Young Girl Argues With Anti-Chinese French On Airplane

From Mop:

Chinese origin MM‘s heart very pained: On my flight, I reproached French people who discriminate against China!

It was on the plane to Paris, three weeks after the Olympic flame was obstructed in Paris.

jin-jing-olympic-torch-relay-paris-tibet-supporter

Next to me was a Westerner, his companions were also all around me. After takeoff, their conversations helped me determine their identities: a group of French tourists returning to their country.

This American airline company’s route to Europe very rarely has Asian flight attendants. So when an Asian stewardess began providing refreshments, everyone was surprised. A French guy sitting near me started his French-style romance, charging the Asian stewardess and saying: “This beautiful young lady is Japanese right?!”

The young lady looked at him and then looked at the five star red flag pin/brooch on her uniform before politely telling him: “No, sir, did you see this? I am Chinese.”

Suddenly without words, his expression cooled, giving people the feeling that he would have continued being enthusiastic had the lady responded that she was Japanese. The stewardess also felt his sudden change, turned her eyes to me, and asked me what I wanted. I used English to reply her.

As soon as the service cart continued forward, that French guy may have felt that what he just did was a little arrogant, and said to me “Sorry, the past few days that flag has been everywhere in France, I truly have had enough! What are they trying to do!”

Without waiting for him to finish, I hurriedly said: “Sorry, sir, I also come from that flag’s country.”

Perhaps he did not expect this, so his expression became a little stiff. He icily looked at me, and then turned to his food before him.

Afterward, as if I did not exist, he and his companions treated this airplane like a Parisian road-side cafe, chatting and drinking, pressing the stewardess call light, opening the window shades of the passenger cabin and allowing the sun to shine in.  I controlled my temper, and used my expression and body language to communicate my displeasure, plugging my ears with earplugs in front of them. I need to rest! I politely said to my neighbor: “Can you please close the window shade?”

I truly did not imagine he would answer me like this: “Sorry, young lady, this window seat is mine, the plane ticket was paid with my money, you have no right to request this of me!”

I was stunned for a long time, not knowing what to say!  This is the self-proclaimed friendliness, generosity, pursuit of romance and freedom of the French people? So what they were pursuing was their own freedom! I did not want the remainder of my journey to be spent in this kind of atmosphere, and concluded that their inhuman behavior was deliberate against us Chinese. I decided I may not be able to argue with them but at least I can avoid them!

Getting up, I walked to the work room at the back of the passenger cabin, and started a conversation with my distant compatriot. Aside from some small talk, she told me about her work experience. She said that amongst her work assignments, the France route gives her the most headaches because the passengers are too wanton, do not listen to the flight attendants, continue to walk around when the fasten seat belt light is on, that it is common for them to ask for 4-5 things each time they want something, and it is as if they have been wronged if it things are not done this way. Not only this, and perhaps as a result of of smoking, their mouths are very smelly. I said to her that people say Chinese passengers are also very difficult to handle. She said that the route between China and America is 14 hours, the route between America and France is 8 hours, and in comparison, Chinese passenger’s behavior is far better than French people. If French people were to sleep for that long of a time, it would be impossible to enter the passenger cabin [due to bad mouth odor]! She also said that she must admit, America is the country with the best personal hygiene in the world, the passengers basically do not have any mouth odor.

We chatted like this. I told her about what happened with my neighbor. She said, “there are all kinds of people, do not worry, you can come sit in the empty seat in the very last row.”

At this moment, my neighbor and several of his companions also come over! They were probably also tired of sitting. Upon seeing us two Chinese chatting, he provokingly said to another stewardess: “Chinese people are so pitiful, living in a country without freedom, look at the Communist Party’s masterpiece, brainwashing their own citizens, such a large country not allowing other religions to exist…”

At this moment, I could not endure it anymore! I asked him: “Have you been to China?”

“I do not even have the desire to go!”

“Then do not say anything!”

“You have no right to ask this of me!”

“You have even less right to make such personal remarks about what you do not know!”

“Young lady, do not be angry, can you understand why so many young people unscrupulously assemble on other country’s territory, expressing their dissatisfaction with everyone in the country? If this is not having been brainwashed, what could it be?”

foreign-chinese-show-support-for-china

“You truly do not understand modern China. Do you know the background these young people grew up in? Let me tell you, they are the 80s generation that were born after China’s reforms. Almost all of them are the only child in their families, whose parents provided them with everything they could. They are a self-confident, self-centered, generation with their own way of thinking, having grown up listening to Western popular music and watching Hollywood movies. They do not feel that they are inferior to others, so when they discover their own motherland being looked down upon by others, without anyone’s incitement or brainwashing, they automatically/voluntarily stood up for the honor of their motherland!”

“Even so, they cannot do whatever they want in other countries? Who welcomed them to come?”

“I think their “page-ant” [probably means march/demonstration] and assembly is legal. Otherwise, the French pol.ice would not allow it.”

“No politics, no politics.” Another flight attendant wanted to break us apart, asking the French guy across from me: “Tell me about the good places in Paris, I want to see museums?”

The French guy’s eyes flashed, and introduced some like the back of his hand before finally saying: “Us French collect precious artwork from various countries in the world, including the home country of these two young ladies–China gave them to us.”

I could not take it anymore, and stared at him: “Why would Chinese people give their own art to your France? They were stolen by your ancestors!”

“Nonsense, us French people would never do this kind of thing!”

“Oh really? Do you know Victor Hugo?”

Surprised, he said: “He is the pride of our people! You also know him?”

I did not understand his surprise, and carefully said: “He previously said in his essay: ‘One day, two robbers came to China and brutally plundered the Old Summer Palace. They killed people, started fires, and committed all sorts of atrocities. The name of these two robbers, one was England, one was France.’ May I ask, who is France? How many Frances are there in the world?”

In the face of my interrogation, he actually said: “Impossible, I am not an uneducated person and I have never known of this kind of thing!”

“Come say that to me after you have gone home and checked the library! A people unwilling to face their own faults has no future. I only admire French people who are like Hugo!”

“A true French person does not buy other country’s luxury goods!” a female companion of the French guy said to me.

bonjou-la-france

Tit for tat, I said: “If you are referring to your LV bags and perfume, why not say this to the English and Americans? You are envying Chinese people! If I am not guessing wrong, a woman like you needs to save for awhile to buy an LV bag. Look at Chinese people, when they buy one, they buy half a dozen or a dozen so of course you are uncomfortable. The most important thing is that the Chinese people did not steal, that they fairly buy and sell, that they paid money! If you are a true patriotic French person, why are you flying on an American airline! Go fly your own French airline!”

They started to use French to shout, I was so angry I began to shake, so I pushed aside a path to return to my seat, grabbed my hand luggage, and returned to sit down in the empty seat in the last row all in front of their hateful eyes. At the time, had there been a gun in my hands, I think I would have immediately shot them all! Ignorant arrogant French guys!

That compatriot gave me a paper towel and said to me: “Thank you, without this uniform, I would have been on your side.”

My tears wantonly dripped down, did I win this argument? If I did, why would tears be all over my face? My heart was very chaotic, very pained. For my motherland full of hardships, I pray that she can truly become strong!

Comments from Mop:

野牛与比尔:

When did the 5 Mao start writing novels?

疯草招摇:

Watching politics evolve is like watching the circus,
Just the year before last was the China-France friendship year, but it has become like this now?
What will it be like next year?
Circus and political turmoil, which one does the lou zhu like to watch?

狼族VS天涯:

What you did was very right. I am proud to have a compatriot like you. If I were you, I too would have done what you did. I support the LZ.

felicia2009:

I support~~~absolutely must ding…I do not feel one bit what is so good about foreigners! Especially France.
My geography teacher said, France is an irrational, only knows “romance” country.  Not worth mentioning!! Lou zhu, next time it would be better to just pretend you cannot see these people. Ignoring them would be the biggest humiliation!!!

2009伱犯賎錒!?:

Why is our China always disliked, bullied, by people? Why? ~~~ Are our Chinese people bad??

明明白白的痛苦:

No matter if it is true or false, it makes people even more angry!

全面小康:

French people, if you are unlucky enough to encounter them, you can fully understand the French philistine mentality.
Personally speaking, I am more willing to deal with Swiss or Americans.
Jews,
I do not even want to say.
They always think the entire world owes them.

magnichina:

With regards to this MM‘s behaviour I express admiration.
I hope all of China’s sons and daughters can be like this! Do not lose your self-respect in the face of foreigners!

splendour83:

Mop friend, most French people are not bad people, only a little mentally retarded.

9NJH:

I am giving my “topic reply virginity” [first time replying to a BBS post] to a beloved person who reveres the motherland. LZ, let me tell you a piece of good news: Our generation will make our motherland strong and powerful, I am sure of it!

厚土黄天:

France, a pompous country~ taught a lesson by Germans twice yet still no progress.

11码:

What he said was not wrong,
Chinese people have indeed been brainwashed.

牛B天天有:

Sigh…France’s appointed president, I still rather like.
This Sarkozy is completely a NB…completely losing all of the French people’s face…letting the world’s people all know that France is also completely insensible and unreasonable country…

w56373511:

First, I will not talk about the authenticity of this post.
French tourists just recently won first place for the world’s most disliked tourist amongst the service industry.

df_llz:

Support. Recently, I have seen many things that have also given me impressions of France that were different from the past. I have decided that after learning French and there is an opportunity, I will refute the French face to face.

Comments from China.com BBS:

红色哨兵:

Our disgrace/shame comes from our elders. I hope it will not happen in the future!

我是你妈二爷:

You stupid cunt. Those studying abroad in France are a bunch of corrupt official’s sons and daughters, including you. Are we Chinese people more wealthy than the French? French people only need to save half a month’s money to buy LV, but Chinese people buying half a dozen each time? If [those Chinese are] not corrupt officials then what could they be? If you are Chinese, then do not buy any French things. Trash begging to be fucked like you must be a French-Chinese [Chinese person with French citizenship]. If you really have the courage, give up your French nationality. Our motherland welcomes you.

我是你妈二爷:

[referring to above comment]
Extremely well-said. Your father being a [corrupt] official within the country [China], yourself outside of the country driving BMW sports cars, going on vacations, being “patriotic”…this kind of life, I would love to just dream about it.

柔士:

France is where freedom originated, so it is normal for French people to enjoy freedom. Lou zhu‘s self-esteem in the post was too strong! It would have been better to just treat them as foolish people.

anthonyz:

There is nothing wrong with liking freedom. Also, other people saying that Chinese people have been brainwashed, lied to, and have no rights is not wrong either. You yelling at people on an airplane again confirms that you are ignorant and have been brainwashed, that you have not experienced much outside of the country. Embarrassing!!!

捧场评论:

The most ignorant yet brainwashed idiots are all those double-crossers, those scum and small people who not only do not help their own but build up others with their eyes wide open! A compatriot no matter how wrong is still your compatriot. No matter how civilized an outsider pretends to be they are still an outsider. This should be understood clearly.

守护神@龙:

France is really amusing.
There first lady is a whore.

ssmrh:

Good job~! If all of China’s youth can be more like you, China will become even stronger!

雅木三水:

France did good, extremely good, just great, helping China’s young generation experience the West’s pride and prejudice,  helping them wake up and work harder.

sunyang2008:

I can only say that prosperous and powerful China makes ignorant Westerners envious! I support the lou zhu!

UPDATE: Many people automatically believe this story is fake. Are you sure? Please see the original author’s blog posts: 飞机上的爱国架 and 最弄不明白的是人!

飞机上的爱国架

Share This Article

559 Comments

  • Some HTML can be used to format your comment.
  • Add a picture to your comments with Gravatar.
  • Our Comment Policy.
  1. Why are Chinese so paranoid of Tibet and Tibetans. Tibetans consider Chinese as unwelcomed guest in their country.

    • Karze:

      would you really know what people in Tibet think? or are you just repeating what your slacker American friends tell you as they break windows at the Chinese embassy or sit in the street occasionally and repeat silly slogans? (while texting their parents what time they will be picked up). To say there was wrong involved on China’s part in their relations with Tibet is easy, rather like saying the same thing about the U.S. and American Indians. But, that was then and this is now. Many many mature people in Tibet now realize that China has been paying for their hospitals and schools and roads and such for a long time and without them, there wouldn’t be enough money raised by American heavy metal groups and benefit concerts and such to cover the costs. Even those bald haircuts and orange robes aren’t free you know. Interesting that you believe you have the authority to speak for the people of Tibet on this issue, though. Good luck with that. Next, maybe you can er take on the issue of the American Indians in the U.S.? or perhaps, on behalf of your Taiwanese friends, campaign for a return of the Confederacy?

      • I am an Indian and have been to France many many times now. I have read all sorts of bad comments on French people – but on a personal level NEVER faced any discrimination or bad behaviour from the French. In fact – its been quite the opposite when I fly Air France everyone is extra sweet towards me, they are very smiley and courteus and even in Paris or the South of France wherever I went people were very friendly to me. Maybe its because I look more Southern European – rather than Indian? But even when I tell people I am Indian they have no issues in France whereas in USA, Britain and even China – people have an issue with me being Indian. I have found the French people to be extremely sophisticated, cultured, a bit reserved and very sexy really… however I do agree they are a bit “Cold” when it comes to emotions and relationships. Despite their freedom – French are still an oppressed culture – but then all socialist countries are oppressed.

        As for the Chinese and most other Indians too – a majority of them have this “inferiority complex” especially the chinese because they are very self-hating people. The Japanese are NOT… chinese hate the way they look their eyes, their colour everything and this is why chinese want to marry whites desperately so they can “mix” or eliminate their own race one day. Sorry but I never met a confident Chinese in my life – they were all loathing in self pity, always complaining how the world is so racist against them, always pulling the race card for no reasons.

        I have strong reasons to believe this girl is lying or manipulating and maybe exxagerating the facts. French are very careful not to upset anyone about “race” so I dont really believe this article. I would believe it if a British or American did this – but not the French and most continental Europeans don’t. They are a bit snooty thats all – and why not? Its the most beautiful country on earth with such a wealth of history, class and culture behind it – If China had the same they would be snooty as well. India and China both suffer from this “nouveau” riche inferiority complex…. there are nice people in both countries too but the ones who travel worldwide have an “attitude” problem – they feel better than their own people and yet feel discriminated by others.

  2. Americans are basically nice but you have to experience the US media first-hand to know the degree of ignorance to which it subjects them.

    America has no monopoly on assholes. Assholes are the most international race there is. The nice thing about the Internet and Globalization is that both will enable them to cancel each other out so that the rest of us can get on with life.

    America is racist. It is the most racist country I know and I’ve seen dozens of them. It is racist because its members cannot see deeper than skin color and details of lifestyle. It can see beyond either because it has no culture.

    When you have a culture, you know there is a reason behind a particular custom, or habit of lifestyle, so you ask about it and walk away feeling you’ve just learned something and that this makes you wealthier inside. When you have no culture, you just think somebody is wrong because he did something differently. Perhaps even apparently offensively. And you walk away feeling righteous…but no smarter.

    When judging the average US citizen, it is perhaps wisest to remember: “Forgive them, for they know not what they do”, as somebody once said.

  3. I lived in different parts of the US – NYC, Florida, West Coast, Texas – it was all the same full of idiots, ignorant to the CORE, clueless about the world and hating anything to do with “culture”.

    I moved to Europe and have never seen or heard or faced the ignorance I saw in USA. It is not a myth that Americans are ignorant – its the truth. Even well educated, and well traveled Americans I have come accross in my life have been ignorant mostly – I would say I only met maybe 2 or 3 americans who were different and open minded people and they all lived outside the US – having rejected their own culture. I do know one such guy living in India now and hates the US himself despite being white, american and born in the US. He dreads even going back for a visit now.

