I'm of two minds on the issue. Yes, things could be handled better by the airline, in this instance and others. But on the other hand, all the political correctness in the world won't actually make a large person fit into a space smaller than their body and it is a major imposition for such a person to squish another passenger out of part of their seat.

it is a major imposition for such a person to squish another passenger out of part of their seat.

If airlines actually enforced the policy equitably, I'd be less cranky about it. However, they seem most concerned with people whose hip/ass/stomach area is larger than average, instead of people whose upper bodies -- broad shoulders, large chest/upper abdomen -- are larger than average. I've sat next to men whose upper bodies didn't fit within the dimensions of their seats, and that squished me out of part of my seat.

But right now the airlines' policies are strictly about whether the armrests can be put down, and/or whether the seat belt will fit without an extender. Those measure lower-body mass, not upper body. So I guess the question is, is it more of an imposition for someone's hip to be touching the passenger next to them than it is for someone's shoulders/upper body to be touching the passenger next to them?

And the airlines have created some of this problem by reducing the size and space so severely. I've been on flights where my hips barely cleared the armrests without twisting as I sat down, and I have no fucking hips to speak of. The combination of this and flying the flights so full has left them with no room to accomodate, and it really should be on them to do so.

right now the airlines' policies are strictly about whether the armrests can be put down

If the armrest can't go down, that's a big deal for me. I mean, if that's my armrest too. I couldn't care less about a seatbelt's extension. But my (completely vain, but still pursued) goal is to be able to ignore everyone else on the flight. Touching me (like what happened on my flight out to NO) or losing my armrest is really annoying.

I can kind of see it as a matter of pragmatism though - they have seats with dividers right there that can be used as a measure, rather than having flight attendants make a judgement call about the space at shoulder height.

A few rows of wider non-first class seating available for heavier passengers would help. Though I'm sure there would be entitled smaller-sized people sqwawking because they weren't being given first choice of the comfier seats.

Those two measures seem at least like they are objective, and relate to the seat working as designed. Of course, Kevin Smith says neither is an issue for him.

Touching me

Lower body, or upper?

I'm not criticizing you, I'm just trying to figure out what the difference is that makes airlines able to deem lower-body spread bad but upper-body spread okay. Not to mention people reclining their seats back as far as possible as soon as they're allowed to do so -- that, too, is an enormous encroachment on someone else's space. Why is lower-body x-axis space singled out, over upper-body x-axis space or z-axis I-will-recline-my-seat-all-the-way-back-because-I-PAID-for-this-seat space?

I really wish people wouldn't actually use the armrests, because that does lead to touching, regardless of anyone's size. I would way rather just have a solid barrier between me and the other person.

Maybe because you CAN move your upper body away from a seatmate somewhat by leaning or twisting, but you can't move your lower body. I find both of them annoying as hell--I love my husband, but he has really broad shoulders and sitting next to him on flights is not the comfiest thing int he world.

Lower body, or upper?

I don't want to have to touch a stranger for extended periods of time, upper body or lower.

I can usually work out a way around that with the armrests, but I'm willing to cede those as shared space. But they gotta be down--if they're up, it's because the other person wanted the space, NSM that we're sharing anymore.