The pat down issue is sophomoric

[Onlooker]

I can't believe people are so caught up in this issue. While there's a civil liberties argument to be made, scanning our bodies or touching near our privates is hardly as invasive as going through our luggage. So, I have to conclude, that this issue involves mostly American Puritanism. It seems to me that too many people think nudity is sex. Sure, there might be a TSA worker who gets off on touching someone or on looking at an electronic image, but most adults do not react that way. If I see someone naked at the gym, I don't giggle. If I visit someone at the hospital and see someone only partly dressed, I don't get aroused. If I see my neighbor run by her window in her bra or a colleague who forgot to pull his zipper up, it doesn't do a thing for me. It's time for people to grow up and accept that they might someday some way be seen naked. It should not be a big deal, unless you haven't yet reached puberty. If the TSA experts think searches make things safer, then I'm fine with it. Those searches do not impede my freedom in any way.

[Individualist]

1. Frog, meet pot of warm water.

[Hawkowl]

6. If people were only frogs

Frogs actually have an acute sense of temperature and jump out of the too hot pot of water quite quickly.

[avaistheone1]

14. lol

Just goes to show too many people don't have the most basic of common sense.

[Scruffy1]

123. I wish the frog thing would go away-it's a lie.

A frog will jump out of a pan of water its not comfortable with. The real problem with this TSA thing is that its only a minor annoyance, but the real problems are ignored. Like is the TSA really necessary?

By the way I've caught thousands of frogs, studied biology, and used frogs for research. Amazing critters.

[JackRiddler]

200. Well sure, but not if you put a tight lid on.

Thanks for the empirical truth and all, but it's hard to kill a metaphor.

[laughingliberal]

135. +1000 nt

[HipChick]

2. I'm sure my OB-GYN doesn't get off on groping me

K&R!

[avaistheone1]

A TSA agent is not your doctor.

And there is no reason for a TSA agent to grope you. If you have explosives up your butt the scanners and the pat-down will not find them.

Why do people comply so easily especially to such humiliating acts as having the TSA in your pants. :shrug:

[hedgehog]

65. I agree, it's not practical to search for explosives hidden in a body cavity.

However, just because anyone who wants to can smash out my windows doesn't mean I leave the doors on my car unlocked. Anyone with a ladder or simple determination can get over a fence, but we still build fences.

I think we will eventually see a combination of metal detectors, dogs, puffer booths and human interaction (conversation) as the scanning process. But what we have today is what we have today.

[Matariki]

87. Not to mention the fact your doctor can't fine or arrest you for leaving their office

if they make you uncomfortable.

[LisaL]

196. You can also freely refuse procedures that make you

uncomfortable. You can also select your doctor, based on whatever criteria you find important. You examinations by your doctor are done in private as opposed to public pat downs with all other passengers gawking in.
I think it's ludicrous for people to be making arguments that visiting your doctor is similar to TSA pat downs.

[TicketyBoo]

222. This is what I have been saying

ever since the brouhaha over pat-downs began.

Someone who is a suicide bomber will just pack it inside of himself/herself and set it off in mid-flight.

Are they going to do body cavity searches on everyone who flies? Is that what's next?

I'm glad I don't have to fly, and I hope the situation doesn't change in the future so that I would have to do it.

It has nothing to do with Puritanism. I'd be willing to walk through an airport nude if it would assure that we would never have a terrorist attack, but neither that nor this BS is doing anything toward that end.

[Pamela Troy]

29. Dear God. Are you really unable to distinguish

between a TSA agent and a physician who is entrusted with the most intimate aspects of your personal life? Seriously?

[treestar]

32. There is a similarity

It's to prevent some greater harm.

The agent doesn't want you to die in a fiery terrorist attack. The doctor doesn't want you to get cancer without catching it as soon as possible.

I don't see why the TSA agent has to be demonized here. People are going overboard here, as if the TSA agent wants to do this and using sexual terminology.

[seabeyond]

41. we know it would not stop underwear bomber. we know groping would not stop cavity bomber

we know it does not prevent cargo bombing

no, it is a lie to say it keeps you safer

[hedgehog]

61. I was thinking the same thing - especially for all those

people out there concerned about children. The best way to make sure no child is ever used as a mule for explosives is to make it impossible for any child to carry explosives on a plane. No child is going to be traumatized by this; what will traumatize a kid is if the parents make a big issue.