    Whenever I am traveling in Europe and I come accross Americans – it immediately puts me off now – never have I seen such public display of arrogance as I see from them, and they are all loud, badly dressed, full of themselves and usually just talking about money. Sorry but I really do agree with someone else above – American media is responsible for making Americans so ignorant, arrogant and dumb. If you compare it to British or French media or even Italian media – then you would know the huge difference in quality and quantity. Media in Europe is FAR more intelligent.

    Americans also suffer from the highest level of mental health problems in the entire world, and USA also has the highest rate of Homicide in the entire western world… USA may be successful as a economic power but as a social power and a social system the US is one big failure. They should open up their mind and learn from other cultures and start accepting them finally.

  4. Jonas:

    You sound like an idiot and will never understand this. Why did I compare Americans to the upper middle class Indians??? Because 80% of Indians live in poverty and have a lack of education, money or clean living conditions. These 80% indians live on $100 a month or less. However in USA 80% of Americans have the right to free education, enough opportunity and a decent lifestyle – which is why there is NO REASON for them to be STILL so ignorant and dumb especially about the rest of the world. If you want a fair comparison then compare those Americans living ABOVE the poverty levels in USA to the Indians also living ABOVE the poverty levels in INDIA… that would be a fair comparison. There is nothing bigotted about this. Another alternative is to compare Americans to another equally wealthy society in a European country. The education system, level of basic intelligence and sense of culture amongst Europeans and educated Indians is far above that of Americans as a whole.

    • Also on a personal level every American I met in my life was more or less FAKE. When I talk to Americans I feel like i am talking to some plastic doll – there is something very unreal about Americans. Whereas when i talk to Europeans and even if they are pretentious or stuck up Europeans – they still come accross as REAL people. Americans just live in their own self-created world. Now they are bitter and angry because USA’s position in the world is declining very fast and they are losing control. USA has been fighting a war with one country or another at every given point in the last 60 years… killing millions of innocent people around the world and Americans sit at home eating their happy meals every night watching their idiot box and never once thinking what their country has done to destroy the lives of millions of people around the world.

      India has never in its entire history started a war with another country… and India never will. India is a peaceful nation where different religions / cultures etc, have co-existed for thousands of years – its nothing new.

      Americans are the most selfish, uncompassionate, and filthy people on this planet. They are so bothered by the BP oil spill and boycotting the Oil company ONLY because it is happening right by their country. But when India and other countries have far more worse tragedies of a similar sort they dont give a shit (example – Bhopal gas) – then talk about compassion. Please… Americans make me sick… but all I can say is that I feel sorry for their STUPIDITY.

  5. I am a french, and I personally love china.
    Its sad that people will get into conflicts for “the honour” of their countries… A good french and a good chinese will not start a racist argument.
    We should honour and respect our country as much as any other.
    My chinese friends would be very sad knowing some people think that Im bad, just because I am french…
    I have nothing against China, I wish the chinese, french and every other nation could learn to see the beauty in every person instead of a nation…

  6. Well that guy sure didn’t help the french stereotype of being assholes.

  7. If only you stopped buying old traditional french shops and changing them in clothes shops in Paris, perhaps you’d be more liked. Some places in Paris have changed so much in recent years I cannot believe it!

    Why come there if it’s only to live between chinese and to speak chinese?

  8. Generally, i dont reply on this site.. but i have come to known french as extremely arrogant people.. i too have been to France and realised that they are extremely rude to foreigners.
    Just think about it this way.. they lost.. they are French! and what a french people good at? losing because they haven’t won a war in recorded history.

  9. This story sounds quite unbelievable ! Whilst I was reading it I also wondered whether it was a true story till I came at the end of this article and read that many do not believe it.
    It is difficult to stomach it I have to say. I am French and the French folks portrayed sound totally ridiculous, ignorant, displaying a totally unbelievable behaviour.

    If it is true…….oh boy ! this is so goddamn weird ! my mouth was wide open as I was reading this ! But then everybody has some weird story to tell about encounters with other nationalities.

    I am sad that you used the same old, same old, same old cartoon to display the French though. I thought only Americans did that !

    How would you like to be portrayed like you were seen before ? A cartoon of a Chinese man with buck teeth and a pigtail and in Chinese robes ?You would be annoyed and I would not blame you.

    Same goes for us !

    If the story is true. Please remember that there are weird and foul people anywhere in the world.

    Incidentally, this article was pointed to me by a Canadian born Chinese person :-) otherwise I would have missed it.

    I absolutely not condone the conduct of those people who really needed a big slap across the face. If this story is true of course..

    Having leaved in many countries I sometimes squirm reading about my fellow citizens but then I think all nationalities should squirm all the same for there are plenty of absolutely hilarious ( laugh or cry ?) stories everywhere.

  10. …One here did point to the fact that some Chinese have too much money.
    …I found much truth in the comments.
    There is so much I like about China that I could write a book. ….I have seen Wuhan under water, South China flooded, and Chongqing swell from 1 1/2 million people to 30 million people, most them refugees of the earthquake in Sichuan, and others seeking opportunity. Yes, China is still suffers. Thank God for the Peoples Liberation Army. They were there to help. Thank the Gods the Cultural Revolution will never return. Most who lived through that have buried it.
    ….I know the children of professors and the children of old soldiers. As for the children of today’s officials … the ones who are the worst are not the ones who have been given special favors but the ones who expect special favors.

  11. wow!!..really guys?? these are the best u can say?? cant u accept the truth and move foward…cant u see hw u suffering…and i mean in aaallll aspects…just sit and look at everything my friend.

  12. Well done brave Chinese girl …
    You have said what is in my feeling against arrogant thief west which they are face less believe what they have in their gallery belong to their country .

    I hope all Chinese people never forget what bastard franc and England did with Summer place .
    I am Kurdish and i like real history ….the west development build on disadvantage of western which they have created for other nations.

    Yes you won and China tell the west ( Back off )

  13. French people are:

    1) Racist
    2) Dump their garbage on other nations
    3) Are responsible for creating all forms of messed up movements eg. The Raeliens
    4) Act like a superior breed of species
    5) Responsible for creating some the most dangerous gangs in North America
    6) Are always looking for a fight be that in politics or on the streets

  14. I think some Chinese people abroad has definitely left a bad taste in others’ mindset, similar to some’s impressions of Koreans (who lays claim to almost everything including cherry blossom and Chinese New Year). But since we are living in a globalized world, it really pushes one to think openly. I’d say the actions of the French were extreme and uncalled for. Respect others, because sometimes you don’t really know who they are beyond the stereotype.

  15. Perhaps one day we can all accept that there is no “best” country. No country without flaws. Each country has its good people, and its less desirable people. I have been fortunate and have been able to travel to many countries. Viewing the culture, spending time with the people, you quickly see the wonder in other countries. When you return home, your eyes are opened, and you can see the good and the bad of your own country. ( I am American.) I do not believe America is the best country, but there are good things in my country, and awful things too. We have a god complex that is unmerited and truly annoying. But one thing that is nice is that we can enjoy visiting people from many other countries and learn about different cultures. But those that attack other countries, or other governments are truly foolish. They don’t understand what it truly takes to lead other people. For example, I have nothing but praise for the Chinese government simply because of the history around the dynastic cycle. If your country had over 1 billion people, what policies would change? If your country had a population that commuted each year that is the size of America what would they do? My guess is first your country would panic, then collapse, then seek advice from China or India. So it is better not to burn bridges with your slander or hatred. The funniest thing is, I have met more people than I can keep count of, but I have not met one that was truly a bad person. We are all different, but we are also all the same. Learn to accept this, or learn to have fun like this argument on the airplane, just be careful who you argue with, some of us are violent.

  16. The writer says : “This is the self-proclaimed friendliness, generosity, pursuit of romance and freedom of the French people?”

    I am American, but I have spent a good deal of time in France. I can tell you that most of the French are the most gracious, down-to-earth, and hospitable people you could ever hope to meet. Many of the rest are the most arrogant, unfriendly, disagreeable, and stupid people on earth. They treat each other and everyone else in the same manner described in this post. I think the writer encountered a group of the latter. I have had this experience too, and I sympathize.

    I would have to say also that I have known many, many Chinese people, and I have yet to meet one I did not like. Even my ex-girfriend, who was Chinese. I still like her and admire her.

  17. I love China and have no great liking for the French, but in my experience the Chinese are the worst on flights! Of course some of the new more wealthy ones that fly oustide of china are often impeccably behaved, but my experience of internal flights has been a nightmare. Many times I have seen nearly every seat in the plane reclined before the plane has even started taxiing, and people making calls on their phones as the plane takes off, with the stewardesses running aroudn trying to wrestle them out of peoples hands. Truly, the Chinese masses have no respect for airplane civility

  18. monkey, how about you stop obsessing over what chinese stories we have, fake or otherwise.

    pathetic wannabe chinese. you may be extremely interested in what we talk about, and what we say.

    but dont confuse me telling the truth as equivalent to being interested in your monkey race or monkey culture.

    only clowns like you would somehow interpret YOU GUYS looking and translating OUR issues as US lacking stories.

  19. Yes indeed Jones, the right word is “conditioning”: that’s why we have pledges of allegiances, boot camps, swimming coaches, piano practice and driving schools.

    Of course, feel free to distinguish between conditioning you like and call the rest brainwashing.

    Just like “we” have “astronauts” and “they” have “cosmonauts” or “taikonauts”; the French even had “spacenauts” for awhile.

    Then too, “they” have “censorship” and we have “news management”.

    Go on with this form of political bipolar disorder.

  20. Jones,

    But, either way, this story is false. …

    Secondly…are we seriously going to believe that these two equally retarded people actually had this inane argument on the plane?

    Like you, I don’t like the substance of the argument or participants presented. We know its only one side of the story, and thus entirely probable that the actual argument wasn’t fairly presented.

    But are you going to go call this woman a liar to her face?

    http://my.backchina.com/space-177161-do-blog-id-26179.html
    http://my.backchina.com/space-177161-do-blog-id-26896.html

    She understands English so you don’t need to worry about calling her a liar in Chinese.

    I don’t think anyone doubts that her retelling is likely biased. That’s a non-issue. As for whether it happened at all, you have a lead to pursue and it would be wiser to pursue it than to jump ahead and make baseless but likewise emotional conclusions.

    As for flight attendants wearing pins, I know I’ve personally seen attendants wearing pins, especially on international flights. You can either call me a liar or you can account for the fact that its possible, just never personally experienced or noted by you.

  21. Jones,

    LoL, I see how my response there was more dramatic than it should be. My point is to question why you’re so sure it is false. You’re calling her a liar either way, but asking you if you’d say it to her face would give us an indication of how sure you are of her being a liar, of what evidence and arguments you have to be so sure of your accusation that she’s lying, that this is false, that it never happened.

    Remember, I’m not saying it happened exactly as described. I am, however, not going to say it didn’t happen, that we shouldn’t believe it happened. That IS what you’re saying, right?

    that the American airline company went against normal safety procedures dealing with altercations (even just the verbal ones…you know air-travel security) in a time when simple disruptive tempers merit fighter escorts, emergency landings, police action, and news reports. Sorry, but she called herself a liar when she went against American airline company paranoia.

    What, never heard of people having different tolerances or rules getting bent? Jones, arguments happen on flights all the time and I haven’t heard of fighter escorts, emergency landings, or police action happening from each of them. It isn’t as if the participants in this story raised fists or said anything about hijacking or bombing the plane. Are you seriously saying you know exactly what “American airline company paranoia” entails and that an argument over politics in the lead-up to the Olympics between an Asian Chinese gal and a white French guy cross those lines?

    The probability of the United States scrambling military jets over these two people arguing about China and France is very very small, Jones. I think you’re overestimating “American airline company paranoia” here.

    The most “telling” of a pin that I’ve ever noticed were pins signaling which languages the flight attendants were fluent in, which would include more than one pin and wouldn’t represent the national flag but just the name of the language (in it’s own language). And that was only once on a United Airlines flight to China back in 2003.

    Didn’t you just claim that “no, flight attendants, especially on American companies, do not wear flag pins or any other notification indicating where they’re from”?

    Now you’re saying you’ve seen them before, just that they aren’t flags? Is it possible that different flight attendants might wear different types of pins? That different airline companies might have different rules and regulations? That the rules and regulations may change from time to time, or on a whim? That people might bend or break the rules or regulations at times?

    I don’t think you should be so sure of something when there are so many variables left undetermined. And yes, I’d still like for you to go reach out to the gal who wrote the story and see if you can mine some more information out of her. You don’t have to call her a liar off the bat. You can, you know, pretend to a concerned reader and investigate.

    Or you can not do any of that because you don’t care enough or you’re too lazy…but I will object to you being so sure of yourself.

  22. Jones,

    The way she described the argument involved a disagreement where they were seemingly very audible and had a flight attendant attempt to break them up.

    Yes, emotional arguments sometimes get very audible. I definitely expect flight attendants to notice, intervene, break up the argument, and calm the participants. I’m sure it’s in their manual and part of their job description. The other passengers wouldn’t really appreciate two people having a noisy argument during their flight and the flight attendant is there to help everyone enjoy their flight, right?

    Let’s make a clear distinction here. Are you saying this incident didn’t happen or are you merely saying this incident didn’t happen as she described it?

    I think it was established long ago that I doubt this incident happened 100% the way she described it. I’m sure she’s spun things, whether by lying, ommission, assumption, or unfair characterization to make the story seem more sympathetic to her. She may have done this intentionally or unintentionally.

    However, I’m not ready to say this incident didn’t happen, that this is a fabricated story through and through, that “this story is false”. You asked whether we should believe that this inane argument happened on a plane. I say, sure, we’re only getting one side of the story, but I don’t see any reason to assume it didn’t happen.

    My point is, in order for her to not be a liar then this story needs to be pretty close to 100% true within reason. I doubt it was.

    There’s no reason why this story needs to be close to 100% true within reason for her to not be lying about this incident happening. It won’t be 100% true because she’s only one side of the story. That’s an unreasonable requirement for her to not be a liar. You can assume she’s lying or at least unfairly presenting the other person because she is a subjective participant, but even then, it’d be hard to prove if she was lying absent other witnesses stepping forward and testifying that she misrepresented something factual and pertinent to the incident.

    No, I wasn’t seeing flags noting the flight attendant’s nationality.

    I never said you saw flags noting the flight attendant’s nationality. I said you first claimed to have never seen pins and then went on to say you have.

    The way I see the flag pin issue is that this was a ethnically Chinese flight attendant. The flag pin may have been worn to indicate what language she might speak. OR, it might just have been a Chinese flight attendant wearing a Chinese flag to show her pride in the run up to the 2008 Olympics. You ever consider she might just be wearing it to show off her pride? Like Americans with American flag bumper stickers post 9/11?

    However, they’re not going to allow screaming pissing contests that ends up involving a flight attendant.

    Uh. People have heated arguments at times, including on flights. Flight attendants get involved to help keep the peace for everyone. It happens. It isn’t what the companies want but sometimes you can’t control when two people get put together and end up having a serious emotional disagreement. The companies would prefer that it not happen, just like the world prefers it, but it happens. I’m not sure why that’s so hard to imagine.

    Not on a post-9/11 paranoia flight that relies on it’s customers being satisfied by the fact that they were able to get sleep on the flight and not be annoyed by some equally arrogant Frenchman and Chinese girl.

