22 Words

Passenger leaves bizarre, sexist note for female WestJet pilot, she responds perfectly

Mar 4, 2014 By Abraham 31

On Sunday, a passenger on WestJet flight 463 scrawled a note to the pilot on a napkin and left it at his seat to be found when he deplaned. Did it say “Hey, thanks for the safe flight!” or ”Really appreciate your mad aeronautical skills!”?

Carey Steacy

No, it didn’t say anything like that. Quite the opposite, actually. “David” of seat 12E had noticed the pilot when he boarded — Carey Steacy, a 17-year veteran and (Shocking!) a woman. This offended him…

Sexist Note for Female Pilot - 01

Sexist Note for Female Pilot - 02

(via Reddit)

Here’s a transcription of the absurd missive…

To Captain/WestJet,

The cockpit of airliner is no place for a woman. A woman being a mother is the most honor. Not as “captain.” We’re short mothers, not pilots, WestJet.

Proverbs 31

(Sorry not P.C.)

PS I wish WestJet could tell me a fair lady is at the helm so I can book another flight!

In the end this is all mere vanity…

Not impressed.

Respectfully in love,

David (or Daniel maybe?)

After Steacy got over the shock of receiving such obnoxious feedback, she responded on Facebook…

To @David in 12E on my flight #463 from Calgary to Victoria today.

It was my pleasure flying you safely to your destination. Thank you for the note you discreetly left me on your seat. You made sure to ask the flight attendants before we left if I had enough hours to be the Captain so safety is important to you, too.

I respectfully disagree with your opinion that the “cockpit” (we now call it the flight deck as no cocks are required) is no place for a lady. In fact, there are no places that are not for ladies anymore.

I have heard many comments from people throughout my 17 year career as a pilot. Most of them positive. Your note is, without a doubt, the funniest. It was a joke, right? RIGHT?? I thought, not.

You were more than welcome to deplane when you heard I was a “fair lady.” You have that right. Funny, we all, as humans, have the same rights in this great free country of ours.

Now, back to my most important role, being a mother.

In a follow-up interview, she said…

I just couldn’t believe there are still people in this country that think like that. It just shocked me.

Indeed.

31 Comments

  1. turtlegirl784 says:

    Has he actually read Proverbs 31? ‘Cause the lady in there is all about business as well as her family. She buys fields, makes and sells clothes, and plants a vineyard. That is not a verse that supports his idea that women shouldn’t have jobs.

    1. Lyddy says:

      Well said! And so true!!!

      I was raised with the stuck up mentality of this fellow that left the note. Except I was on the woman side of it, so.. Women always belong in the home raising their families, they don’t need an education, etc. I am upgrading my schooling so I can go to college (much to my parent’s dismay), and planning a long successful career outside of the home like a normal person.

      1. Tink says:

        You go, girl!

        My grandmothers were Christian, as were their grandmothers before them. Being rural folk, they lived a hard life tending the fields (often ridiculously far away), keeping the home; the kinds of things the woman in the proverb did. But also the kinds of things their husbands did. Look at how impoverished women today and through the ages have been living, and you’ll see they haven’t been doing much less physical work than their menfolk; this idea of men’s work = hard and women’s work = sit at home easy is a recent and relatively indulgent creation. None of my lady ancestors would have had time for some backwards interpretation telling them what a woman’s work was; yes roles were expected of men and women, but look closely and you’ll see that there wasn’t much different for most people. It was just a way of dividing up who does what.

    2. S.Stern says:

      Actually it’s about a woman caring for the home and taking care of it for her husband. Saying it supports a woman working outside the home is a bit of a stretch at best. ^^;

      Proverbs 31:3 Do not give your strength to women

      i’m not a theist, but don’t put words in the bibles mouth to make it all cutesy.

      1. Tink says:

        Are we reading the same Proverbs 31? She does more than ‘care for a home’, she is competent both inside the house and outside, ensures nothing runs scarce, does ‘profitable trading’ for her family as well as tending to her farm independently, helping the poor, giving words of wisdom, and earning respect both from within her family and without (same as her husband).

        You could read it, as many men whose interests it suited, to imply that women should stay at home and make the babies, but really, there’s nothing in there that says women are incapable or shouldn’t do stuff. It’s a very reductive view, both of what it takes to run a home, and of the lady described in the proverb. Or you could see that, even in this time, this woman was admired for holding her own in the household, for contributing financially, being wise spiritually. The words they use are strong, vigorous, dignity. Her husband has ‘full confidence in her’.

        Besides, read the end. The proverb isn’t saying women can’t do anything but be housewives, it’s saying if you’re going to pick a wife, don’t go for looks or flirtatiousness, but pick someone who is bloody capable, who you can trust to steer your household in rough times and is enterprising and capable of holding her own. That’s the *point* of the proverb; that this example from that timepoint in history shows a ‘good wife’ to be someone who is strong, wise, and is always prepared. She honours her husband by bringing home the bacon, and is well regarded in town and by her family. Seems to me you could extrapolate this to mean working outside of the house is OK; after all she does a lot more ‘working outside’ than your average housewife!