[HipChick]

72. Exactly...people are too caught up in their outrage

[sufrommich]

76. It's pure hysteria at this point. nt

[Pamela Troy]

150. No. I have a personal relationship with my gynecologist.

That's way, WAAAAAY different from some TSA person. This isn't a matter of "demonizing" them, any more than I am demonizing any casual person I meet by not wanting to be groped by them.

[treestar]

211. So you have no personal relationship with courthouse security

Or government building security.

So what? They are trying to head off a tragedy. Why does it matter that you have a personal relationship with them or not? Would you rather be on a bombed plane? If so, your family would not blame the government right? You would admit that a "groping" would have prevented that bomb, but you preferred to die rather than go through the "groping?" And you would take responsibility for that. No suing the government. Just being willing to take death due to liberty from the groping.

[LisaL]

197. What freaking similarity?

You visiting your doctor is voluntary. There is no law you have to go to your doctor. WTF makes you unable to see the difference?

[treestar]

209. No law you have to fly either

The intent is what matters. They are at least trying to make sure you aren't on a plane with a bomber. I think they should at least be given that.

[jberryhill]

254. Your visit to an ER is not voluntary

And neither is the "groping" you get from the volunteer EMT from the firehouse rescue squad.

[JackRiddler]

201. Homeland Security. Doctors to the Nation. All Hail.

[ProudDad]

247. Right...

they are only "following orders"...

they have no culpability or should carry no blame for following orders to grope and peer... :sarcasm:

[laughingliberal]

220. Here's the thing. It's not about the effect it has on the groper. It's about our rights. nt

[unapatriciated]

237. so the answer is to enlist OB-GYN's to work for the TSA.

at least we will get health care.
This is such an idiotic statement. Your doctor sees you in a private setting for health reasons, the enhanced pat down is done in public by someone who is not your significant other or your doctor.
a big unrec

[ibegurpard]

3. or we could not do it and recognize that

a determined person willing to die is going to pull it off and understand we have a greater chance of dying by slipping in the shower and do away with these regulations that continue to erode our way of life.

[seabeyond]

4. wow, if i chose who sees me naked, adn who gropes my crotch i am puritan?

really? that is all it takes to make me anti sex?

talk about people needing to grow up

it is not about anyone else, tsa employees or the govt, it is about my choice to be naked or groped

you are so fuckin hip and cool. that is what you were implying right?

[otohara]

40. A Quick Pat Around Your Crotch

isn't going to damage you for life, is it?

There's a difference between being groped and a TSA pat-down.
I've experienced both, big difference, huge difference!
One is unwanted sexual advances by men who think no means yes, the other is a professional doing their job.

[seabeyond]

45. feel about uncertainly or blindly. sounds like a grope. is that our boundary, damage for life?

is that now how we decide whether we allow invasion, is to decide if we will be damaged for life? really?

you still have not explained to me, to make the decision who sees me naked and who gropes me, makes me a puritan

[avaistheone1]

49. Yes it is.

It is degrading to me, my dignity, and my person. It is humiliating, unnecessary and ineffective.

It is immoral, unethical and illegal.

[otohara]

67. Me, Me, Me, Me

for maybe 2 or 3 minutes of uncomfortable, that is designed to protect us - you're going to fall apart?

When the TSA agents stop patting down ever so carefully and start really groping, then I'll protest.

You may think it's ineffective - I don't!

[avaistheone1]

88. I don't "think" it is ineffective. It is ineffective.

It doesn't protect anyone. Explosives can not be detected with these screeners.

So stop your theatrics about it protecting us. All it does is rip off hundreds of millions of our tax dollars and give them to sleazy lobbyists and huge corporations. No thanks.

[seabeyond]

93. it also leaves open the real dangers because this easy way of securing comforts, allowing other ways

to be used.

[avaistheone1]

103. So stopping doing something which is ineffective, allows other ways of

doing what...? Are you afraid of doing something effective like is done in Israel (who has never had a jetliner go down in 30 years)?

[seabeyond]

106. point. exactly what i am saying. they put up these visible security creating illusion of safety

all the while not the action to ensure safety.

it is show

and in that show we give up all rights

there are much more effectives means of security we ignore....

