Air New Zealand is sticking to its policy of treating all of its male passengers as potential pedophiles with its ban on seating unaccompanied children next to male passengers.
Wayne Mapp makes the excellent point that if one supports the policy on the basis of an increased risk from men (which there is) then an airline could have a policy not to seat children beside young Maori men on the basis of the higher crime rate of young Maori men. That is just as offensive as applying it to all men.
Mapp also points out that neither Air NZ nor Qantas have been able to point to a single case where a man did something harmful to an unaccompanied child on an aircraft.
Air NZ should do the sensible thing and have a more flexible policy which deals with preferences, not bans. For example if I was Air NZ my policy for seats next to unaccompanied children would be below. Note I would never ever get a passenger to move seats to get a higher ranked passenger next to a child. I would just use the system to choose the best unallocated seat:
1) No-one (empty seat)
2) An accompanied child
3) A couple travelling together
4) An elderly woman travelling alone
5) An elderly man travelling alone
6) A woman travelling alone
7) A man travelling alone
8) Cactus Kate
Asking male passengers to move seats because they are banned from being next to a child is just offensive and insulting.