    This happened in 2008, 7 years after 9/11. There’s still concern and paranoia over terrorist hijackings, but it isn’t as if passengers on flights now are so well-behaved that such an argument would be inconceivable. Jones, people still have arguments on planes in the post 9/11 world. I’m sure these two people arguing annoyed other passengers. I’m sure that’s why the story included another flight attendant trying to calm it down.

  23. Jones,

    any unreasonable deviation from the truth would put it into the “fiction” category.

    One party to an argument presenting a subjective and biased side of the story is not an “unreasonable” deviation from the truth. It’s pretty much expected.

    I never claimed I didn’t see “pins”. I said I never saw flag pins or any other pins noting the flight attendants nationality or heritage.

    My mistake. Thank you for clarifying.

    The reason I doubt the flight attendant would be wearing that flag is that the airlines take these things seriously enough in order to prevent controversies like the one the girl was talking about.

    I imagine not letting an ethnically Chinese flight attendant wear a small flag to show her pride and support of the 2008 Beijing Olympics during the Olympic year would cause quite a bit of controversy and negative PR. Unless you want to suggest that a PRC flag during 2008 is similar to wearing a swastika or hate speech.

    Given the fact that it was taking place during a time when China and France were busy flagellating each other with pathetic drama, it’d be reasonable for someone to suggest she not wear the flag.

    On an American airline? Maybe, but it’d be reasonable for her to slap that person upside the head and ask why can’t she wear a small flag pin? Just because there’s a possibility that a French person might zone into it and have an argument with a potentially ethnic Chinese passenger sitting next to them? Part of the whole American free-speech and tolerance thing is that people of different backgrounds can still openly express pride in their backgrounds as long as it doesn’t infringe on other people’s rights. There is no right of French people to not have to see a small PRC flag pin just becase China and France are politically exchanging barbs.

    A Chinese flag or China or anything like that should not be inflammatory to anyone, but unfortunately it is and American airline companies are well aware of the political sensitivities around the world and thus would not allow such a thing.

    You’re making a bold assumption here.

    While googling it, there were a few mentions of flight attendants in the US having to remove their American flag pins, even.

    Yes, I know.

    I’m saying they don’t allow it to continue. I believe you knew I meant that or, at least you should have realized it.

    What made you think I ever thought they would allow it to continue? Especially when I said otherwise so many times?

    Lately, fighter jets have been known to escort planes with unruly passengers to an airport. That isn’t necessary, but it’s an example of how very serious they take these things.

    What is “lately” and can you tell me the reason why? Just want to know if you know. Next, remember when this happened. Then, ask yourself how companies taking unruly passengers very seriously supports your original conclusion that this story is false and two people having an inane argument on a plane shouldn’t be believed.

  24. Jones,

    Either way, if the story is biased and inaccurate, however expected it is, it is thus rendered false.

    This is why I asked earlier:

    “Let’s make a clear distinction here. Are you saying this incident didn’t happen or are you merely saying this incident didn’t happen as she described it?”

    I don’t recall you answering this yet. I want to know if you simply think it didn’t happen quite the way she described it or if you don’t think it happened. I think you’ve been defending both.

    It’s not a slap in the face to her if they require the same thing for all employees of all heritage and nationalities.

    Jones, I understand companies having restrictive but entirely legal policies. What I’m asking you is if you think it is so inconceivable that an ethnic Chinese flight attendant would wear a small PRC flag pin in 2008 and that the company would allow or tolerate it. Don’t forget that there were plenty of PRC Olympic commercialism throughout America AND France. Companies sponsored and advertised their sponsorship. Chinese flags and allusions to China were everywhere. I sincerely think you’re overplaying how “controversial” an ethnic Chinese person wearing a small PRC flag, that the French passenger didn’t even NOTICE until she pointed it out to him, is.

    Unless you don’t think there was a flight attendant wearing a PRC flag on the flight because her entire story is “false”. You’re hinging your argument that this story is false on a overplayed assumption that this detail is so inconceivable that everything else must be false. That’s not logical.

    But, as an airline company, they try their best to take reasonable measures to make sure people are as comfortable and happy as possible to make sure it’s a smooth, enjoyable experience for everyone.

    And an ethnic Chinese person displaying her pride in her country (assuming the flag pin was decorative and not meant to signify origin or language ability) is none of anyone else’s business. It’s a flag, one that was appearing everywhere in 2008, not a swastika. Are you suggesting that the threat of passengers complaining to the airline company to remove all visual reminders of China is so large that the company would institute such a policy of forbidding their flight attendants a small pin?

    What happens when you get a bunch of prudes who object to flight attendants wearing skirts that show their calves? Or, gasp, their faces are uncovered!

    I never suggested such a thing, and in fact, said it SHOULDN’T be inflammatory, but it could be.

    I didn’t say you said such a thing, I said you’re suggesting it is so potentially inflammatory like hate speech or swastikas that it would be forbidden and thus helping prove your conclusion that this story is false. I certainly know anything COULD be. I’m not arguing about whether or not it COULD be inflammatory, I’m arguing about how reasonable or likely your overall argument is.

    On a flight to France, three weeks after the Olympic torch protest there, you can imagine the Chinese flag might be inflammatory to the probably larger population of French on the plane.

    So American airline companies are going to discriminate against the Chinese to make sure no French person gets upset by seeing a Chinese flag?

    Unlikely.

    Regardless, this isn’t so much my opinion but more of an example of the political correctness that goes on in the US.

    It would be politically incorrect to forbid a person to be proud of their country or background, especially over a small unobtrusive flag pin.

    Using the “Olympics” excuse, then everyone should be able to wear their flags to support their own nation. However, there are just some places that upset other people. Try walking around with an American flag in some countries and see how many nice smiles you get.

    Sorry, the world, and American airline companies simply weren’t that anally antagonistic toward the flag of a country that was holding the Olympics they were all participating in and preparing to watch on TV. You’re overplaying the controversial nature of the PRC flag, much less a flag pin. This flight attendant wasn’t running down the aisle waving around a massive PRC flag singing the Chinese anthem, intentionally going out of her way to shove her pride into other people’s faces.

    However, I am sure that her boss would inform her of the company policy that bans even the American flag pins because of political sensitivities.

    You don’t know the company, much less the company’s policies. You’re making assumptions.

    Mainly because there’s a lot of idiots in the world who get worked up about such simple things, and when they get on planes they have been known to run into buildings and pentagons in the most extreme of situations.

    The 9/11 terrorists did not decide to hijack the plane because a stewardess was wearing an American flag. Terrorists aren’t idiots. They know the nationality of each airline without visual cues and they have far more important and meaningful reasons for their terrorist acts than chafing at the pride displayed by Americans by wearing flag pins.

    I said the first time that it’s “not allowed” as in, once it happens, actions are taken to make it stop. Actions much more strong than a gentle “no politics, please”.

    No, flight attendants are going to politely deal with a situation before escalating to stronger measures, like fighter escorts, emergency landies, and police action. Politely asking the arguing passengers to stop arguing over politics is a reasonable first response to a disturbance on a plane.

    that could have very well turned much bigger than it was (evident by the fact that the girl said that if she had had a gun, she would have shot them)

    Never used hyperboles, have you? Never whispered in frustration “fucking Kai, I want to strangle him!”?

    She also said she “returned to her seat” so apparently she was already out of her seat by choice.

    Of course she was out of her seat by choice. Read the story again. She had gone to the back to chat. The French guy came around and that’s when the argument reignited. It wasn’t as if she had stood up in her seat in anger ready to throw a punch.

    There was absolutely no actual attempt at breaking this fight up like any airline company would do in this instance.

    Because it was just an argument, Jones. When it got loud enough to be of concern, a flight attendant DID break it up by asking them to stop. Read the story.

    Therefore, this points to a big fat false. Maybe there was a disagreement, but if there was, it was nowhere near anything like she said it was. Therefore, it’s fictitious.

    You have absolutely no evidence and your arguments are, to me, unpersuasive if not unreasonable. I don’t think you should be so sure of your conclusion.

  25. Jones,

    I did answer it at least once before.

    “A Chinese person and a French person getting into a discussion or argument over who’s country/culture/people are the most dishonorable? Of course that can happen.”

    Okay, thanks. I was stuck on you saying:

    are we seriously going to believe that these two equally retarded people actually had this inane argument on the plane?

    I’m glad we now agree that the incident happened. I’m also glad we both understand that her version of events may be biased just as we can expect and suspect his version to be likewise.

    I believe there’s a possibility that she could have spoken to someone who may have said something about China that upset her. I do not think that it happened like it did in this story. My point is, also, if her story is not accurate, as in he didn’t say those exact words and she didn’t say those exact words (since the story is based on their verbal argument) then the story is false. Plain and simple.

    Not so plain and simple. It’s unreasonable to expect people to have perfect memories and be able to quote such a long conversation/argument verbatim. Are you arguing that anything short of verbatim makes a story false? I think that’s too strong in the colloquial sense.

    If so, then would I be justified in accusing your stories as false any time you paraphrase someone involved in your story, memory, or experience?

    It’s one thing to acknowledge, even point out, that someone’s side of the story is likely, well, their side, hence subjective and possibly biased. It’s another thing to say their story is “false”.

    If this airline, the biggest airline in the world, would disallow flag pins, even Chinese flag pins during 2008, then I think it’s likely that it’s also a policy of other airlines following that very same flight attendants request of “no politics”.

    I think that’s a huge assumption, one that I’m fairly confident in you being wrong to assume.

    The reason I know the woman was not wearing it as part of any “we support Beijing Olympics 2008″ company thing was because she was using it as an indication of her nationality in that she expected the French man to realize she was Chinese based on that pin. Here’s her quote: “The young lady looked at him and then looked at the five star red flag pin/brooch on her uniform before politely telling him: “No, sir, did you see this? I am Chinese.”

    Objects can serve different purposes in different contexts. I wouldn’t jump to your conclusion on the narrative you’re quoting.

    It is hardly inconceivable that a single ethnic Chinese flight attendant wore a small PRC flag pin to show her support for the 2008 Beijing Olympics, and when a situation arises where she is mistaken for another nationality, she simply points to her flag pin to help communicate what nationality she identifies with.

    As far as a flag upsetting someone, or if you want to be more personal about it, the Chinese flag upsetting someone, then perhaps there’s some sort of refugee or asylum case on the flight.

    Dude, Jones, you’re really reaching…

    Perhaps someone who was a part of Falun Gong or happened to be persecuted for something else and held a grievance with the PRC government.

    Yeah, persecute people wearing a PRC flag because the PRC government persecuted people who ascribe to a controversial religion. That would be a faux-pas. No, an airline is unlikely to forbid a flag pin on such narrow grounds. Moreover, an airline is even less likely to do such a thing in 2008.

    Kind of like how someone could get annoyed with the American flag being proudly worn if they happened to lose and innocent someone to some stray bomb or bullet during the Iraq war or a drone over Pakistan. Perfectly understandable.

    Yes, understandable, but not reasonable or likely. There are certain visual speech that is widely regarded in the Western world as being inappropriate. They include Nazi parapharnelia and pornography. The PRC flag is not one of them. However evocative it may be to SOME people, society overall has no problem with its display. You make it sound like there’s an obvious and overriding social aversion to the PRC flag. If that were the case, every television station that broadcasted the Olympics must’ve gotten a zillion complaints from angry, inflamed, and offended viewers.

    You’re overplaying it.

    That’s simply saying that symbols, no matter how good or how bad or even how neutral they are, they’re going to have staunch supporters and antagonists.

    Jones, I do not fail to understand this. I fail to understand why you think this strongly supports your conclusions. It is, I’m beginning to fear, entirely possible that we have very different understandings and maybe experiences of what is likely or unlikely.

    (that, for some reason, “shocked” everyone on board to see her as if Asians aren’t common in the West)

    Did the story say everyone was “shocked”?

    actually just probable company policy based on the usual political correctness and sensitivities that airline companies (and most other companies) follow in the US in order to at least appear fair and unbiased

    My understanding of most American companies when it comes to political correctness it to respect, even celebrate, everyone’s background and pride in their country. My understanding is also that it is not inconceivable, even entirely likely (as I know it was) that companies were understanding of 2008 being a big year for many ethnic Chinese.

    As for the “important” and “meaningful” reasons behind 9/11s attacks, I’d like to hear that.

    After 9/11, do you really need me to share with you the reasons Islamic terrorists cite for their war against the West? If you do, that’s embarrassing for you as an American, to not even bother trying to understand why your enemy has it out for you. That’s supreme arrogance of the most disgusting order. Have the decency to at least respect that they consider their reasons meaningful and important. Not taking them at east that seriously is going to cause more problems for America.

    Now, I’m suggesting that you do not utter anything under your breath, hyperbole or not, about anything to do with guns, murder, or anything else while in an American airport or airline. Even if it is a hyperbole, they still will want to prevent this sort of feelings and/or words. Because it’s an airplane. People get bitched at for not “preventing” something when they “had signs” that they ignored. So, now, they go overboard to prevent these things. That’s why the gentle, nice attempt of “no politics” would have been abandoned after the first time and they would have been at LEAST ordered to go to their seats and/or even separated to opposite sections of the cabin.

    You’re totally overblowing the minority situation stories where people have panicked. It’s probably because those stories get news coverage. They get news coverage because they’re sensational. Believing them to represent the majority is as silly as taking the sensational stories and comments on chinaSMACK as being legitimately representative of the majority of China and the Chinese.

    These are airlines that take your toothpaste from you before you get on the plane.

    Actually, that’s the TSA and they reportedly do a piss poor job of actually screening for things that might really hurt people, like knives and explosives, much of the time. In other words, these things aren’t constants. Just because some flights might have some flight attendants that react one way doesn’t mean they all do, especially if you’re citing clearly minority incidents.

    They are VERY serious about these sorts of things.

    Sorry, I don’t think a girl and a frenchman arguing politics on a plane is LIKELY to elicit the reaction you’re suggesting they should’ve elicited. I’m not saying its not possible, but I am saying it is very unlikely. Maybe you’ve been on some really shitty flights with some really anal flight attendants but I can’t say my own experiences or what I know of flights resemble the maximum security prison lockdown environment you’re describing as what would’ve precluded this incident from happening.

    Being a political argument…it could have riled up more passengers against the French or the Chinese, especially since both parties were throwing pathetic, childish insults back and forth. You don’t have to be French or Chinese to hate the French or Chinese, and it would be understandable to assume that there’s more retards on board than just the girl and the Frenchie.

    You’re letting your imagination run wild. This isn’t helping your argument.

    The point of that was that, if an argument was going on and both parties were out of their seats, they would most DEFINITELY be asked to return to their seats.

    Read the story again. She got up to go chat. The guy didn’t pursue her to continue the argument. In fact, there wasn’t really an argument when they were sitting down. The argument developed after the French guy happened to walk back to where they were and make new remarks.

    I don’t think they “DEFINITELY” would’ve been asked to return to their seats if she voluntarily went back to her seat and changed seats herself. I’m pretty sure the flight attendants were more to than happy that the situation resolved itself without requiring them to get further involved.

    The girl removed herself to go back to her seat only after she was CRYING and the French were SHOUTING in French. Do you not see how ridiculous it is that this would have been allowed to reach this point? Especially after the polite suggestions to stop arguing and topic changes didn’t help?