[avaistheone1]

108. Got it

[polly7]

112. Do simple pats normally bunch up the pants?

http://www.debbieschlussel.com/29445/air-marshal-theyre-not-touching-my-junk-either/

I'd call this more of a grope.

[uncle ray]

226. what you apparantly fail to understand,

is you do not have that right once you choose to enter the TSA screening area. so during the ever so careful pat down that you have no problem with, if the TSA worker finds something suspicious about YOUR crotch, it's already too late, you are getting the real groping. you have no time to react or protest, and if yo do, they'll use it as justification for the really invasive search, along with a hefty fine.

so you'll just choose the x-ray scanner instead? don't count on it if you visit any of the many smaller airports that don't yet have the machines, you can fly out of your home airport using a full body scanner, only to find when you try to depart from your destination's airport that they have a grope-only policy.

[Bucky]

58. "Bitch was askin' for it" sounds so much nicer if you say it that way.

[otohara]

71. I'll Remember That

:fistbump:

[Lost-in-FL]

81. Professional? That's open for questioning.

They might look professional due to personal appearance, having a uniform, but if they don't know what a medical device looks like, I don't expect them to recognize an explosive device. The added inconvenience of the new inspection policy would only further delays, nothing else.

[Odin2005]

99. It will if you have PTSD from being raped.

[otohara]

109. As A Polio Survivor

I've survived a life time of all sorts of shitty things, like teasing, rejection, having people mock the way I walk, discrimination, abuse.

People will survive this - they're doing it in other countries too.

We American's, with our body issues and multitude of illnesses think we're exempt, special -

We need to get over ourselves.

[seabeyond]

113. is it merely an existence to survive? who are you to tell me i have body image issue? you make

assumptions and guesses, totally clueless adn expected to be taken as factual.

how about the basic human right. feel that we actually have things that go beyond the fear of a bomber. how about if i tell you, all the people that willing go thru this are merely cowards......

[laughingliberal]

138. Yep. Just lay back and enjoy it.

:sarcasm:

[Caretha]

144. Let's get this straight

They are feeling the penis & scrotum of males, and the breasts and the vulva of females. That includes 3 year olds on up. This is not just a pat-down. It is highly invasive and you know it. Even the TSA agents are humiliated, disgusted and hating their jobs. Get it yet?

[otohara]

207. Not 3 Year Olds

Jesus, what are we "freepers" keep repeating a lie until it become fact

It's not going away, do you get that?

I look forward to fewer American's flying - cleaner skies, less oil.

[TicketyBoo]

225. Did you not see

the video of the three-year-old who was being groped while held by her mother?

She got upset when they took away her teddy bear, and so they decided she must be a terrorist. The poor little thing was screaming, "STOP TOUCHING ME!"

Her father is a TV reporter and took the video on his cell phone.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/politics/it-would-be-sexual-molestation.html

[Caretha]

227. Why you get your jollies

from thinking "It's not going away", I'm not sure, but I have a few educated guesses.

If I was you, I wouldn't bet on it. This has gone too far and there is a wide hue & cry against it from the public, and they don't like it one Goddamn bit.

Edited to add:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4624126

Heeding a sudden furor, John Pistole, administrator of the Transportation Security Administration, said in a Sunday afternoon statement to POLITICO that airport screening procedures “will be adapted as conditions warrant,” in an effort to make them “as minimally invasive as possible, while still providing the security that the American people want and deserve."

[Hawkowl]

5. You're right!

Now please board this train where you will be deloused in this special communal shower before we send you off to this wonderful new work camp....

[avaistheone1]

17. You will feel so much better when you get in the shower.

[somone]

84. Bingo. Abu Ghraib, Auschwitz

'Nuf said.

[AsahinaKimi]

198. Ya know...

I seem to recall some Republicans and Right wingers saying, that Abu Gharaib was nothing, it was just a Prank!! Just some Soldiers having fun, No one got hurt...

[seabeyond]

7. all the rest of the oh so cool world that are so nudity advanced are not getting groped

and do not have naked scanners. the oh so cool, unpuritan europeans. how do you explain that.

i am not seeing any answers from you

just a sophmoric op

[stevenleser]

157. Oh yes they are.. almost everywhere else has much more invasive security measures.

Having gone through airports in London, Paris, Geneva, Zurich, Rome and Mexico City in the last 11 years, I can tell you that almost all of them were more invasive than ours and almost all already have or are getting the enhanced scanners. Mexico City was the most severe, with two separate scans and a pat down for everyone boarding the plane back to the US and that was in 1999.

