As feared Forbidden Journey is Not for Many

[damo]

So are you trying to argue that people do NOT discriminate against obese people?

On this ride, yes.

In the real world there is all kinds of discrimination. This thread is not about that but continually seems to be pulled in that direction.

 

[MrsRJLupin]

I'm not sure how you can argue that when they are making larger seats.

They are not fixing the ride for people of short stature, or vertigo, or heart issues. They ARE "fixing it" for larger riders.

That means they KNOW there is a problem here that needs to be addressed.

 

[PrincessOp]

Is it discrimination that people with vertigo can't ride? Do you really expect Universal to take into consideration every medical issue and make sure that those people can ride? We are back to Small World again and I would imagine that ride even alienates some people.

It's different - the vertigo condition is going to be worsened by the ride - that's why folks suffering from it shouldn't ride -- this is a limitation of the person riding, not the ride. The obesity would remain unchanged. I think if any theme park is going to take money in exchange for an experience (ie - riding FJ or any ride) the limitations on who can and can't ride should be made very clear before that money is exchanged. Let me put this question out there - why aren't height/size limitations posted clearly at the gates, BEFORE you pay for your ticket? Do you think they should be?

 

[Magpie]

Strangely enough, we manage to have good times in a LOT of places...concert theaters, movie theaters, and all other theme parks. Only this one seems to be causing a problem.

I'll tell you why - because when you go to a theatre, concert or even on an airplane, you don't first log onto an online forum and read about all the folks who couldn't fit in the seats and feel their rights have been violated.

Even car seat manufacturers have had to play catch-up. For a long time car seats didn't take into account the safety needs of all the overweight American babies out there. (http://babyproducts.about.com/b/2006/04/03/car-seats-for-larger-or-overweight-babies.htm)

But I bet you weren't up in arms over that issue, were you? Even though the lives of babies were at stake!

As for this being the ONLY ride causing problems, just check out some of these links:

Silver Dollar City Theme Park: http://www.theredneckdiva.com/2006/03/too-fat-to-ride-roller-coaster.html

Cedar Point: http://www.hometheaterforum.com/forum/thread/179047/are-you-too-fat-for-the-rides-at-cedar-point

Six Flags: http://www.golivewire.com/forums/peer-ybiynob-support-a.html

I could go on, but you get the idea.

The only reason this seems like any kind of exceptional issue is because this is the Universal Forum and Harry Potter is the shiny new ride that everyone's talking about.

 

[damo]

I'm not sure how you can argue that when they are making larger seats.

They are not fixing the ride for people of short stature, or vertigo, or heart issues. They ARE "fixing it" for larger riders.

That means they KNOW there is a problem here that needs to be addressed.

That certainly does not mean that there was intentional premeditated discrimination. There are many rides in many amusement parks that all people can't ride.

Can you also point me in the direction where it states that they are changing the ride? I have yet to hear that this is a fact.

 

[bubba's mom]

- why aren't height/size limitations posted clearly at the gates, BEFORE you pay for your ticket? Do you think they should be?

they ARE at Universal Studios & IOA

as a side note, let me say "wow".

I was reading along this thread just noting the generous people stating their size to let others know if they could ride or not.

sadly...this thread has gone WAAAAAYYYY off course

 

[marivaid]

But because it's just "fat people," that was deemed okay. This is a problem with society as a whole.

That we can agree on.
I'm only speaking for myself here, but when I was 300+lbs the least of my worries was whether or not I'd fit in a ride at a theme park.
Getting a job. Not getting turned down for insurance. Not having to pay a 2nd seat on the plane. Now THOSE are issues you take to the streets.
But ONE ride in a theme park is not worth my anger.

 

[damo]

It's different - the vertigo condition is going to be worsened by the ride - that's why folks suffering from it shouldn't ride -- this is a limitation of the person riding, not the ride. The obesity would remain unchanged. I think if any theme park is going to take money in exchange for an experience (ie - riding FJ or any ride) the limitations on who can and can't ride should be made very clear before that money is exchanged. Let me put this question out there - why aren't height/size limitations posted clearly at the gates, BEFORE you pay for your ticket? Do you think they should be?

You can never satisfy everyone. People would complain that they paid for parking so that you should put the seats before you pay for that. Or people would complain that they paid for airfare, so you should put seats in every airport. It will never make everyone happy.