    No, not at all. I see it as very mundane. It appears to have happened quite quickly. I don’t think she was bawling but likely tearing up and emotional for understandable reasons. I don’t think the French were shouting as if it were a football match either, but they were likely offended and definitely angry with raised voices. I believe the story does not fail to convey how the argument escalated over time, that it wasn’t as if they were yelling at the top of their lungs from the get-go. You make it sound like there was a persisting disturbance where the flight attendants did not act. That is not the case. The situation escalated until it got to the point where it became a probem the flight attendants might want to break up but the girl extricated herself and the situation ended.

    Again with the “go read the story” rebuttal.

    Yes, because your statements are not in agreement with the story. Different interpretations can only go so far.

    I already mentioned that attempted mediation several times, Kai. “No politics, no politics” ring a bell? That was the only time a flight attendant tried to break them up. Even in full view of the Chinese flight attendant in the back. It took ANOTHER flight attendant to try to break it up with the “no politics” suggestion, and then she started asking about French museums.

    There was ONE attempt by another flight attendant at defusing the broiling argument by suggesting a change of subject. Not “several times”. Not “mediation”.

    Can you imagine why the Chinese flight attendant didn’t break things up? Maybe because she didn’t feel it was necessary to do so yet or maybe she was invested in the argument or maybe she was just stupid and didn’t know what to do. Lots of very logical and likely explanations.

    The reason I see this is false is based on the fact that a one-sided, biased, obviously “from memory” recollection of an event is not going to be true.

    Are you going to get angry if I respond to any comments you make on this site that fits that description accusing it of being false…and then quoting this very line?

    However, this one I know is more of a ethnocentric rage rather than plausible event based on:

    Oh, I guess we DON’T agree that the incident happened.

    1. People tend not to get involved in other people’s business. This is true for people on international flights as well. It’s called bystander effect when it’s not called “doesn’t involve me, none of my business.” I’m sorry, most people simply are not interventionists. While flight attendants are trained to intervene when necessary, they often fail to do so in real life and there’s also no clear indication that it was necessary in the narrative given or that the situation ended when it became apparent that intervention may be necessary by the flight attendants.

    2. People regularly post comments here that are giant regurgitations of every asinine stereotype of the Chinese. Big surprise. This doesn’t suggest the event didn’t happen, just that the retelling of it is colored. As for the expressions used, are you sure you’re not referring to the translator’s abilities?

    3. People indulge in prejudices all the time. While those people need not be taken seriously, it doesn’t mean the events they describe didn’t happen. Your #3 is really just an extension of #2. Jones, people can have distorted and hypocritical perceptions of the world and people around them. chinaSMACK should’ve taught you that already.

    The closest thing to her story that could have happened was probably that the girl was on a plane next to a French guy. They talked to each other and the French guy had probably…

    Sorry, I’d rather go by her account than your’s. See, we don’t know if her account is true or false but we definitely know your’s is.

    Because, as she said above: “and concluded that their inhuman behavior was deliberate against us Chinese.”

    Never met a Chinese person with a persecution complex? You do understand that people suspect these things all the time, right? Black Americans, in particular, get invoked for this in jokes all the time.

    A non-Chinese doesn’t do something she wants/likes/suggests and she sees it as a non-Chinese spitting in China’s poor, defenseless face.

    Are you sure you read the story? She was put off by the guy by his previous reaction to the flight attendant not being Japanese but Chinese. It’s entirely possible she misread his reaction but it’s also entirely possible she didn’t. She had reasons for her discomfort and suspicions of his attitude toward her and her nationality. Yes, she hypocritically indulged in reverse generalizations, stereotypes, and prejudices bt this doesn’t mean her story is unplausible. In many ways, it makes it seem even more plausible, that she didn’t even recognize her own hypocrisy. Most people are like this. chinaSMACK has them in spades.

    Now, if you want to go one believing this victimized girl, then go ahead. However, I’m going to remember my childhood days of running around making shit up because I was a child and mad at my brother and just wanted him to get in trouble.

    This isn’t about her being victimized or not. This is about the plausibility of her story. Again, you have no evidence and your arguments are not plausible either. I’ve already said I’m willing to just conclude that you have very VERY different life experiences and a VERY different understanding of the world than I do, but for every argument you offer, I’m going to fairly tell you what I agree with and what I disagree with.

  26. Jones,

    If there were any sort of debate between her and a French guy on an airplane, I’m betting that it went pretty differently.

    How differently? What evidence do you have to support your bet? I’m openly agreeing that her version of events are likely biased but you’re pushing to make her out to be a categorical liar. I think you’re going too far in your efforts to defend your initial declaration.

    Yes, I agree she would be biased. That is why it is false. Because she is biased. Therefore what she says will, at best, not be the whole truth.

    You will always be biased as well. Am I supposed to declare everything you say as being, at best, “not the whole truth” and “false”?

    Rational people implicitly understand subjective testimony, Jones. But something usually isn’t declared false until there is more tangible evidence beyond the simple fact that subjective testimony is, well, subjective. You can of course suspect, as you have, but you already know I don’t find any of your arguments persuasive or dispositive. The one you’re now falling back on, relying on, is that the very nature of her being subjective makes her story false. That’s technically true, as would it be technically true of me accusing everything you say being false because it is subjective. Do you see how ridiculous your argument is?

    Since she’s quoting both herself and the guy she supposedly argued with, and obviously using this to make a statement against French people (as she did a lot of generalized comparing of nationalities, in which the French seemed to be poor and dirty and Chinese rich and, I guess, not dirty), she needs to be 100% accurate.

    That’d be great, but that’s unrealistic and unreasonable. There is no rule, law, or reason why anyone making a statement against anyone must be 100% accurate. chinaSMACK is great evidence of people making statements about people all the time without being 100% accurate. You’re selectively applying a standard you don’t even apply to yourself.

    If I get in an argument with a Chinese, and then get on the internet and type out some conversation that is loosely, at best, related to what was actually said and paint this guy out to be another arrogant Chinese who’s horribly brainwashed and bashing the US and Americans, being very arrogant, etc. Would you say that that argument happened? I doubt it.

    I would doubt it if I had any tangible evidence that the conversation you typed out was “loosely, at best, related to what was actually said.” In this case, you have ZERO evidence that her representation is “loosely” or “false”. I entertain the possibility that it COULD be because that’s what a reasonable and rational person WOULD entertain, but a reasnable and rational person does not ASSUME it to be true without evidence. You have no evidence. You have only your DESIRE that what she said is too “loosely” or “false”.

    How are you so certain the French guy DIDN’T say what he did? We’ve all seen people say some really outrageous things before. What is your hesitation? Bias? Prejudice? I can’t think of anything else, Jones. You weren’t there. You weren’t party to the incident. You have absolutely NOTHING to prove her version to be wrong. You can call it into doubt, but I’m not challenging you calling it into doubt. I’m challenging the certainty to which you are so personally sure her story is false and she is a liar. I KNOW she’s biased, but that alone doesn’t prove that everything she said or even most things were false or “loosely” based on what actually happened. You have NO idea what actually happened, Jones, so what is your basis for comparison to judge how accurate her testimony is?

    Just because she makes some prejudiced remarks about French people? People make prejudiced remarks all the time IN conjunction with relaying reasonably true testimony of experiences. Are you going to call their stories false just because of what they colored their testimony with? Don’t be ridiculous. Racists can tell truths too. Racists can still relay accurate information. Inaccuracy in one thing does not preclude inaccuracy in another. That’s a fallacy. You’re conflating the two.

    What are the odds that you’d have a French guy and a Chinese girl with the exact same “Nuh uh, we’re better than you!” “Nuh uh, WE’RE better than YOU!” argument style?

    I see this every day on chinaSMACK and in the real world. I’m baffled as to why you don’t.

    If you’re talking about how they were presented as speaking, you ever consider the girl is naturally rewording what transpired in her own linguistic style? It isn’t necessarily to misrepresent, but just the only way for her to retell what happened. I doubt you could retell a Chinese person’s argument with the exact tone and meanings as they intended, right?

    Yes, you could characterize my stories as false if they are ridiculous beyond reason, as this story is.

    We obviously disagree on how ridiculous this story is. I don’t find it ridiculous at all. The arguments you’ve shared for why it is ridiculous I find completely unpersuasive given that I have repeatedly offered multiple mundane explanations to each and every one of them. You haven’t convinced me that this story is ridiculous beyond reason. You’re only assuming and declaring it to be so.

    Given that your argument above was that anything that is biased or subjective is false, I can characterize your stories as false ALL THE TIME. So, do you really want to use that argument to defend your position here? It’s ridiculous.

    It’s not just me saying it’s bullshit. Pretty sure most others did, including some of the Chinese netizens up there.

    Another fallacy. Just because some people share your skepticism doesn’t mean your skepticism is valid.

    I’m completely baffled that you would consider a story that you say is definitely biased to be true.

    I didn’t say that. I said the story is likely biased but the nature of it being biased doesn’t predispose it to being false, that it didn’t happen, that elements of the story are necessarily false UNLESS there is evidence to suggest so.

    My position has been that I can definitely imagine this incident happening. It isn’t that ridiculous to me. I’ve seen similar happen many times. There isn’t any detail in the story that I find particularly unreasonable or incongruent with reality. I am reasonably skeptical that her side of the story presents everything accurately, just as I would be if given his side of the story, but I’m not led to conclude that this argument didn’t happen and that the narrative is more false than true in representing what they argued about.

    It’s like “yeah, I know that she’s going to play up her side and not explain it like it probably really happened, but it’s true”. It’s very contradicting.

    It’s only contradicting if you’re not carefully reading what I’m saying or if you’re misrepresenting what I’ve said.

    I’m not wrong in assuming that the airlines would disallow flag pins based on evidence from other airlines.

    No, you ARE wrong in the sense that it is a fallacy, in the sense that you already KNOW that different companies often have different policies even if certain policies or regulations are shared. You’re not WRONG in any moral sense. You made a very human assumption but how human or understandable it is does not make it RIGHT.

    I’m not getting on your case for your mistaken assumption. I only pointed out how it was a mistaken assumption.

    At least, not as wrong as assuming a biased story is true. Now that’s an assumption.

    Wrong is you misrepresenting my position as saying this story is “true”. No, Jones, my position is to disagree with your position that this story is “false”.

    I don’t know if this story is true. I only know, and have been arguing, that the elements of this story don’t seem impossible to me, as they do to you.

    Assumption is you buying your own misrepresentation of my position.

    It’s a bit odd that she would point out the flag and say “did you see this?” Well, no, it’s actually not odd. She was very obviously wearing the flag to denote nationality, not Olympics. She asked him “did you see this” as in “I’m Chinese. See?”. Again, I’m baffled as to how you could see this another way.

    Holy shit, you’re off your rocker. So every person who has ever waved a flag or a flag bumper sticker was ONLY displaying their nationality and not, say, simply communicating their support of something?

    Let’s say there’s a guy carrying his US passport to the local PSB to renew his residence permit. That’s why he’s carrying his passport, because he needs it. However, some Chinese guy starts chatting with him and then asks if he’s British. The guy raises his hand with his US passport and casually says “nah, I’m American, dude”. So this guy was carrying his passport to communicate his nationality? No, he was carrying his passport for another purpose but he repurposed it for an unexpected but appropriate situation.

    I don’t know why you would narrowly insist that the only reason she was wearing a flag pin was to display her nationality. There are multiple mundane reasons for it. For all we know, she could be a naturalized American citizen but she wore the flag because she still identifies with China, especially during the Olympic year.

    I don’t see their reasoning for bombing the US and killing any innocent people anywhere as “meaningful” or “important”. Religion isn’t any reason to kill anyone. Maybe you think so, but I definitely do not. I can distort that shit just like you and call you “supremely arrogant” or say “not taking innocent lives seriously is going to cause more problems for China”, so don’t try.

    I’m not TRYING, Jones. No shit you don’t think religion is a reason to kill anyone. What I was angry about was that you don’t even take their reasons seriously to try understanding why terrorists do the things they do. I’m not JUSTIFYING them, I’m saying you’re arrogant if you don’t think you need to figure them out. Terrorism is a PROBLEM for America. It behooves Americans to understand that problem if they want to SOLVE it. You dismissing their reasons as not “meaningful” or “important” to them is just going to piss them off even more. That you think it is only about religion is a problem too, Jones. It isn’t just about religion for them. It’s geo-political, Jones. Religion is a rallying banner but there are MANY reasons why terrorists are blowing themselves up. They have grievances, Jones, not just religion. Religion is merely one thing from which they draw their strength from. What side of any conflict HASN’T invoked God or some greater significance to justify their action in response to their grievances?

    So, you don’t think that two people arguing politics, as this girl said ended up shouting in French. Shouting. On an airplane. It also took place in front of flight attendants. A flight attendant that said she would be on that girl’s side if it weren’t for her being an employee. You really think it’s going to result in the two belligerents being separated? Why wouldn’t it? You think they’d just let them sit there and argue back and forth to the point of shouting and crying?

    Already addressed. See previous reply on the shouting and crying. I don’t think your characterization of the argument is the only, or even the likely, characterization. You’re making it sound like it was a persistent disturbance when it was more likely an escalation judging by the available testimony.

    This isn’t maximum security prison stuff, Kai. You’re just being ridiculous now.

    You characterizing two people having an escalating argument on a plane being “belligerents” that flight attendants would immediately jump to break apart and subdue is you making it sound like maximum security prison stuff. You’ve also invoked fighter plane escorts, emergency landings, and police action. For crying out loud, Jones, two people had an argument that resolved itself as quickly as it escalated. It happens. It’s not abnormal. No need to call the National Guard.

    It’s not my imagination, Kai. Political debates can and do get others involved easily. I’ll use the netizen reactions to a lot of these sorts of stories as a case in point.

    LoL. Dude, 1) it’s easier to get involved behind a keyboard, 2) do you have ANY idea what the views to comment ratio is for anything on the internet? FAR more people view something without interacting with it. Why? Usually because they don’t care to get involved. This is true in real life. People see people arguing but few people usually get involved.

    Or, say, massive protests.

    I don’t think massive protests happen as easily as you’re suggesting here.

    Anything like that. Politics, especially when it involves berating each others’ nationalities, can piss people off.

    I know it can piss people off. It certainly pissed off the participants in the girl’s story, right? But you’re still making a massive assumption about people’s reactions. I reckon most of the people who became aware of the argument weren’t party to the argument throughout it all, likely because they were minding their own business as people do. When voices raised and the argument became apparent to the people nearby, they’re likely first to wonder what the argument is about instead of take sides. People usually do this. As the story tells, the argument pretty much ended rather quickly. She removed herself from it. Minus her, the French, and the flight attendant, it is highly unlikely any of the other passengers knew what the argument was all about. It wasn’t as if the girl was shouting racist slurs in every pasenger’s face.

    I swear, it’s like you’re taking things out of context on purpose.

    I disagree. It is your job to communicate your arguments well. Not mine. I write so much because I try really hard to do just that. You already know from above that I feel the same about you misrepresenting my position. The difference is that I can point back to what I’ve actually written as contradicting what you’re misrepresenting.

    Yes, Kai. I read the story. Stop the “go read the story” repeated rebuttal thing.

    I will tell you to re-read the story every time you present something that is not supported by the story. If you don’t want me to say that, then please make sure you don’t say something at odds with the story.

    Again, I don’t think they’re standing up in the back at this moment, but there’s definitely some hostility that she pointed out.

    This wasn’t the argument. The argument was in the back of the plane. At this point, he had looked icily at her (or she interpreted his look as being icily) because she was also Chinese. She had asked him to pull down his shade but he refused and escalated it from a matter of doing a favor or courtesy to her infringing upon his rights as a paid customer of that seat. Instead of arguing with him, she decided she would “avoid” them, getting up, and going to the back of the plane.

