law, Regulation, etc. each has it's own set of rules associated with it. If you consider an airline regulation as Law, then you must understand that the government and the system disagree with you. As such, this cannot be challenged in the House of Commons which controls The Constitution and your Bill of Rights.

Second, if transsexuals think this can be challenged in the courts then again we are wrong. This is controlled by the Ministry of Transport underPassenger Protectwhich since passed has mirrored the US's No-Fly List. Good luck fighting the FAA and TCCA on this. Canada and the US share many of the same securities and safe guards when it comes to airline security. In Canada, you can try to take the TCCA (Transport Canada Civil Aviation) to court but you can imagine what that would take.

Lastly, do you know why the gender issue on a plane? It's to stop terrorists from dressing up as women, faking passports and blowing up planes. This is a serious security issue to many airlines and to the people that fly. How do you argue against this? This is why it's on the no-fly list and this is why transsexuals will be fighting a battle in which the safety of the many out number the needs of the few.

Challenging laws is very difficult and that's why the state overstep its boundaries often!

What you have said is reasonable and like what most prostitutes said about prostitution laws for decades, Good luck fighting them, until three prostitutes came and took it on their shoulders. I am sure that their life was ruined by this challenge, but that is why there are always heroes who sacrifice for the betterment of the others, and people like me survive on their accomplishments.

I agree as I said earlier if a TS presents with non-matching ID, there are legitimate safety concerns but I am afraid that the language of the regulation you referred too goes way further.