The reason there are restrictions is that people can be harmed. People with vertigo can feel very sick, people with back problems can incur more problems, people who don't fit the restraints can be injured if the restraints release. All are safety limitations for the person riding.

 

[Magpie]

I'm not sure how you can argue that when they are making larger seats.

They are not fixing the ride for people of short stature, or vertigo, or heart issues. They ARE "fixing it" for larger riders.

That means they KNOW there is a problem here that needs to be addressed.

I suspect that may be because those people aren't complaining as loudly.

 

[Rip]

This is exactly the point I'm making. Perhaps they CANNOT make it work for people of short stature or people with high blood pressure. But they CAN make it work for obese people, because they're working on it now.

What I'm saying is this: if they had been working to make the summer deadline and to do so had to sacrifice a group because of race, ethnicity, sex, sexual orientation, or religion, they never would have done it. The backlash would have been crippling to their park. But because it's just "fat people," that was deemed okay. This is a problem with society as a whole.

Oh good grief, they wouldn't have to make a special seat for race, sexual orientation, religion, etc. You're being nonsensical.

And yes, 99% of morbidly obese people can do something about it. No one is suggesting that everyone can look like Angelina Jolie, but if you intake fewer calories than you expend, you won't be morbidly obese to the point that it is unsafe for you to ride a ride.

 

[ear_poppin]

sadly...this thread has gone WAAAAAYYYY off course

I agree but there is a minority on here that are simply taunting the "fat people" that cannot get on this ride - justifying Universals actions and they have nothing to do with the Company! On this thread alone there are over 45,000 views - that is a HUGE potential client base that Universal could tap into but are alienating potential customers over this ride.

Of course we could all go to IOA and see 10 year old stale rides or repackaged rides if we wanted to and have a "great time" even though we are too fat to get onto FJ !

MrsRJLupin - I agree with everything you say

 

[MrsRJLupin]

Oh good grief, they wouldn't have to make a special seat for race, sexual orientation, religion, etc. You're being nonsensical.

And yes, 99% of morbidly obese people can do something about it. No one is suggesting that everyone can look like Angelina Jolie, but if you intake fewer calories than you expend, you won't be morbidly obese to the point that it is unsafe for you to ride a ride.

This is why I started out saying IMAGINE. Sorry you missed that part.

Also, are you a doctor? Do you work closely with people trying to lose weight? If not, I wouldn't go quoting statistics about "99% of people." Learn some facts before trying to quote them.

 

[Orlando313]

Wow, I haven't looked at this thread since page 4 or 5 and it has changed dramatically since then. Now we're debating the rights of obese people instead of talking about the ride.

I'm not trying to be cruel, although it may come off that way, but I think some people tend to confuse discrimination with entitlement. I'm sorry, but every person in American can't expect to be allowed to do every single thing they want to. Could I walk into a men's country club and sadle up to the bar, no because I'm a woman. Does it make me angry, yes, but why should I feel entitled to be able to do that, if these group of men wanted to make their own little woman free club.

The disability act was created to allow people who had disability's they couldn't overcome get jobs, live their lives. I don't think it was intended to force a theme park to design attractions for people of all weights. If that was the case, you could say the same for kids who are too short to ride something. My kid it too short, but he can't help that so you need to redesign the ride for him to be able to ride.

I think it's time to move on from this topic, and get back to the ride.

 

[JenM]

Here's another point I don't understand.

Imagine, just for a minute, that this isn't about people who are overweight. Imagine that instead, the problem of getting on this ride is based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or sex. (I know it's not because none of those affect safety, but I said IMAGINE.)

But there's no point in imagining that as a scenario because none of those things have anything to do with seat dimensions on a theme park ride.

For the record, I think it stinks that the FJ restrictions are leaving a lot of people off this ride, and I do think it was poor planning on everyone's part not consider what an issue this would be before the park opened, deadline or not. I don't think it's fair at all.

BUT, I don't believe any of this is any way discriminatory. Clearly, reading through this thread and other sites that have brought up this issue, it's not strictly an obesity issue, it's a body size issue. People who aren't obese are having trouble fitting the ride.

Discrimination would be to purposely restrict people from getting on the ride, and that's not what this is at all. Poor planning? Definitely. But Universal/IOA being a bunch of obsesity-haters or something like that? No, that's not what's happening here.