    When you first said and emphasized “OUT OF THEIR SEATS”, I read it as you saying their argument was so heated that they were out of their seat ready to get into a fist fight or something. I then explained that of course they were out of their seats but not as a manifestation of getting ready to come to blows. She had gotten out of her seat as she was allowed to, to get away from someone she didn’t like. He happened to walk by later and the argument ignited. I’m repeating myself AND her story.

    (although the last we heard was that they were shouting in French, which wouldn’t fly. No pun intended)

    LoL, nice pun(s). What is so difficult to imagine about him still cursing her out in French as she was walking away? He was getting his last barbs in. Why wouldn’t this fly?

    But, it’s unlikely.

    Uh, it’s EXTREMELY likely. I totally expect someone I had an argument with to be yelling at me still even if I’m turning my back on him.

    Being present at the very beginning of the verbal argument, the flight attendant would have informed them that they are to return to their seats, possibly find someone on the other side of the plane to exchange seats with the girl (since she was alone and the French were in a group) and give the French a warning for having gone back and started the argument. None of that happened, which is very odd.

    What the hell are you talking about? The flight attendant specifically welcomed her to change seats to the empty last row after the girl shared her frustrations with her neighbor.

    I don’t find anything about the flight attendants actions in this story to be unbelievable. I’ve explained this multiple times above.

    Dude, you’re purposefully missing the point here. The point is not “NO CHINA FLAGS” it’s “No flags”. Stop acting like they’re just picking on China. Jesus Christ.

    No, I’m NOT purposefully missing the point, I’m explaining what the fallout would be if they insisted on such a “no flag” policy in this context. Nevermind that you DO NOT KNOW if there was a policy forbidding flag pins at all. Whether or not there was a policy, it was 2008, and the flight attendant was likely wearing the flag pin NOT to denote her nationality but to merely use a small token to express her pride in China hosting the 2008 Olympics. If the company forbade it and offered the explanation you’re giving, that a small flag pin even in 2008 would inflame and offend passengers, this incident would be characterized as persecution of Chinese people being proud of China in the Olympic year, likely by the people affected AND the media circus.

    I’m not misrepresenting what you said, I’m trying to explain how what you said would cause negative PR for the airline company having or enforcing such a policy in that year. Get it straight.

    Rules like this are not going by what should be reasonable. These sorts of rules, all over the US (and I guess the rest of the west) are in place because of the large amounts of different opinions and not wanting to upset anyone. Avoid problems. I agree that it’s dumb, but it’s there. This isn’t a national thing. You can fly whatever flag you want. You can even walk around with a swastika on your arm. However, companies have their own rules.

    Previously addressed. See above.

    Excuse me, Kai. Everyone was “surprised”. A synonym, but leave it to you to pick out some technical flaw and act like that somehow refutes the fact that the girl said everyone on the plane was surprised to see an Asian woman. Which, by the way, it’s retarded for anyone to be surprised at seeing Asians if they’re in the US or France.

    Oh, so you use quotes around something that wasn’t actually in the story and you’re insulting me questioning it as a technical flaw? Synonym, yes, but there’s an appreciable big real world difference between “shocked” and “surprised”.

    Do you want to know why the girl felt people were surprised? Because it’s definitely atypical. Do you know what the percentage of Asians are for America? For Europe? It isn’t that high, Jones. More importantly, the ratio of Asian flight attendants operating international routes to Europe is indeed FAR less than those operating international routes to Asia. You can guess why. Is it such a stretch for people to find the Asian stewardess to be a bit of a surprise, or for the girl narrating the story to feel they were surprised?

    What are you talking about? I said I mentioned it SEVERAL TIMES. Not that she tried to mediate it several times. Now the reasoning behind a lot of these points you’re making are starting to make sense. I hope these misunderstandings were mistakes and not on purpose.

    This is definitely one clear case of misunderstanding between us. Your original sentence:

    I already mentioned that attempted mediation several times, Kai.

    I read that as you saying they attempted several times to mediate. However, you meant that you’ve already mentioned sevearl times that they attempted to mediate. Thank you for being kind enough to recognize the possible misunderstanding. I appreciate this sincerity.

    That said, The original thread of discussion there was me saying it was “just an argument”. I was saying this because you were saying the attendants would’ve done more to break it up and that they didn’t, in the story, suggests that the story is unrealistic and thus false. Me saying it was “just an argument” is to say that it wasn’t that big of a deal for you to reasonably expect the measures you’re saying should’ve been taken.

    I take it you’ve never flown in the US or really been in a business establishment in the US.

    BIG MISTAKE. Why do you think this?

    I saw a gas station attendant call the cops for a non-violent argument between two customers. I actually had to call the cops one night because of a somewhat loud argument going on out in the parking lot here at work. It’s company policy because it’s not so much that the arguing is a danger to you or the people involved, but it’s a complete annoyance to other customers and would result in losing customer satisfaction and potentially losing customers. I think you fail to see this aspect of it, even though I’ve explained many, many times that a lot of American companies have policies of not only solving these problems the moment they happen, but preventing them from happening in the first place, if at all possible.

    And I see all of those as exceptions to what usually happens. As I’ve said, we clearly have very different experiences and understandings of how the world works. You see what I consider to be rarities and exceptions to be the common and norm.

    As for the passengers, there’s also the “complain when shit annoys me at 30,000 feet above sea level because being in a plane itself is annoying already and my legs are killing me” effect.

    Having flown as much as I have, this is a rarity. Most people are fairly well-behaved and accomodating. There is the occassional cranky princess that thinks his or her comfort comes before everything, but that’s not the usual case for the vast majority of passengers.

    Now I’m getting even more sure that you’ve never been on a plane in the US.

    You wouldn’t say that if my Gravatar was of a white man. I can guess your reaction but I’m not going to buy it.

    The flight attendants? There’s the part where all the people start complaining about the argument going on in the back

    You’ll have to clarify what you’re trying to say here becase I don’t recall the part where all the people start complaining about the argument going on in the back.

    Anyway, I see the idea of no one hearing or noticing them arguing and then complaining to a flight attendant to be very much implausible.

    Already addressed. See previous comments.

    I’m not sure what you mean with the comment about people talking about Chinese. Probably has to do with the same thing about the PRC flag being picked on when no one was picking on the PRC flag. Yeah, maybe something was lost in translation. If so, then I think Fauna needs to rethink this entire website because those must be some MAJOR mistranslations. Or maybe they aren’t, because I doubt Fauna is that bad at it.

    Go back and re-read the thread of discussion there. I was responding to you saying “giant regurgitations of every asinine stereotype”.

    Yes sir, I am very well aware of that. Thank you for pointing out the very obvious and then acting like I had no idea.

    When you say things like:

    #2) The entire story was one giant regurgitation of every asinine stereotype of the French. Every single French person I’ve ever met, even if a bit arrogant or nationalist, was nowhere near the cartoon she painted this guy to be.

    …it does indeed suggest to me that you “had no idea”. Remember, your argument here is that the “cartoon” she was painting helps prove that her story is false. My point was that colored commentary suggests bias, not necessarily that the main suject being related is categorically false.

    If someone said “that nigger Obama was elected president”, is that person saying something false? No, it says that person is prejudiced but there’s no proof that Obama being elected president is false unless there’s evidence. You argued with point #2 that her story is false because she was clearly prejudiced.

    Just because people have ignorant assumptions about people based on generalizing ideas such as nationality or color, it doesn’t make it acceptable or even tolerable.

    I never said it was. Who are you responding to here?

    This story screams of anti-French sentiment, at a time when anti-French sentiment was making it’s rounds in China. Hard to not point that out, and if there was an argument on a plane between her and a French guy, it’s hard not to point out the very big possibility that these feelings helped her “memory” of the things this guy said and how events unfolded.

    So? How does this prove the story is false?

    Ok, so you consider it a possibility that she and a French guy got into an argument on a plane, but we do know that it’s false when I say that, yeah, they might have gotten into an argument. Makes sense.

    No, I said your hypothetical “what really happened” story is something I know is DEFINITELY false.

    Case in point. Good job pointing out exactly what I was pointing out.

    No, I think you’ve gotten lost in the argument.

    Yawn…

    Heh, re-read the story, Jones.

    Yes, I have no way to really prove that these things would happen. However, I am making an attempt to do so by providing evidence, even if it’s more weak than I’d like it to be, to prove my point of view or my take on what might have happened (or should have happened, if this girl is telling the truth).

    Right, and I’m telling you that your point of view is way too narrow.

    The girl who told the story did not.

    What do you want her to prove? How do you expect her to prove it? With a video? A tape recording? Vulcan mind-meld?

    She told her story. If you doubt the plausibility of it, you need to offer evidence and reasoning for your skepticism. You had no evidence but you did present your reasoning. I, however, have mundane answers that address all of your reasoned skepticism. To me, the story is plausible. You think it is implausible but you haven’t convinced me of it.

    I see a lot of holes in the plot of the story and am calling them out based on typical company policy here in the US. I say “here in the US” because it was an American airline company. Had it been a French airline or a Chinese airline, then I’d probably say a lot less about the flight attendants attire and behavior. I’ve flown on Hainan Airlines once before and slept through most of it. So other than that, I have no other experience except with American airline companies.

    And you still haven’t offered any evidence. You know what would work? You finding the company policies of every American airlines during the alleged time period of this incident. If you can do that and it says company policies specifically, for example, requires that no flag pins ever be worn, no exceptions, then it would be up to me to prove that there have been exceptions or breaches of that policy. Feel free to call the girl up to take the stand and question her and submit any witness or expert testimony you may have. I reserve the right to cross-examine.

  27. Jones,

    the difference between her story is that I did not type paragraph after paragraph of play-by-play action sequence with focus on dialog.

    This too by itself does NOT render a story “false”.

    I called her’s inaccurate because I doubt very seriously that it’d be verbatim, which would be important for her story.

    She’s not insisting it is verbatim, is she? Did you ask her? She’s telling her story as she saw it. If you ask her, she’ll concede that her telling cannot possibly be 100% accurate and not only because the conversation with the French person was in English. It is expected that she’s paraphrasing and that she may be coloring the story but this doesn’t render the story false. It may render details of the story inaccurate and biased, but not the entire story false. Your mistake is in trying to connect inaccurate details with the overall falsehood of the story.

    As my story does not focus on something as detailed as a verbal argument and there was absolutely nothing to quote anyone saying within my story, it’s pretty different.

    So now any story told by a subjective person with alleged dialogue is “false”? Why is dialogue necessarily false and not just a story-telling mechanism understood to be subjective paraphrasing?

    For example, I understood in your story that you meant that your Guangzhou boss’s English was so poor his son had to translate most of the time for you to understand. I’m fairly certain he spoke SOME English, or spoke plenty of English that you just couldn’t understand because you’re subjective, but should I string you up and call you a liar over the detail? No, because subjectivity and not 100% accurate details do not prove a story to be false overall.

    At least there would be a way to prove mine to be true, albeit a pain in the ass to do so. I could always get work history documentation and/or photographs, or even have their extended family whom I stayed with for a month in Guangzhou give you call. Our airborne master debater up there couldn’t possibly do that.

    Well, let’s see…

    Your work history documentation wouldn’t prove that your bosses “spoke no English”. Neither would photographs. They might prove you worked as a waiter, on weekends, in a Chinese restaurant. Likewise, the girl could produce airline reservation documents, boarding passes, maybe even photographs to help prove she was on an American airline, on a route to Europe, at the time she stated in her story.

    You can have their extended family give me a call and testify that your bosses “speak no English”. Likewise, she could might have the flight attendant give you a call also and testify that the girl’s story is “true”.

    But none of this changes the fact that you’re subjective and that your detail may not be 100% accurate within reason to me, and thus if I wanted to insist that this equates to the story overall being “false”, I’d be somehow justified in saying so.

    Did you notice that you told me a story and when I alleged it was false (to prove a point obviously), I’m listening to your explanations? If you’re alleging this girl’s story to be false, why are you so unwilling to ask her about it and listen to her explanations? Because you’ve already pre-emptively concluded she’ll lie to you?

    So as long as I pre-emptively conclude you’ll lie to me, it’s okay for me to obstinately insist your story is false because there’s a detail I subjectively feel is outlandish or ridiculous?

    Are you starting to see the logic problems with your position?

    Truth of a story is not determined by subjective and pre-emptive judgement of a the story-teller’s inherent subjectivity. What is outlandish or ridiculous or implausible to you may not be so to others. Inaccurate parts are not dispositive of the whole. Inaccurately relating that a gun man said “Cowabunga!” before shooting a hostage does not make the overall story that a gun man shot a hostage “false”.

  28. Jones,

    Aye, but she should be. She knows good and well that it’s the words of the French guy that are going to set off the Chinese and her own words that would be giving her credit for putting him in his place.

    She should be what? Of course she knows that the words of the French guy are going to set off the Chinese…BECAUSE she was a Chinese person who was set off by his words! She’s sharing her story BECAUSE she was peeved by what happened. Just like you would share a story abut something that pissed you off.

    You’re approaching the entire issue on the assumption that she’s completely fabricating what he said when the reasonable position is to acknowledge that she may be biased in retelling what he said but she’s not intentionally just making shit up. You can accuse her of just making shit up IF you have some reason or evidence to believe she’s a pathological liar. Do you have one other than your reluctance to believe that a French person could say something along the lines of what she said that French person said?

    She knows this. That’s the entire point.

    The entire point of what? Is it that strange to you that a person who share a story of a bad experience they had? That’s all she’s doing, sharing her story of a bad experience, sharing with others why it was a bad experience for her, sharing what happened as she saw it to make her feel how she felt.

    It’s not so much the location or reason why the argument started.

    Be fair, Jones. You made it very much about the location throughout our long discussion here.

    It’s the words said back and forth that cause the real controversy here.

    Sure, but that’s expected. Why would she share her story if she didn’t feel the words exchanged weren’t controversial to her?

    Those words need to be accurate for the main point of her story to be accurate.

    And they’re accurate to her. That’s what she remembers. No doubt she has to paraphrase and recall from imperfect memory, but its her testimony! How can YOU judge the accuracy when you weren’t there and have nothing to compare her testimony against to ascertain “accuracy”?

    For someone who takes pride in words and definitions so much (as much as I do, or more) I’d think that this would be pretty important to you, as well.

    What is important to me here is your inappropriate declaration of her story as “false”. The reason it is inappropriate is because your premise for declaring her story false is absurd. That premise is absurd because it would require me to declare any story told by a subjective person (which is everyone) that included alleged dialogue to be “false”. I think that’s unreasonable.

    Not saying it’s completely false. Just saying it’s probably inaccurate, which makes it false to a certain degree.

    It’s only “false to a certain degree” and as “false to a certain degree” as every story told by a subjective person that included alleged dialogue.

    My point there is that there’s much more reason to question the accuracy of the statement without further evidence.

    And what is that? What are these additional reasons to question the accuracy of her statement? She’s sharing a story. Others share stories. Her story includes alleged dialogue. Other people’s stories include alleged dialogue. This dialogue is an important element of her story. Other people’s stories also have alleged dialogue being important parts of their stories. What makes her story special, Jones? What is it about her story that is unique that makes you jump to the conclusion, absent proof, that her story is false?

    It’s more about the fact that, as I stated before, the human memory isn’t really that great at detail, especially when under stress.

    Actually, I’m pretty sure that’s something I brought up first and something you’ve been repeating back to me as if it is some major point you have on me. I wish you wouldn’t do that.

    Especially when brooding and broiling over it for the rest of the plane trip until she could get her hands on a computer and type all this up.

