Private companies are beginning to take things too far. They are making their own petty rules that are making people’s lives more stressful than they should.
Last week, college student Daniel Podolsky was kicked off his flight after a Southwest Airlines employee noticed the extremely catastrophic and potentially deadly language on his shirt, “Broad F——- City”.
Podolsky, a student at Stony Brook University in New York, was leaving the South by Southwest music, film and interactive conference in Austin, Texas to head back to school. He wore a shirt he received at the festival to promote the Comedy Central show “Broad City”.
He boarded the flight with his jacket on, somewhat covering the shirt, and after becoming warm, he took it off. The plane made an unexpected stop in St. Louis, and Podolsky took advantage of that extra time to stroll through the terminal to find a restroom.
When he returned, an employee requested that he remove the shirt. But just like many other college students would have, he tried talking his way out of the situation claiming his freedom of speech. This verbal exchange ended with Podolsky being kicked off the flight. He later reported the incident to KTVI, a FOX affiliate in St. Louis.
Podolsky claims he wasn’t trying to “break the rules” by wearing the shirt — his intention was to get back home.
After much debate, the airline allowed him to catch the 7:15 p.m. flight, under the condition that he take the shirt off, which he did.
Although the airline explained its contract of carriage prohibits him from wearing the shirt, Podolsky made a valid point to KTVI.
“There are more than a hundred people on the plane trying to get to Chicago and the most important thing is my shirt,” he said. “How does that work? Where’s the sense of priority.”
While we often forget certain rights don’t hold true in some private businesses, this airline was ridiculous by holding the flight, and escorting Podolsky off of the plane. And while it would’ve been smart for the student to comply with the rules for the sake of getting home, Podolsky still made good points.
Not only is there no sense of priority, there were no recorded complaints. It isn’t fair for Southwest Airlines to police what passengers are wearing — the same airline that banned saggy pants might as well ban everything else that is freedom of expression or that many people may find “offensive”.
I’m waiting for it to ban girls wearing short-shorts and mini-skirts because that’s basically on the same level as “Broad F—— City.” Or the sweatpants with “Juicy” across the butt, or a shirt that says “Democrats Suck” because those can all be found offensive depending on who you’re talking to.
Private businesses shouldn’t be denied the right to create and enforce their own rules, but where do you draw the line? Southwest Airlines needs to figure that out because soon there will be a strict dress code enforced — black blouse, tailored slacks, dress shoes, and hair brushed back into a slick ponytail.
We might as well go back into the ’50s and ’60s, known as the “Golden Age” of commercial aviation, where they had strict dress codes and you could’ve easily mistaken the plane for Wall Street.
But now there are more things to monitor than the clothes someone decides to wear, such as terrorist threats. Southwest Airlines doesn’t seem to understand that.
At the end of this all, Podolsky still came out a winner now selling shirts that say “South F—— West.” Which if you ask me is much funnier.
Next time, Podolsky should consider reading through the lengthy contract of carriage before he wears questionable clothing, but Southwest Airlines also needs to get over themselves and stop making rules against people’s freedom of speech.
Clarke Perkins is a 19-year-old political science freshman from New Orleans. You can reach her on Twitter @ClarkePerkins.