        You can’t sell linen from home or farm from home any more than her husband took his seat in the council from home. The point was, she was not a kept woman in a tower never permitted to leave the house, but encouraged to be enterprising in many endeavours. At the end of the day, it’s funny how people pick up particular bits of the bible (and you know, rarely is it the 10 commandments or something particularly literal, independent of context and easy to interpret), and ignore all the other bits. Just before this lady, the proverb mentions how kings (ie those in responsibility) shouldn’t drink, as thy need their wits to run their people, and that drinking is only for poor people with no responsibilities who need to drown their sorrows. I’m not one for literal sticking to scripture, but it always amazes me that those in power will pick the most limiting interpretation when it comes to women.

      2. turtlegirl784 says:

        And did you read the context surrounding “do not give your strength to women”? It’s a mother telling her son not to do a variety of foolish things, and can also be translated as “do not waste your strength on women”. She’s basically saying he shouldn’t spend his time looking for sex.
        Proverbs 31:16 “She considers a field and buys it” – I don’t consider business transactions like this to just be “caring for the home”.
        31:18 “She perceives that her merchandise is profitable.” – Merchandise wasn’t sold from the home back then.
        31:24 “She makes linen garments and sells them; she delivers sashes to the merchant.”

        Yeah, she does a lot of stuff for her home, too, but she does way more than that.

    3. WL says:

      The proverbs 31 woman had chidlren who were grown ,while she ran her businesses. Plus she did most of these things FROM home!

    4. Tink says:

      It also never explicitly mentions motherhood, either. I agree, as I’ve said below, Proverbs 31 woman kicks ass!

  2. Matthew says:

    Clearly this genius never read Proverbs 31….which actually describes a hard working woman

    Description of a Worthy Woman
    10 An excellent wife, who can find? For her worth is far above jewels. 11 The heart of her husband trusts in her, And he will have no lack of gain. 12 She does him good and not evil All the days of her life. 13 She looks for wool and flax And works with her hands in delight. 14 She is like merchant ships; She brings her food from afar. 15 She rises also while it is still night And gives food to her household And portions to her maidens. 16 She considers a field and buys it; From her earnings she plants a vineyard. 17 She girds herself with strength And makes her arms strong. 18 She senses that her gain is good; Her lamp does not go out at night. 19 She stretches out her hands to the distaff, And her hands grasp the spindle. 20 She extends her hand to the poor, And she stretches out her hands to the needy. 21 She is not afraid of the snow for her household, For all her household are clothed with scarlet. 22 She makes coverings for herself; Her clothing is fine linen and purple. 23 Her husband is known in the gates, When he sits among the elders of the land. 24 She makes linen garments and sells them, And supplies belts to the tradesmen. 25 Strength and dignity are her clothing, And she smiles at the future. 26 She opens her mouth in wisdom, And the teaching of kindness is on her tongue. 27 She looks well to the ways of her household, And does not eat the bread of idleness. 28 Her children rise up and bless her; Her husband also, and he praises her, saying: 29 “Many daughters have done nobly, But you excel them all.” 30 Charm is deceitful and beauty is vain, But a woman who fears the LORD, she shall be praised. 31 Give her the product of her hands, And let her works praise her in the gates.

    1. S.Stern says:

      you forgot Proverbs 31:3 ‘Do not give your strength to women’

      the hard working woman is a housekeeper, not a jet pilot. but it’s ok, interpret as you like.

      The guy is right about the bible passage. it’s the bible that’s wrong.

      1. Jared says:

        I just looked up Proverbs 31:3 and “don’t give your strength to women” is, within the context of the other verses, talking about a king not sleeping around when he should be focusing on leading his kingdom. It has nothing to with the “worthy woman” that is described starting in verse 10.

      2. Tink says:

        Yes, i.e. don’t get carried away with funnelling all your energies into running after women, as it will distract you from everything else. It is followed up by the warning that kings shouldn’t drink either, because it also distracts them from their duties. See?

        It also fits well with the summary ‘Charm is deceptive, and beauty is fleeting; but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised. Honor her for all that her hands have done, and let her works bring her praise at the city gate.’. How does ‘giving strength to women’ in any way mean ‘don’t let women do anything apart from make the babies and sitting at home?’ That sentence is followed up by stanza upon stanza describing a strong, capable woman allowed out on her own to work the fields, sell goods, run the household, and bring her man bacon some bacon and honour.

        Her husband was also not a fighter pilot, and I’m pretty sure there’s nowhere in the Bible that ‘allows’ men to do most modern jobs, either. That’s kinda the problem with taking a written work that is a snapshot of a particular time and culture 2000+ years ago, and trying to apply it verbatim (or some strangely archaic interpretation of it) to life today. Unless you have eschewed all modern invention and lifestyle and society, you’ll be falling as afoul of the Bible as that lady pilot.

        In reality most people of her time would have lived simple, harsh lives be they male or female, and both partners and their servants would have had to pitch in to many household tasks to keep afloat.

    2. WL says:

      She did most of these things from home, plus it is interpreted that her children were grown at this time. Not small babies or little children who would have had to be put in daycare because she was working.