    Now you’re just blatantly adding biased characterizations of her, ostensibly to get people to sympathize with you that she must be lying, suggesting she must’ve been stewing in anger and was hatching some diabolical fabricated story the entire time so she can “get back” at the French people once she gets online.

    Isn’t it possible, even more so, that she, like everyone else, HAD to wait until she got to a computer to share an experience that really pissed her off?

    Isn’t it possible, even likely, that she wrote her story a long time after it happened, not because she was drafting up revision after revision of her grand anti-French smear campaign but because life went on until that day she happened to remember the experience and decided that day she’d share it? Check the story, Jones. Check when she’s writing it and when it allegedly happened.

    We all know what it’s like to have something on our mind that pisses us off to high heaven and how that can alter our memory.

    Yeah, but it doesn’t necessarily make the story false. May I also point out that you’ve seen plenty of people share stories where they were clearly pissed off, that their emotions could’ve altered their memory, but you haven’t accused their stories of being false or them of being liars? Why the special treatment for this girl?

    The work history and photographs just prove the first parts A) I worked there, and B) there were Chinese and therefore I am not so dumb as to think that Chinese could not or would not travel to the US.

    No, Jones, you WERE NOT invoking the work history and photographs to prove to me that you’re not so dumb as to think a Chinese person could not or would not travel to the US. Why? Because you were invoking those things as possible evidence supporting your story about working as a waiter for Guangzhou bosses to be true. You were doing this because I was arguing that your story could be accused of being false according to your argument for why this girl’s story is false. Are you even following your own side of this discussion? Do you need me to quote you in context?

    If the girl somehow managed to get in contact with the French guy and he could confirm the incident took place exactly as she stated it, or at least within reasonable accuracy, then gee golly she’s caught up with me.

    What do you mean she’s “caught up” with you? Your requirement of evidence for her is not analogous with the requirement of evidence you apply to yourself.

    The French guy would likely present HIS side of the story would would naturally have elements at odds with her’s, especially when it comes to interpretations or representations of comments made to each other. We would have a “he said she said” situation.

    Would you accuse his story of being false? You should, because you accuse her’s of being false, right? Would you measure her story against his or his against her’s? Why would you pick one or the other as the basis of truth to measure the other’s accuracy?

    Words are not and words are pretty damn important as the wrong thing said, even if similar, can evoke different emotions. Example being the whole “shock” and “surprise” thing you talked about earlier. She makes one mistake and misquotes the guy, it could turn out completely different.

    I know words are important, Jones, but she’s sharing an experience as she recalls it, not writing a mathematical proof. You’re arguing to accuse her sharing as “false” if it doesn’t meet an unreasonable standard that you don’t appply to others or yourself.

    I have the actual Mr. Yang and Mrs. Wu in my arsenal of “proof that Mr. Yang and Mrs. Wu can’t speak English”

    So are you willing to bet $100 if they can respond to “Hello” with a “Hello” that they do in fact speak some English?

    I would bet you real life $100 bills that she doesn’t even have the French guy’s MSN address.

    Oh my god, Jones, why the hell would she have his MSN address? That’s like saying the story you shared about why you hate someone you randomly met one day and had a tiff with is “false” because you don’t have their MSN address, their name, or a way of contacting them. Why the hell would you want to stay in touch with someone you had a spat with?

    I can’t believe you’re actually suggesting that she have his MSN address before her story can have a chance of not being categorically labeled “false” by you.

    GIRL: “That random motherfucker said I was a slut!”
    JONES: “Do you have his MSN address?”
    GIRL: “Uh, no!”
    JONES: “Then you’re lying! FALSEHOOD SPREADER!”

    Because I #1) didn’t really see the story as being that important anyway. The only reason I’m still talking about it is because I enjoy conversing with you so much. and #2) well, there is no #2. It’s really not that big of a deal if it happened or not.

    You’re being disingeneous. It’s a big enough deal for you to initially make a comment and then write volume upon volume of follow-up comments. It’s way too late for the “oh well, I don’t really care anyway” dismissal so let’s be adults and be secure in what we care about, even if that means arguing our side to the bitter end.

    If you want to mimic me, then you should rather just question the detailed parts of my story that have to do with quoting someone’s part in a dialog from memory under duress. Then we’ll be on the same page.

    Interesting, are you trying to argue that is what you’ve been saying all along, instead of it being a position refined by me questioning you and challenging this entire time? Should I quote you?

    I’m not entirely sure that you see the point I’m making about the importance of words (ironic) and how they should be quoted accurately, especially if the words are the biggest and most important reaction-causing part of the story. On top of that, add the time between the incident and transcribing of the quotes, limits of human memory, language differences, and stress, and you have a my reason for questioning the accuracy of the quotes,

    Except you weren’t questioning the accuracy of her quotes. You were declaring her story false and not to be believed, as implausible. Not just her alleged dialogue but, amongst many things, whether the flight attendant wore a flag pin or the plausibility of their actions throughout the story.

    I’m asking you to be HONEST about what you’ve said, been saying and arguing. To acknowledge mistakes and missteps, to admit when you overreached and overplayed, to freely recognize when you have changed or refined your position. But yeah, I shouldn’t expect or ask people to acknowledge when they were wrong or made a mistake, because with most people and their very understandable pride, that’s hoping for too much. Yet it really does annoy me when I abide by this standard and you don’t. It makes having a discussion with you increasingly frustrating as you change your position then deny ever having the previous position.

    If the point of the story is that one little quip he yells before shooting the hostage, then it IS important. It’s just one phrase, but it’s very important.

    But does it make the story of a gun man shooting a hostage "false"?

    No.

    For example, let’s say you’re retelling what you witnessed at that very same hostage shooting. You couldn’t see the gunman’s face or anything because he was completely covered in black clothing and ski-mask. There was no indication of what the man looked like…was he white or black or asian or did he have a beard or blonde hair or anything. What could his motive be? However, that same gunman, when he shoots the hostage, yells “Allah hu akbar!” and then runs away. However, when you explain to the police what you saw, and you tell them that you saw a man covered in black clothing and ski mask so you couldn’t tell them anything about him except for the one word he used (their one and only clue), and you told them it was “cowabunga”, then you’ve lost a very important part of that story and a very important clue.

    Sure, but it doesn’t make the story false, just inaccurate. Inaccurate details do not make stories categorically false. She is retelling a negative experience she had with French people as she remembered it. She’s not going to insist she had the dialogue entirely verbatim. That’s not the point of her story. She’s not saying “this is exactly what they said”, she is saying “this is what they said that pissed me off”. If you could somehow prove her telling of what they said to be different from what was actually said, it is still plausible that she may have remembered incorrectly or heard incorrectly. In either instance, she’s not lying and her story isn’t false, just inaccurate for very understandable and reasonable reasons that are not typically dispositive of whether the overall story is false.

    Now, instead of looking for a muslim assassin they’ll be looking for a Californian assassin or perhaps a mutated turtle assassin.

    They’re NINJAS, you bastard. And only by self-identification. Have you seen them assassinate anyone?!? *shakes three fingered fist*

    So, even fucking up that one word can bring about a much different meaning or reaction to the story.

    Yeah, so? It doesn’t necessarily make the story categorically false or the person a liar.

  29. Jones,

    She should care about her wording because, of course it sets off the Chinese, but it’s up to each of us individually to combat the ugly nationalist bigotry that exists in each of our societies by NOT promoting it with inaccurate representations of the truth (unless she has the world’s greatest memory, in which case she should be posting about THAT instead).

    You’re making unreasonable assumptions here. You’re assuming she doesn’t care about her wording. You’re assuming — worse, suggesting — that she’s intentionally promoting “ugly nationalist bigotry” with “inaccurate representations of the truth”.

    What happened to her simply wanting to share an experience she had as she remembered it?

    You’re trying to apply an ulterior motive to her in order to justify your condemnation of her, and justify your accusation of her story being “false”.

    Not strange that a person would share a bad experience, but strange that they remember it to the fucking T after a long flight full of misery and stress and second languages.

    As I said before:

    She’s not insisting it is verbatim, is she? Did you ask her? She’s telling her story as she saw it. If you ask her, she’ll concede that her telling cannot possibly be 100% accurate and not only because the conversation with the French person was in English. It is expected that she’s paraphrasing and that she may be coloring the story but this doesn’t render the story false. It may render details of the story inaccurate and biased, but not the entire story false. Your mistake is in trying to connect inaccurate details with the overall falsehood of the story.

    Sure, they can kind of mimic the English word of “hello” although generally a greeting to them is responded to with a big smile and several nods. If I can only say “ni hao” in Chinese, does that mean I speak Chinese or just that I can say one Chinese phrase?

    The point was to apply the same ridiculous standard of accuracy you were applying to this girl’s story. Since your statement is not 100% accurate within reason (which is subjective itself as this entire discussion with you has reinforced), it must be “false”, right?

    Yeah I made it the location until we got to a stalemate on American airline company policy, so I switched to the main point of her story: Frenchie’s insults to China and her glorious defense.

    Her defense wasn’t exactly glorious and it isn’t implausible that a French person would make insults about China. Is it?

    I’ve made plenty of bad grades on memorization portions of exams which proves that “accurate to me” or “accurate to her” doesn’t constitute “accuracy”.

    Again:

    Your mistake is in trying to connect inaccurate details with the overall falsehood of the story.

    Declaring her story inaccurate because it’s based on her own recollection is not absurd but common sense. I take it you don’t just automatically believe everything you read on the internet, or do you?

    I’m not disagreeing with you declaring her story likely inaccurate due to subjectivity. I’m disagreeing with you declaring her story categorically “false”. Don’t conflate the two. I’ve been very clear, repeatedly, on my position. Why do you keep doing this?

    The additional reasons all lie in the fact that detail and more detail equal more skepticism as to the informations accuracy. This is why reports and even Wikipedia suggests or requires citation of the information used for evidence.

    She’s sharing an experience. She’s not writing a research paper. What is inconceivable about a person’s story including the details she ostensibly remembers?

    Again:

    Your mistake is in trying to connect inaccurate details with the overall falsehood of the story.

    Nothing makes her story special, Kai, except for the fact that you chose to defend this one instead of all the other reports that I or anyone else has said are bullshit, made up, or misrepresenting.

    Because I haven’t noticed anyone making the same over-reaching declaration of falsehood and absurd arguments you’ve been making here (or I just didn’t notice but I noticed you here).

    You brought that up about the mind and inability to remember stuff in detail, especially under duress? Good, then we can agree that she probably doesn’t remember it to well thus giving the chances of inaccuracies in her testimony a very high likelihood.

    Again:

    Your mistake is in trying to connect inaccurate details with the overall falsehood of the story.

    No I am not adding biased characterizations but speaking rather from my own experience and general psychology when stating that after a heated argument in which there was no very big obvious display of your victory for the world to see, we tend to have it on our mind for a while and it’s hard to not think about it, especially when that person is there. Then generally we start brooding over it, especially if we were brought to tears in the end, and this does not mean that she is merely typing that story to “get back” at the French.

    How is doing this not making a biased characterization towards the end of convincing people that you must be right in declaring her story “false”? You’re calling into question her character to cast doubt upon her testimony.

    But this isn’t necessary because no one disagrees that her emotions could affect her memory. What is disagreed upon is the propriety and reasonableness of you declaring her story “false” on the basis of her unavoidable inherent subjectivity. Inaccurate details = inaccurate details. They do not necessarily render the story false unless critical details are proven false.

    1. You can’t prove them false. You’re not even trying. You won’t even question the story-teller directly.

    2. Casting doubt on the accuracy of her representation of what the French people said only casts doubt on the accuracy of her representation of what the French people said. It doesn’t prove her story of meeting and arguing with some French people she found distasteful “false”.

    3. In case you forget, I’m not arguing that the story is 100% true, that her representations of what the French people said are 100% accurate. I’m only arguing that the entire story as described is entirely plausible and inaccuracy of details alone is insufficient to declare the entire story false.

    4. I’m waiting for you to concede that you can’t logically or reasonably declare the entire story false because of the above. I have no problem with you doubting the accuracy of the dialogue based on her being subjective but your doubt and my agreement that she’s subjective does not make her story “false”. Absent evidence, it doesn’t even make her story “proven” inaccurate, just “likely” inaccurate. And again, “likely inaccurate” does not equal “false”.

    To tell you the truth, I didn’t even look at the date in which she wrote it, as I assumed it was just typed up a little while after she got in Paris or back to the US and got to a computer with time to spend. I’m too lazy to look up the link again so…how long afterwards, exactly, is she writing it?

    I suspect this is precisely why I kept asking you to re-read the story before.

    No, it doesn’t make it false but it can very, very possibly lead to inaccuracies and therefore not the whole truth.

    Okay, so maybe you’ve conceded already. Let me ask you, Jones, what part of the above statement you’ve made do do I disagree with?

    What else, for Christ’s sake, would I be talking about working for Chinese people in the past for?

    I wasn’t responding to your story of working for Chinese people. I was responding to you juxtaposing your ability to prove your story of working for Chinese people with the French girl’s ability to prove her story.

    Yes I would probably have the same belief of inaccuracies existing in the French guy’s testimony, in which case I would look for similarities in their stories. Then we’d have a better understanding of what happened

    So you’d jump to accuse the French guy of being a liar and his story “false”? Good. At least you’d be behaving fairly in this instance.

    Kai, come on, you know that I am not suggesting that she would have the guy’s MSN address. Jesus, dude, I’m saying that she wouldn’t have any way of contacting him and therefore we have no way to get the other side of the story to compare the two and get a better understanding of what happened.

    And my point was that NEITHER DO YOU, therefore you were overreaching in declaring with such certainty that her story is false and she’s a liar.

    Notice all the follow-ups were in response to you, and not just random replies to the original post itself.

    I didn’t say you were posting random replies to the original post. I meant exactly you arguing with me over this issue. I’m not pretending I don’t care about this argument. I know me replying to it shows that I do care.

    Negative. I am saying that when I came up with one small explanation of something in my own life (that was indeed small and without actual detail) you spit out a quick “oh yeah? WHERE’S THE PROOF OMG I DON’T BELIEVE YOU!!1″ that seemed like a rather sarcastic thumbing of your nose at me.

    Negative. Just applying your absurd standard of subjectivity and inaccuracy as I understood it to your own story. You can’t say I didn’t warn you multiple times before.

    My declaration of the false-ness of her story was largely based on the probably inaccuracies in her quotations, which I have stated umpteenth times already.

    Again:

    Your mistake is in trying to connect inaccurate details with the overall falsehood of the story.

    …which I’ve stated umpteenth times already as well (both in this comment and previous comments). It’s been my disagreement with you the entire time.

    No it doesn’t make the shooting false but it does make the story false because a gunman shooting a hostage and yelling “cowabunga” never happened.

    No, the “cowabunga” part didn’t happen, but the rest did.

    You have to include the WHOLE story in order to have a truth. It’s like those courtroom drama movies “do you swear to tell the truth, the WHOLE truth, so help you god?” There’s a reason they mention the “whole truth” part.

    No, you do not have to include the “whole story” (which you’re describing as being 100% accurate, seemingly verbatim) to have “a truth” and you’re interpreting the court oath incorrectly. No one can tell the “whole truth” as you’re describing it here because they are necessarily subjective. Thus courts don’t demand such a standard. The court demands they swear to tell the whole truth “as they remember it” without willfully lying. Notice that no one gets hung for perjury or contempt of court for failing to remember something 100% accurately or for adding biased commentary to their testimony. Biased comments are usually objected to and ruled irrelevant.

