Banned bird sparks airing of grievances

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 03/02/2018 (3143 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

I’m afraid I have some tragic news for air travellers who become extremely anxious when they board an airliner.

It turns out you will not be allowed to get on board a commercial flight if you are accompanied by a peacock.

I became aware of this injustice after reading multiple news reports about an unfortunate woman who tried to board a United Airlines flight in Newark, N.J., recently but was turned away after showing up at the airport with her emotional support animal, which happened to be a large blue-and-green peacock.

You will be shocked to hear United blocked the bird from boarding, even though its owner, a performance artist from New York, had bought her emotional support animal its own ticket.

As we understand it, the airline did not let the bird on board because (a) it may not have packed its own luggage, and (b) it probably would not have fit in the overhead compartment.

Ha ha ha! We are, of course, kidding around in a lighthearted manner, which is something we rarely do when it comes to the extremely sensitive topic of airline security.

In a statement to the Washington Post, the airline said it denied the peacock — whose name, if you are interested, is Dexter — a seat because it violated guidelines governing emotional support critters.

“This animal did not meet guidelines for a number of reasons, including its weight and size,” United said. “We explained this to the customers on three separate occasions before they arrived at the airport.”

The good news, according to Dexter’s Instagram page (seriously), is the banned bird’s “human friends” are going to drive it cross-country, given the fact it cannot fly on its own or in the company of its owner.

Seeing as how we newspaper columnists are expected to express mounting outrage at the drop of a feather, I am compelled to wonder what kind of society we are living in when an apparently innocent exotic bird is denied entry to a commercial aircraft on the grounds that it is, in fact, a (bad word) exotic bird.

But we don’t have time to think about that, because we have to wring our hands and perspire heavily wondering what emotional support animal will be next. Will, for instance, pigs be kicked off flights?

I am forced to ask that question because, in 2014, I wrote a groundbreaking column about a woman who boarded a US Airways jetliner at Bradley International Airport in Connecticut with her emotional support animal, a 70-pound pot-bellied pig on a leash.

What happened was the woman tied the pig to the armrest of her seat, then began casually stowing the other items she was carrying, which is when the pig pooped, prompting the other passengers to begin gagging and complaining, leading the plane’s crew to punt the pig and its owner from the jet.

The odd thing is, service animals — everything from pigs to monkeys to miniature horses — are allowed on flights under U.S. rules drafted in 2012 unless they become too disruptive.

I wish I could tell you that disruptive peacocks and pigs are my only concern with modern air travel, but I would be lying. It turns out plumbers have become an issue as well.

I base that statement on news reports I have just read concerning a Norwegian Air Shuttle flight that was forced to turn around shortly after takeoff because of a problem with its toilets.

It turns out that most of the passengers on the plane with the malfunctioning toilets — 84 of them, in fact — happened to be plumbers heading to a trade event in Munich. If you think the plumbers would have fixed the faulty commodes, then you obviously know nothing about modern plumbers.

Sadly, they took this problem sitting down.

Here’s what Frank Olsen, who was on the flight and is head of the Rorkjop plumbing company, had to say: “We’d have gladly fixed the toilets, but it must unfortunately be done from the outside, and we didn’t want to take a chance on sending out a plumber at 10,000 metres altitude.”

Isn’t that just like a (bad word) plumber? They always have an excuse, such as: “Oh, sorry, I brought the wrong tool.” Or: “I’d fix that for you, but I do not wish to plummet to my death by going outside an airplane in mid-flight.”

We should ponder the injustice of plumbers refusing to wing it, while we move on to our last aviation issue, which involves airports and the fact feisty travellers are apparently doing things in them that we normally do not discuss in family newspapers.

According to the Washington Post, a new survey conducted by online flight-shopping service Jetcost.com has discovered that about one in 10 air travellers report having had sex of some kind at an airport.

“Of those who had some sort of ‘sexual encounter,’ 42 per cent reported that it took place in a public restroom, while 28 per cent got busy in the ‘storage cupboards’ (?) and 14 per cent ‘under a coat,’” the Post reported. “Twelve per cent coupled in the VIP lounge, which at least makes some sense; 17 per cent have been caught in the act by airport staff.”

OK, hands up anyone who has, well, you know, canoodled in an airport. I can wait. All right, let’s see… Uh-huh, that’s what I thought — none of you have, um, done “it” in a (bad word) airport.

Still, the airport-sex survey raises some troubling questions, namely: 1) Do you need a boarding pass?; 2) Do you have to keep your tray table in the upright and locked position, if you catch our subtle drift?; and 3) Is smoking permitted afterwards?

We need to give these questions serious consideration, but not right now… because my emotional support kangaroo really needs to go outside.

doug.speirs@freepress.mb.ca