I'm 6'4". My knees always touch the seat in front of me - reclining helps me angle my legs a bit more so I have a few more positions for my legs, particularly on 8+ hour flights, which I often take. It also helps my back hurt less, and often means a significant difference (>1 hour more) in the amount of sleep I get on a flight.
I'm not sure why using the seat as it's meant (particularly in response to someone else using the seat in the same way in front of you) is perceived as selfish.
Granted, I often purchase Economy Comfort/Plus/Premier seats on redeye flights of more than 6 hours, but sometimes it's not an option.
The one in front reclines, putting the one behind in more discomfort. They are prioritising their own comfort over the person behind.
This is like, the definition of selfish, unless the person behind is short enough for it to have no discernible effect (so likely under 5'10 or so).
I expect the same courtesy from those sitting in front of me
But I'm not sure it really is about the yes/no answer - it is more a display of courtesy to someone whom you are about to cause discomfort
If you're convinced that this WILL cause discomfort, why are you asking people - which very well might be too polite/afraid/distracted to decline - if you can do that?
Aren't you, based on your very own impression and description of reclining, asking people if you can slap them every 10min for the rest of the flight?
(I dislike flying in general, and I never had to take a flight longer than 4.5 hours. I couldn't care less about the argument, but would probably lean towards the 'So my chair can be set back. I guess I use it as intended' position)
A slap with consent may be weird, but a slap without consent is battery. So, if one accepts your slap analogy, there's a good reason to ask consent.
For me there is no analogy or issue. Ignoring the 'I think flights are crap in general' base line: My seat. I recline it or not, but that's my decision.
I would have a harder time to recline it, if I'd be convinced that this is in some way 'hard' on the one behind me. But IF I were convinced that this was 'hard' for the person behind me, I'd not ask them for consent.
A) They say "Please don't recline".
Hah! I'm right! And I'm a great person for asking, and now not reclining my seat. Go me.
B) They say "Enjoy"
B1) Hmm. I am convinced that this reclining thing is bad for people in the seats behind the person in question. They agreed, but unless I'm wrong I'm now making their life miserable. But yeah - they're fine with it?
B2) Interesting. Maybe reclining isn't that bad? I should reflect and think about whether my 'reclining is bad and torture' idea is sensible.
it is more a display of courtesy to someone whom you are about to cause discomfort
which my English as a second language skills parse as unconditionally causing discomfort (after asking).
That's the twist. IF you are convinced that reclining your seat causes discomfort, would asking for permission be the right thing to do?
(Obviously I might just plain suck at English once more and fail to understand that sentence correctly)
But I can see that this isn't clear from my original post so sorry for causing confusion
But I'm not sure it really is about the yes/no answer - it is more a display of courtesy to someone whom you are about to cause discomfort
I parse that as
- You think reclining causes discomfort (Not sure I agree, but let's take this as given for now)
- But you ask the one behind you
For me it followed that if the person behind you says 'Sure, go ahead' you'd knowingly cause them discomfort (albeit after asking them / with their consent)?
For the sake of sanity: Can you pick that apart for me? Text is a crappy medium, this isn't my native language and nuances are hard. Where did I fail?
Throughout this interaction I am assuming a few things:
1. Reclining causes discomfort to the person behind 2. But the amount of discomfort varies quite a bit from person to person (e.g. I can imagine that a small child is less discomforted than others) 3. I can't really tell for sure how much discomfort reclining will cause so I ask if it is OK to recline. Then it is up to the person behind to decide how comfortable they are with this.
Are you suggesting that I shouldn't recline at all because it causes discomfort to those behind even if the amount of discomfort might be negligible?
And how about the person behind who can no longer make use of the entertainment system or tray table?
Individual comfort is maximised if you recline, but the comfort of the cabin as a whole is better if only some people recline?
Me in expecting politeness from my fellow flyers and you in that you want to use every inch of space you have paid for.
I can't really say you are wrong - I think we just come at the question of how to get on with other people in public in different ways.
I can not believe people think they have the prerogative to stop other people from reclining. It is intended functionality and we have certainly paid for that.
Will our ancestors (again +10cm[0]) in 100 years still mutter about reclining seats? :)
[0]: http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/3780/20130902/averag...
I fly a lot within Europe (granted, with a limited selection of airlines) since 2006 and never noticed a decline of space during this time.
Except for the super discount carriers (I rarely fly Easy Jet and never flew Ryanair, so I can't really comment on that) the seat pitch seems around 31" in economy for most flights I ever took.
This is about what most airlines offer on long haul flights (in cattle class) and is certainly tolerable for short hops of less than two hours.
Well I guess that is the question: What did we pay for?
Did we pay for comfort? Reclining does seem to offer that.
Did we pay for discomfort? Not reclining may be a cause of mild discomfort. Who would pay for that?
Did we pay for actual physical pain and significant discomfort? Hell no, but if you are tall and the person in front does recline then this is a reality.
I can't believe people think that have the prerogative to cause other people actual pain. I'm really not convinced you or I paid for that.
Why would you think otherwise? If you can't fit in the space designed then pay for a seat with more leg room or try suing.
Its not a case of thinking I have some sort of privilege that would be infringed by the person in front of me reclining their seat - it simply didn't work. the seat in front of me reclined ~ 1/3rd of its normal distance before hitting my knees, and there was no way to get my knees out of the way. In that case I apologise to the elderly gentleman in the seat in-front, and after he glanced at my knees he (very considerately) concurred that getting the full recline out of his seat was 'unlikely to work'.
Sometimes I try to pay extra and reserve an exit row seat, sometimes they aren't available. The last time I got one I ended up wedged between a rugby player and an obese person for ~12 hours, It's not always an improvement, nor is it necessarily cheap.
And like the poster somewhere up-thread, I don't like being a hypocrite, I try to recline my own seat as little as possible.
I have experienced this in buses and trains, on trains especially. There this can be tolerable, because there is a much more space (at least where I've experienced reclining), and people mostly have been very understanding and kind of afraid that someone from the back will start to shout on them.
In any case, it as well quite a sad thing, that whether there is enough space to be able to recline or isn't, we have a situation were we are unable to sort this out between ourselves.