    If we were to apply your standard here to your own working for Chinese bosses story, then your story would be false for not telling the “whole truth” that they can probably understand and utter some very basic simple English instead of “speak no English”. Mind you, I understand your story fine, I’m just using it to demonstrate the absurdity of your arguments here.

    It makes the story false in that it provides false testimony, even if inadvertently. Kind of like “On December 7, 1941, the Chinese bombed Pearl Harbor. One billion innocent, golden babies were killed by tiger-mounted lasers”. No, the Chinese never bombed Pearl Harbor. That statement is false, even if most of the story is true.

    You’re confusing identifying a subject with paraphrasing a subject’s words according to memory. The analogue would be you proving that the girl incorrectly identified the guy she was arguing with as French when he was in fact some other nationality and she would only be the liar you were accusing her of if you could prove that she knew that but instead intentionally chose to identify him as French in her story.

    You have none of that. All you have is the dialogue she wrote being likely not 100% accurate because the conversation was in English and the story as written in Chinese, and that she’s necessarily subjective and likely incapable of remembering things verbatim. You have no other testimony or record of the alleged incident to compare her testimony to. Therefore, the most accurate characterization of her story is not “false” but “at least plausible” and, if you trust her, “generally true except certain details may be missing or inaccurate, maybe unfair.”

    To her, she’s telling a true story. This is what happened to her as she remembers it. She’s not going to insist every word of dialogue is verbatim, but she’ll likely take offense to you saying her story is “false” and you calling her a “liar”, especially if it is on the basis of her inability to quote what the other guy said verbatim. It isn’t appropriate to acccuse her story of being false and her being a liar over the largely unavoidable fact that she’s going to paraphrase what she remembers.

    If that were the case, anyone who paraphrases what they remember would be telling false stories and are liars.

  30. Kai is a very good name. I’m glad you are not suffering in the South with your other displaced white friends. I’m also glad that I made you laugh. Next time could you please give metric height and weight? U.S. is very backwards in this, ni yingai zhidao. The truth is we are not enemies, I’m just making funny like you (if without the douche-bag metaphors and whatnot).

  31. thanks Jones. I wish thoughtful and well-meaning foreigners in China peace and understanding. Those ugly ones you describe makeit worse for everyone. You’re really thin. You need some hot pot, min tiao maybe more sleep.

  32. Jones,

    Given how unwieldly this discussion thread has become, I’m going to try to condense it into the major points. If you feel I’m intentionally ignoring or avoiding any point of your’s that you feel is particularly devastating to my position, please feel free to bring it up and I will happily address it.

    Common sense and our own experiences in our own lives tells us that it’s going to biased.

    Yes, but that the story is likely biased was NEVER an issue in contention.

    it seems to me that if things turned out like she says they did (we already agreed they probably didn’t)

    We NEVER agreed that things didn’t turn out the way they did. I only agreed that her story is likely biased.

    YOU feel this story is “outlandish”. Not I. You accuse the story of being “false” BECAUSE you feel it is “outlandish”. I, on the other hand, do NOT feel it is outlandish nor do I accuse the story of being false. I do, however, accept that it is likely BIASED, but this does not necessarily render the story FALSE absent evidence disproving the entire story as false.

    You argue that she is subjective, thus her story must be “false”. You further argue that since we agree that her story must be subjective, I should likewise agree that the story is “false”.

    No.

    Being subjective and being a liar are two different things. A colored story and a categorically false story are two different things. Proving the former does not prove the latter.

    The whole reason I keep threatening to accuse ANYTHING and EVERYTHING you say as being “false” is precisely meant to HIGHLIGHT this point, this fallacy, this ABSURDITY in your argument.

    I don’t see it as reasonable to automatically assume the words were completely accurate.

    I don’t see it as reasonable for you to suggest I automatically assume the words were completely accurate.

    Agreed, but public consensus does help a little when you are talking about common sense and probable cause.

    Appeal to common sense is a fallacy. Especially when both of us believe our arguments and explanations are “common sense”. For example, you argued I should share the “common sense” that flag pins would not be allowed by American airlines. I argued that you should share the “common sense” that a Chinese flight attendant might wear a small flag pin to show her pride and support during the Olympic year even if that is against company policy, or that a company might not have such a policy, or that a company wouldn’t enforce the policy given the circumstances of the year as long as the infraction is not unreasonable. All “common sense”, Jones.

    Well, we can reasonably deduce that it was an American airline company. I’m guessing one of the flagship carriers.

    We don’t have to deduce. It was explicitly said. You read the story, right? You don’t need to guess. Why do you need to guess which carrier it was at all?

    But yours are? I’m kind of confused about these “your assumptions that it’s wrong are wrong” bit. Because an assumption that it’s right would be kind of the same thing.

    I said YOUR assumption that the airline must’ve disallowed flag pins is wrong because you know airlines can have different policies. I wasn’t assuming that airlines have different policies, I was responding to your assumption by pointing out the very reasonable possibility that airlines have different policies. Is that wrong? Or is that right of me?

    I never argued that my assumptions are always right and your assumptions are always wrong. I was just pointing out where your argument relies on assumptions.

    If you think I have mistakenly assumed anything, please feel free to point it out. Just remember that the difference between you and I is that you’re arguing for something certain, that this story is false, whereas I’m arguing that there is insufficient evidence or reasoning to declare this story false (or true), only plausible. The position you’re arguing and defending has a much higher burden of proof.

    YOU: This didn’t happen.
    ME: This definitely could’ve happened.

    YOU: This story is false.
    ME: This story is biased but not necessarily false.

    YOU: She’s biased so her story must be false.
    ME: You’re biased, so everything you say is false?

    How about “inaccurate”, then? It’s closely related to false, seeing as how it would cause parts of the story to be untrue.

    Jones, how can you judge accuracy, how accurate or inaccurate it is, when you don’t know what exactly happened?

    If a Chinese guy asked me where I’m from (it’s happened hundreds of times) I’d probably just say that I’m American rather than throw up some visual aid. Mostly because I can say it in English and Chinese.

    And you think everyone behaves just like you? I’m amused you can’t entertain someone using a visual aid.

    Whether or not that’s what her intention for wearing it was, and nor am I saying it was the sole intention, she used it to point out her nationality instead of just simply saying it.

    Please say this AFTER you’ve shown where I disagreed that she used it to “point out” her nationality in that given situation. Remember, you wrote:

    She was very obviously wearing the flag to denote nationality, not Olympics.

    So before you said her intention was “very obviously” to denote her nationality, now you’re saying you don’t know what her intention was or that the above was her sole intention? Why didn’t you say so the first time around?

    Again, I never disagreed that she pointed it out to communicate to the French guy that she was Chinese. I disagreed with you saying she “very obviously” wore it to denote her nationality, as in she wore it to display what nationality she was as opposed to other mundane reasons such as an ethnic Chinese person supporting the Beijing Olympics like an ethnic Chinese person wearing an American flag to support America post-9/11.

    No, I understand why they do those things. However, if I were you, I’d at least leave the word “meaningful” out, unless you want to spend some time explaining the meaningful death of at least one of the innocent people killed by terrorists in their quest for vengeance and intolerance. It can be any of them. Hell, just pick one out of…I dunno…let’s try Pan-Am 103. Give the name of one person who died a meaningful death on that flight (or of the 11 killed on the ground). Then you can go ahead and call their cause “meaningful”.

    Jones, I said: they have far more important and meaningful reasons for their terrorist acts than chafing at the pride displayed by Americans by wearing flag pins.”

    How is that incorrect? You objected to me saying they feel their actions are “meaningful” and “important”. I never said their reasons are meaningful and important to me in the same way, did I?

    Yet, the important thing to note is that people DO get involved so far as to complain to the flight attendant and tell them to get the others to shut the hell up so they can get some sleep or try to enjoy their flight.

    No, it is NOT. The important thing is PLAUSIBILITY, not that something can happen. You were arguing that people should’ve complained but since the story didn’t cite people complaining, the story is false. I’m saying, NO, the story is NOT necessarily false just because no one complained because it is ENTIRELY plausible that people minded their own business and did not get involved. I argued that people usually don’t get involved. Insofar as you are trying to argue that people usually do, I completely disagree with you.

    They did in 2008 during this whole French/Chinese thing. I remember a lot of them. In fact, Frenchie pretty much referred to one, I think. He mentioned the sudden influx of large amounts of Chinese flags in France.

    You were trying to argue that a political argument on a plane was so likely to inflame people and create a major civil disturbance that airlines would quash immediately. Since that wasn’t represented in the story, you argued the story was false. I argued that shit fucking happens and people get into arguments but arguments don’t necessarily escalate out of control before they fizzle themselves and that flight attendants, for multiple mundane reasons, don’t necessarily jump on every argument. HENCE, there’s no reasons that argument of your’s convinces me that the story is false.

    Ok, so now I need to go back and copy and paste everything I said before that you misinterpreted?

    PLEASE DO SO. I do it. You should do it too. The moment you feel I didn’t understand you correctly, you should CORRECT me, not WAIT until later. Later on, I won’t believe you.

    Actually the Delta Airlines release said nothing but the fact that they were verboten.

    Feel free to invoke this after you’ve asked the girl what airline she was on. If it turns out to be Delta, please then provide the “release”. I will check if it was in effect during the time this story is alleged to have taken place. Then I will provide you evidence that rules aren’t always followed, that people bend them, even break them.

    Again, a ban on flag pins wouldn’t have to make exceptions for Chinese people just because the Olympics are there. Yes, I realize Chinese are proud that they had the Olympics in China, but the Olympics have happened in a lot of places so it’s not really necessary to even include the Chinese flag to it, as it’s not a purely PRC thing.

    Did you actually say that? OMG, you did. You’re literally arguing that the flight attendant wouldn’t have worn a Chinese flag because the Olympics have been in many countries and thus she wouldn’t have felt wearing a PRC flag during the year the Olympics is hosted in Beijing made any sense?

    The article NEVER claimed she was wearing it for Olympic pride or to support Beijing or anything. The only thing it ever mentioned was that she was wearing it, and then when questioned about her nationality, she looked at the pin and asked the man if he saw it and THEN said she was Chinese. It’s hilarious how you get on to me about “not knowing” and then you go ahead and do the whole “what if” thing.

    I never said the story said she was wearing it for the Olympics, did I, Jones? I was responding to what I quoted you above saying, that she was “very obviously” wearing it to “denote her nationality”. I don’t think that’s the only explanation, that she wore it specifically to tell everyone she’s Chinese. I don’t disagree that she pointed it while responding to a passenger. However, that does not prove that she wore it to denote her nationality. The alternatives, the reasons I’ve offered to you for why she may have been wearing it I feel are easily plausible and not at odds with any other aspect of the story.

    But that was after the window shade incident and them being too loud.

    Which wasn’t an argument! She asked them to do something and he said “no”. She found their behavior annoying, but was she arguing with them? No. Instead of arguing, she chose to avoid them.

    which seems pretty unlikely unless this flight happened to be carrying the world’s most sheltered people.

    You don’t have to be sheltered to find an Asian flight attendant on a European route to be unexpected. You just need to have the expectation (largely from past experience) that the flight attendants are usually not Asian. The French guy wasn’t surprised with the girl of the story. He was just surprised that the flight attendant was Asian. Not unreasonable.

    Oh, trust me, I’m well aware. My high school class of 120 had 10 or so. Not a lot, but they aren’t rare. And this is bumfuck country-town Texas, not LA. Regardless, it’s not to the point that we stand around and discuss the fact that we see someone who looks different or looks Asian. It may be a low percentage of Asians, but it’s by no means a homogeneous society in either country and we’re use to seeing people who are different.

    See above. The issue is not about being accustomed to seeing Asian in general. The issue is context-specific. The French guy was merely surprised that there was an Asian flight attendant on a European route flight. He may not have been surprised either and she merely thought he was. People have misread others before. No big deal.

    Why would anyone other than this girl care about this?

    You should care about it if you want to understand why the girl might have said “surprised”.

    Because you seem to have an odd view on how people treat public disturbances around here.

    No, I seem to have an odd view to YOU. JUST as you seem to have an odd view to ME. We’ve gone over this before already.

    Because there’s not a usual occurrence of these situations. The ones I’ve witnessed personally had the cops called, or at least threatened with calling the police in order to convince them to cut it out. No, not saying the flight attendant would call 911 from the middle of the Atlantic. Just saying that public disturbances generally merit action rather than indifference.

    And I happen to know that public disturbances are often met with indifference by those not directly involved. I know this not only from personal experience but by the fact that such phenomenon is DOCUMENTED AND STUDIED ALL THE TIME in psychology, sociology, etc. I want to say it is COMMON SENSE that MOST people fail to act instead of acting, but I’m not sure you’d buy it if you’re heavily invested in thinking people always act.

    The point wasn’t that people are always cranky. It’s that unusual disturbances such as an argument could much more easily annoy someone in those settings.

    I never said your point was that people are always cranky. I was saying that an argument isn’t that unusual and that arguments don’t necessarily annoy people in those settings as easily as you’re suggesting.

    I’m hoping that’s not you calling me a racist.

    Are you?

    Jones, I don’t think you want to be a racist and I definitely know you won’t accept being thought of as one. That doesn’t change the fact that you’re still liable to jump to certain prejudiced conclusions or make statements liable to be interpreted as prejudiced.

    I could use your logic and say you’re a racist for assuming my white skin makes me a racist against you.

    My logic does not involve me saying you’re racist just because you have white skin. My logic DOES include me commenting that you assume that I’ve never flown in American or been in a business establishment in America may be you being prejudiced and influenced by my Gravatar.

    But she made quite a few more detailed claims against the guy.

    Jones, you’ve been arguing your initial declaration that her story is false. Now you’re trying to say you’ve been arguing that some of the words she put in his mouth must be false? Sigh, I guess its good that you’re recognizing the limits of your argument, but I’ve never argued that the words she put in his mouth should be taken at face value, have I? I’ve only argued that the entire story, as told, is plausible. You saying the words she put in his mouth may be false does not make the entire story false, does it? There are such things as details.

    It doesn’t. It implies the biased nature of it would very possibly be increased and therefore prone to more inaccuracies.

    So why are you declaring the story false?

    Suggesting her biased views and human memory would lead to inaccuracies isn’t that narrow of a thought. So I don’t believe what she said.

    I wasn’t saying that suggesting her biased views and human memory would lead to inaccuracies was a narrow point of view. What I was responding to was not you saying that. I was responding to your narrow interpretations of what could have plausibly happened.

    That’d help. What do you suggest I use?

    I suggested that you contact her and ask her if you think her story is false. You refused to do so. You’re content to accuse it as false without interviewing her, without giving her a chance to address your skepticism.

    I did. I said it’d be biased, the human memory, stress, etc. Lead to inaccuracies. Therefore not completely true. Not completely true means it’s not the whole truth. Not being the whole truth means that it didn’t happen like that.

    Inaccuracy due to bias does not necessarily make the entire story false just as you being biased doesnt make everything you say automatically false either.

    Since I have to prove that girl’s claims wrong by somehow finding a tape recording of their conversation or something,

    No, Jones, no one said you have to prove the claims wrong by finding a tape recording of their conversation. I did say you can’t judge the accuracy of her statements as being inaccurate or more accurate unless you had something to compare to, which you don’t. Get it straight. You were making judgements of accuracy when the most you can do is presuppose that bias can affect accuracy. It’s the difference between saying “her story may be biased” and “her story is inaccurate”. Invoking subjectivity proves the former but it doesn’t prove the latter.

    By saying I must prove it right first before you have to prove it wrong is the same as the girl having to prove herself with empirical evidence of her telling the 100% truth that everything was written word-for-word and accurate.