 

[Mcbruns]

Quick update -- my husband did not fit But I am glad I knew about the size issues and we were prepared. He is over 6 foot and about 299. His shoulders are very wide.

 

[bubba's mom]

Wow, I haven't looked at this thread since page 4 or 5 and it has changed dramatically since then. Now we're debating the rights of obese people instead of talking about the ride.

I'm not trying to be cruel, although it may come off that way, but I think some people tend to confuse discrimination with entitlement. I'm sorry, but every person in American can't expect to be allowed to do every single thing they want to. Could I walk into a men's country club and sadle up to the bar, no because I'm a woman. Does it make me angry, yes, but why should I feel entitled to be able to do that, if these group of men wanted to make their own little woman free club.

The disability act was created to allow people who had disability's they couldn't overcome get jobs, live their lives. I don't think it was intended to force a theme park to design attractions for people of all weights. If that was the case, you could say the same for kids who are too short to ride something. My kid it too short, but he can't help that so you need to redesign the ride for him to be able to ride.

I think it's time to move on from this topic, and get back to the ride.

couldn't agree more

 

[MrsRJLupin]

Except that it IS about the ride. The very subject of the first post was about how this ride "isn't for many." Which is a shame.

I seem to have caused trouble, which wasn't my intent. I thought the people in this thread would have similar views. I will be leaving this board immediately. I would discourage people from posting further replies to me, as I will not read them.

However, for those of you fooling yourselves that you're not being discriminatory or judgmental to others, I would think very carefully about how others perceive you before you get on your high horse in the future.

Finally, to those of you working hard to lose weight, not just to get on this stupid ride but to live a healthier lifestyle, I wish you all the success in the world.

 

[Planogirl]

I've often stated that I wish that everyone could ride but I don't see this as discriminatory. I don't believe that making sure that everyone can ride everything is a protected right. I honestly feel bad for those who don't fit and wanted to but the ride design just simply doesn't allow that. I would suspect that a larger seat would have precluded smaller individuals so the ride designers had to find a middle point.

If the ride designers are trying to come up with a larger seat for some to use then they are aware of the problem and trying to fix it. If they didn't care about the problem then they wouldn't bother. It's possible (and I thought likely) that there is no way to change the seat design but I'm the wrong kind of engineer to know anything about that.

I suggest that those who worry about this to write or call Universal and let them know. No one on this board can do anything and it is truly just a few that voice anger over this while there might be many more who don't say anything.

MrsRJLupin, it appears that you have only ever posted on this thread and no other. In case you look back, I feel bad that this subject apparently bothers you so much that you signed up just to comment about this one thing. I have to add that it's unfair IMO to come here and attempt to make others feel guilty about this. This is what I'm seeing in this case.

 

[Rip]

This is why I started out saying IMAGINE. Sorry you missed that part.

Also, are you a doctor? Do you work closely with people trying to lose weight? If not, I wouldn't go quoting statistics about "99% of people." Learn some facts before trying to quote them.

Yes, I'm a doctor. I also understand that if you intake less energy than you expend, you won't be morbidly obese.

I saw the "imagine" part, it's just that there isn't any reason to imagine such an absurd hypothetical because it isn't in any way relevant to the discussion.

 

[Rip]

I've often stated that I wish that everyone could ride but I don't see this as discriminatory. I don't believe that making sure that everyone can ride everything is a protected right. I honestly feel bad for those who don't fit and wanted to but the ride design just simply doesn't allow that. I would suspect that a larger seat would have precluded smaller individuals so the ride designers had to find a middle point.

If the ride designers are trying to come up with a larger seat for some to use then they are aware of the problem and trying to fix it. If they didn't care about the problem then they wouldn't bother. It's possible (and I thought likely) that there is no way to change the seat design but I'm the wrong kind of engineer to know anything about that.

I suggest that those who worry about this to write or call Universal and let them know. No one on this board can do anything and it is truly just a few that voice anger over this while there might be many more who don't say anything.

MrsRJLupin, it appears that you have only ever posted on this thread and no other. In case you look back, I feel bad that this subject apparently bothers you so much that you signed up just to comment about this one thing. I have to add that it's unfair IMO to come here and attempt to make others feel guilty about this. This is what I'm seeing in this case.

She signed up for the sole purpose of complaining and trying to compare a safety issue on a ride to actual discrimination.