      1. Tink says:

        Well yes, because people didn’t have daycare then. I guess they had in-laws, though. And yet, that didn’t stop (and still doesn’t), millions of women who have to work to support their families around the world, many in poor rural areas. Many women around the world, even Christian ones, never had the luxury of wondering what a woman’s role was, or if they should be spending so much time ”out of the house”. Because it’s a strange concept when there are fields that need tending so you can eat, and plenty that needs doing to survive. The idea that women have always been tethered to the house is a lie; it’s often been a necessity for women to work outside it; but it’s often been a mark of being a richer woman if her husband could afford to keep her in.

      2. mand says:

        No need for daycare, if you are working in fields / adding up the finances / cooking / making beds / riding a heavily-laden donkey / running a market stall or whatever you choose.

        Very few places are inaccessible, very few tasks are impossible, with a baby in a sling on your back or safely playing on the floor (nor when pregnant if it comes to that). Older than toddler can help with many things, and with several children they keep each other entertained most of the time, and fed, and clean enough for the time being. Especially with several adults present. (The baby-in-sling, of course, is simply slid round to the front when hungry; the work isn’t interrupted.) The “disabled” can sew or stir the porridge, story-tell, explain why not to run fast near the fireplace, kiss it better when someone falls over, etc, depending on their particular abilities. As well as sharing the experience they have on finances, cookery, marketing approaches…

        All it needs is the adults to be attentive to everyone else in the room while they’re working. It is nothing like today’s norm with one adult and one, two, occasionally three children all very close in age, then a partner turning up tired in the evening who hasn’t enough practical experience to handle tired children.

        Have you run a household? It takes exactly the same skill set as project management, and is rather more demanding in terms of emotional stability. As testified by someone who’s done both.

  3. holly belsher says:

    If David/Daniel wants to live as if in the time of the Bible, I suggest he gets himself a donkey to travel on. No Planes in the Bible. He would obviously be more at home with an Ass!

  4. zlowrie says:

    proverbs 31 is the advice about women given by a mother to her son. and 31:3 is the advice to guard against being with a gold-digger or promiscuous woman.

  5. John says:

    I sincerely hope WestJet can identify the person who left this message. For a start they could recommend him to get some more education, as his standard of English is pitiful. Second, they could request him to use alternative means of transport in future. And finally they could send a TV crew round to ask him to repeat his words on air, in front of the camera – since he was cowardly enough to leave them on a napkin.

    1. Beepage says:

      John, you are obviously missing the beauty of the “Bible grenade.” It requires no critical thinking, no interaction with your victim/target, and best of all-no responsibility!!

  6. jonathan Pannell says:

    Sorry to hear about the note. It seems like they don’t have control of the written English language yet. Im sure this person sounds like a baby Christian or maybe not on at all. The actions in the note sounds childish.
    I am a Christian and appreciate quality pilots. Great Job well done Dear Lady.
    I hope to be flying on your shift.
    Jonathan

  7. Dez says:

    If he wants to follow all of the rules of a book thousands of years old and written for desert nomads to abide by … he should be riding on a donkey, not a plane.

  8. Barb says:

    Personally, this has a ring of a certain fabricated-and-posted-all-over-the-internet-note-on-a-receipt to me. I think if you post these things you really show how much of a professional you are NOT.

  9. Michael Kaplan says:

    Need I remind you that the bible is named the King James Bible which was translated into the language used during the reign King James and is notoriously full or errors so as to appeal to King James (and the upper class).
    Gaius Julius Caesar:” Man will willing believe what he wishes to be true.”
    The King James Bible is not the ‘word’ f god; rather it’s translators tryin to appease King James.
    For the Old Testament one must read/translate ancient Hebrew, for the ‘new’ testament Ancient greek. Everone is entitled to their own opinion but NOT their own facts.

  10. Michael Kaplan says:

    OH lest I forget, The man who wrote this gobble gook is a moron. The proof is he knowingly chose to fly with her as pilot–so on top of everything thing else he is a hypocrite. He tries to be humble but he ain’t that great.

  11. Judy Cummings says:

    It is just good that a “woman” also had the experience to guide him in to having LIFE. But he thinks she shouldn’t be guiding him in an airliner. I think he must have had a little too much to drink or something. He also wasn’t able to write correctly so I wonder what HE does for a living? Hopefully nothing that could endanger lives of others.

  12. Paul says:

    Aircraft should have special doors designed to accommodate single passengers requiring instant exit. While in flight, over deep water.

Leave a Reply

As seen on Huffington Post, CNN, BuzzFeed, New York Times, Scientific American, Mentalfloss, USA Today, Funny or Die, Gawker, Gizmodo, Laughing Squid, Boing Boing, Hot Air, Jezebel, Neatorama

About 22 Words

22 Words collects a blend of everything from the serious and creative to the silly and absurd. As your source for the crazy, curious, and comical side of the web, 22 Words can be counted on to share funny and fascinating viral content as well as more obscure (but equally interesting) pictures, videos, and more.

© 2014 | 22 Words

Privacy Policy