    She’s offering testimony about HER experience. If you disbelieve it, YOU’RE supposed to offer evidence for why her testimony does not reflect HER experience…NOT demand that she prove her own experience. You’re the prosecution here, Jones. The burden of proof is upon you because you’re the one making an allegation against her. She’s just sharing an experience and her thoughts. She’s not out to prove something but you are. She was out to share something. You are out to prove what she shared is false. Arging that her details may be incomplete, inaccurate, or biased does not prove what she shared to be categorically false, just biased.

  33. Jones,

    I agree me feeling offended by your comment has derailed this conversation into an issue of racism between us.

    I also agree that had your Gravatar been of an Asian and me not knowing your background as a white person born in the east part of Texas and studying in the south, I probably wouldn’t have instantly questioned whether or not you were being racist.

    Those I agree and I accept my responsibility for my part in it.

    I agree too that this argument has become about pinning each other to what they had said, but I clearly feel the fault is very much on you. I personally feel you’re a slippery jackal who argues disingeneously. If you say something I disagree with, I’m going to explain why I disagree with it. The moment you change what you said (and what I was responding to), I’m forced to explain how what I said applied to what you said. The more you keep changing, keep shifting the foundation (that being what you originally said), the more I’m forced to compensate and re-establish the connection. Do this enough and the debate does indeed become about “you said” and “no, I didn’t”. Except I think your “no, I didn’t” is disingeneous. That is, of course, my opinion. You will, of course, disagree. We will have to agree to disagree. Either way, I don’t like it and feel it is intellectually dishonest.

    The bottom line with regards to whether or not this girl’s story is “false”, as you declared it in your initial comment, is that YOU think it is appropriate to say it is “false” as long as she is subjective. Given that she is necessarily subjective, the story must be false. In your argument.

    I, however, do not agree. I think it is ridiculous that any person’s story be categorically labeled “false” merely on the inherent fact that the person telling it is subjective. I believe for a story to be labeled as categorically false, one must have EVIDENCE to demonstrate that the story is false. YOUR skepticism or suspicion, whether born out of your “common sense” or “reasoning”, is ultimately SUBJECTIVE as well. You need actual evidence and that evidence needs to prove a majority of the story to be false before it should be declared “false”.

    Without evidence or recourse to prove a person’s story to be false, we likewise cannot rationally argue it to be definitely true. At most, we can only express that we TRUST it to be true. The most logical position to take is to evaluate the story’s PLAUSIBILITY.

    You, Jones, went beyond this and decided to declare and then argue that the story is “false”, not to be believed, implausible. You’ve provided many arguments for why it is implausible. I have, in turn, argued against your brash declaration and provided counter-arguments to every one of your arguments to show how they are all plausible.

    Here we disagree again and our disagreement, as baffling as it is to each of us, is based on our different understanding and expectations of how the world works. For example, you argued that an argument isn’t likely to happen on a plane without a strong response. I argue that arguments happen all the time, even on planes, and different people will react differently to it depending on what that argument is like. My reading of the story does not suggest there should’ve been a stronger reaction from the flight attendants. Your’s does.

    But the MAIN point is that it is foolish to declare another person’s testimony false when you have no way to prove it false. This is over-reaching. This is getting ahead of yourself. This is putting yourself in an indefensible position. Never declare something as certain unless you can prove the certainty.

    Arguing, even proving, one detail to be inaccurate does not render the entire story “false”. Arguing, even proving, the story-teller to be subjective and biased, does not render the entire story “false”. Thus declaring the story “false” is stupid. The whole point of threatening to accuse every story you share as “false” was meant to highlight this absurdity in your argument. Subjectivity and bias does not prove falsehood. Otherwise, there wouldn’t be a word like “bias”, would it? There’d just be “untrue” or “false”.

    If there is anything to argue about in this story, it is PLAUSIBILITY. What I agreed with you was that there’s no need to argue BIAS. I did not agree with you that BIAS = FALSE. I was very annoyed with you repeatedly saying that. On plausibility, we’ve argued and realized we will never agree. What I do wish we could agree on is that you jumping the gun to declare this story “false” is, well, not appropriate.

    I mean, when I was in high school I worked at the Chinese restaurant on the weekends as a waiter…but hey, I guess I think it’s impossible for Chinese to ever be able to come to the US, never mind the fact that my bosses were from Guangzhou and spoke no English and I had to rely on one of my best friends (their son) to translate for me.

    This story is “false”. You’re biased, necessarily subjective, and thus it is likely that there are inaccuracies with your story. Since there are inaccuracies, it cannot be 100% true within reason. Therefore, this story is “false”.

  34. Of course I’ve seen Indiana Jones, guess who is my grandfather!

  35. B-real: so many complaints you have about China. Maybe since you hate it, you should think about returning to the U.S.? I doubt with such an angry, closed mind you are going to be lucky enough to meet very many Chinese friends. You really don’t seem very thoughtful or educated with your post, and have substituted generalizations and cliche’s. I wonder. Were you among the black guys selling drugs over near the Olympic stadium in Beijing? In point of fact, every time I go there, my Chinese friends show just how much more they know about say the NBA (players, even stats, etc.) than your average U.S. citizen. What makes you say “they think there are no black people in America”?

  36. Well, I will not dispute how adorable I can be. I’ll try to watch it. You’re right: the U.S. should stay completely out of the tibet China disputes. AT least until they are ready to renogiate with the Sioux and Cherokee and so forth.

    Started maybe, but Obama now believes he is forced to escalate American involvement in Afghanistan–which we had not done before (so he won’t contradict his “I’m tough on terrorists, GWB is just warmongering in the wrong place!” allegations). You see, Jones, if he did not do such a thing–appear despite his words to be in practice, the same exact man on foreign policy as all of his predesessors (sp) then a large part of the country bumpkin U.S. population would scream that he was homosexual and against god. If I’m lyin, I’m dyin.’! Concerning traffic cameras–which make mistakes was my point just as your computer goofs up sometimes, my point was essential powerlessness.

  37. ah, B…there’s some lesson in your post here about ‘walking in others shoes’. I know L.A.–so I don’t want to be too hard on you. I’m not at all sure why you can similtaneously call China “a horrible place” AND a “wonderful experience.” Unless you are a masochist. Your citation of the conversations on the bus sound friendly to me. They probably meant ‘black and speak Chinese’ don’t you think? Let’s ‘B Real’. ha. You don’t find black people speaking Chinese in America, except maybe the Wu Tang Clan and they get it wrong. I was basing the ‘NBA’ knowledge thing on the fact that my Beijing friends know more than me about Amare Stoudamire or the rebounding Orlando Magic guy who says Jesus a lot, Dwight Howard. I didn’t marry until age ’33′, but replace China with L.A. and you sound like me at about age ’26′. I lived for 9 years there (before the ever so much more pleasant in every way SF Bay ARea), in Pasadena w/mostly black neighbors, then in Altadena (near Rodney King), then in East L.A., then Hermosa Beach, then Venice Beach, then San Gabriel, then Pasadena again, and finally in a gang-neighborhood in Van Nuys where my car was vandalized by the locals regularly; I was briefly jailed for illegal lane change as a black guy in my cell was asked which gang his Kansas City Royals cap belonged to; I was carjacked twice–the last time, on the Sepulveda/ topless dance club/liquor store drug-corridor—called 911, and the police arrived quickly with back up to apprehend ME rather than the perp. But they caught him later–I’m not sure how (did he turn himself in?), and I was soepenaed by the debuty district atty. to testify against him. I took off work, took the LA bus system since no car, to Poicoma I think it was up above Panarama City and everyone silently and angrily ignored me. I wanted to speak at the hearing and was told to shut up, then to leave. I asked later about restitution, they refused; the only thing left in my car when returned after the (Mexican drug gang) chop shop was a Rickey Henderson rookie baseball card. They even took my Kraco power booster.! I have many other stories about L.A. (hell-A I call it), before I escaped to Oakland (which believe me was a big step up!). I really can’t believe I managed to get my B.A. from Long Beach State despite all these troubles. Most of my friends in Oakland were black and they accompanied me to Warriors and A’s games (before the Raiders came back from hell-A). How could you possibly like LA? I mean really? By the way, in my internet study now for my turning right on red as allowed camera ticket, I learned that the 3 most abusive cities in California for intentionally rigging yellow lights below the 3 second minimum standard, as well as issuing the most camera tickets at confusing double-intersections with fewest dismissals, and most total camera tickets, are not surprisingly, all in L.A.: Culver City, Hawthorne, and Inglewood. Highwayrobbery.net advises boycotts of the businesses in these cities. Everything is about money, lying, and cheating in L.A. you see. In my current job, I am shocked that doctors and even non-doctor social workers and counselers CHARGE claimant’s to fill out very simple assessment forms (that take less than a minute to complete). This is never done in the Bay Area–it would be all over the news. We here in the Bay–do you know Too Short? The Coup? Paris? Digital U? Tupac? and so forth, have to this date, never had a bunch of police officers caught on film beating an already out black guy with sticks, and THEN, have an all-white jury say the white police officers were ‘not guilty’. Never. You kidding? Not in Willie Brown’s bay area. We stick around until games and concerts are over too. We cheer because we are not too hip (to cheer). We don’t preen in mirrors because we are not on the way to being a ‘star’ like your average deluded American Idol contestant. We don’t tolerate the polution you guys do. If someone in a remote part of the bay area has a bad experience we all feel bad. In L.A.? You guys probably say ‘poor schmuck’ and laugh. You guys actually have breast augmentation billboards!! I’ve seen them on the way to Disneyland. Stupid Stupid L.A. Home of the blonde bimboes. Home of conservatives–Reagan, Dukemejian, San Marino’s right wing cult the John Birch Society, Nixon, Pete Wilson, setting for “Chinatown” (now I’m going to admit that I still have two brothers who live down there. if you are religious, B-real, pray for them). I suspect if your folks did not live in L.A. you would NEVER go there.
    BUT, I sympathize with you now, I mean, what does L.A. have going for it except maybe more El Polo Locos? and if I were in China now I’d definitely buy you a Nanjing pijiu. Stay away from that Maotai though, or any other firewater with adjectives like fragrant on the side. My #1 advice: your 30′s in every single way will be better than your 20′s. and be glad you can safely talk with strangers on busses and so-forth in China, or go out for a walk at 1:00 a.m., or be in a country that is undeniably going up rather than down. Cherish the experience while you can…

  38. Jones –

    Americans have a big issue with Indians – but then everyone has an issue with Americans don’t they?? Americans think Indians are beneath them but europeans are above them. Americans look up to Europeans and look down upon Asians and Indians but there is also a big jealousy issue Americans have with India. Indians are the most intelligent migrant group and India is a rising country. Another reason why Americans and British have issues with Indians is because in USA / UK there is a very large number of Indian migrants – and any large population of people causes a problem for others. The British however are not so ignorant or racist as Americans are – in fact Americans are the worst out of all nationalities in completely rejecting other cultures. This is why USA is so deeply seggregated even now and White Americans never mix freely with other nationalities but go to UK and you will see white Brits mixing freely with other cultures – the Brits are much more open as a Society and so are the French as well as most other western Europeans.

  39. The USA was actually founded by a bunch of European bankers as an experiment to see what would happen to Europeans if they were freed from the legacy of their history.

    But what can you can expect from bankers except to produce a state founded upon no value than money and the thin veil of the Ten Commandments?

    Ask a housepainter to landscape a garden for you and don’t be surprised if you find all your trees and plants covered in every colour available at the local hardware store.

    And no more.

  40. The USA was actually founded by a bunch of European bankers as an experiment to see what would happen to Europeans if they were freed from the legacy of their history.

    But what can you can expect from bankers except to produce a state founded upon no values other than money and the thin veil of the Ten Commandments?

    Ask a housepainter to landscape a garden for you and don’t be surprised if you find all your trees and plants suddenly covered in every colour available at the local hardware store!

    And no more.

  41. Jonas:

    Well I do not assume immediately upon seeing an American – “there goes a jerk” – I actually evene respect SOME.. but very few Americans for their extraordinary abilities, intelligence and down to earth attitude. I love many older Americans who travel around the world – they are extremely friendly, very open minded for their age (comparing them to older indians or asians who are so closed minded) and best of all many Americans have a POSITIVE spirit / outlook in life. In Europe people can be very negative – this is a major problem with europeans.. they have the best of everything, less working hours, socialized health care and a government which takes care of them yet they always keep complaining and are never satisfied.

    So no I dont think every American is an idiot – but I have met more than enough idiots who are Americans and I will say more than 80% of the population is. When I see Americans (and I can easily tell if they are American), I watch them for a minute, observe their body language, their behaviour, accent, way of interacting with others and then judge them. Many of them are “friendly” but will never become your real friends… in Europe many of them are very unfriendly but once they open up to you then Europeans are friends for life.

  42. This concept is new to me. I would love to read about this. Can you please point me to a source on this? Much appreciated.

  43. Long story, Mr. Dragnet. In school you read about the history of nations, not the the history of the families that steer them. The Kennedy family tried to break into the big league and failed. Nazi Germany issued some 300 certificates declaring their Jewish holders to be honorary Aryans. Beneficiaries included the Rothschild family. The US Embassy in Paris was a gift from the Rothschild family to the USG; that family also donated a splendid piece of property right outside Senlis, north of Paris, to the Jesuits (who later sold it to Cap Gemini, but that is yet another story).

    The American and French revolutions were hatched at the turn of the 18th century in Paris among a group of select citizens. That group split in two over the issue of how France might catch up economically with its rival, Great Britain. One faction held out for a constitutional monarchy while the other resurrected the concept of the republic out of some Roman history book, but got radical about it and insisted on dumping the king in order to avoid the excesses of Nero, Claudius et al.

    The Russian Revolution was hatched in the same place. Research Lenin’s train trip out of Switzerland in the most unproletarian comfort of a private train. Who backed it? Who paid for that? Swiss Communists??? They could barely afford their chocolate rations.

  44. ANOTHER BIG PROBLEM WITH AMERICANS -

    THEY CANNOT HANDLE CRITICISM OF ANY KIND.. EVEN IF IT IS VALID CRITICISM.

    India is a developing country – if you want to compare apples to apples then lets talk.. but if you want to compare apples to cherries then shut up. And if you really must talk about Indians then compare Americans to the upper middle class educated Indians.. trust me they are far more intelligent, intellectual, open minded and progressive people. Your country runs on the likes of such immigrants actually.

  45. ANOTHER BIG PROBLEM WITH AMERICANS -

    THEY CANNOT HANDLE CRITICISM OF ANY KIND.. EVEN IF IT IS VALID CRITICISM.

    India is a developing country – if you want to compare apples to apples then lets talk.. but if you want to compare apples to cherries then shut up. And if you really must talk about Indians then compare Americans to the upper middle class educated Indians.. trust me they are far more intelligent, intellectual, open minded and progressive people…and at least they know the WORLD MAP very well.. unlike a 5th of americans who cant even point out the US on a map.

    Your country runs on the likes of such immigrants actually.

  46. Good call Jones!

  47. http://www.michaelparenti.org/Tibet.html

    Does that change the fact that lives has improved in Tibet since the invasion compared to the serfdom that existed in Tibet before? Does that change the fact that the Tibetan flag and the title of Dalai Lama was created by the Qing Dynasty Emperor. It’s people like you that makes me hate Westerners even more: always considering the Western account as the correct view and dismiss the Chinese views as propaganda.

Personals @ chinaSMACK - Meet people, make friends, find lovers? Don't be so serious!»