[somone]

8. Yeah, please, people, your TSA inspector is a highly trained medical professional

Just shut up and enjoy.

[Xipe Totec]

25. Unless they change gloves after pats, they will be transmitting disease from one person to the next

They will become biological weapons of mass destruction.

A bio-suicide terrorist could infect his clothes and go through the pat-down to contaminate the rest of the population.

Pleasant thought for the day.

[katnapped]

35. Nonsense!

This all to keep planes from going boom.

Now feet in the stirrups and open wide please :sarcasm:

[MineralMan]

129. Hmm...and do you suppose they sanitize the airline

seat you'll be sitting in for a few hours? One of the reasons we wear clothing is to protect our bodies against germs. Last I heard, they're touching you over your clothing. You don't mind sitting in an airline seat but you're worried a gloved hand on your clothing is going to infect you? There's a logic problem there, you know.

[Name removed]

137. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[MineralMan]

140. Uh, I was responding to a post that made an illogical argument.

There isn't any risk of contracting a disease from the current search procedures. My post was limited to that. Do you have some evidence that I was incorrect? Please address what I actually posted, rather than your general opinion of me.

[polly7]

148. They are touching people under waistbands, running their hands

through hair, etc. I've read articles stating those standing in line did not see them changing gloves and that they only did if it was requested.


Would you have a problem with a case of head lice, impetigo, ringworm, scabies?

[MineralMan]

151. Again, when they start disinfecting the seats on the plane,

and in the waiting area of the airport, I'll think about worrying about some guy with a gloved hand.

There are legitimate concerns people have. This is not one of them.

[polly7]

154. Really?

You'd seriously have no problem getting a skin disease caught just because you had to fly? If those gloves aren't changed, they pass on disease just like if they'd worn no gloves at all. Super-bug bacteria can also travel on people's clothing, and for travelers whose immune systems are already compromised, this could some day be a huge problem for one of them.

[MineralMan]

166. My point remains the same. They don't disinfect anything at the

airport, or on the planes for that matter. Anytime you go out in public, there's a risk of catching something. It's a minor one. It will still be a minor one when you add this new stuff in. There are real issues to consider. This one's not one of them.

[polly7]

173. Not to you, anyway. But then you probably have a good immune system

and will make sure the gloves are changed. Many won't know they have the right to ask, imo. The risk may be small .... but it's there.

[MineralMan]

182. Actually, I'd make no such request. It's almost impossible that I'll

get patted down. I never have in the past, and there will be nothing unusual to be seen in a scan. I can stand still for the time needed for the scan, and nothing will show up that will cause them to want to pat me down. That's assuming that I even have to go through the scanner. At my airport, they're randomly selecting people to do that. Everyone else goes through the usual metal detector. I never beep that either.

Why would I worry about something that's only vanishingly likely.

However, in the unlikely event that I have to be manually searched, I will not bother worrying about the TSA guy's gloves. I'm not at all frightened of getting infected by something like that. I'm much more likely to catch a stomach bug on the plane from some other passenger. Now, that has happened to me, and it was no fun at all.

[polly7]

186. Well good luck with that. Others may have to worry about it. Especially the

eldery and ill.

[MineralMan]

188. Uh, I am elderly. I don't worry about it.

I'm not all that ill, though, or I wouldn't be flying.

Thanks for the wish for good luck, though. I'll take all the good wishes I can get.

[polly7]

203. Chronically ill people do fly. All the time. Glad you're well. n/t.

[boston bean]

194. Good thing you don't have to wear tampons or sanitary napkins.

maybe some day a depends.

then you can enjoy the groping.

[DeadEyeDyck]

185. well, if the chance of infection and infestation is so

small, then why are the TSA's wearing gloves??

[MineralMan]

190. Because it makes people think the process is sanitary.

The gloves are for show and, perhaps, to keep the TSA workers from getting yucky stuff on their hands. After all, they're the ones doing all that touching, not the passengers.

[boston bean]

195. and if they touched some yucky stuff with their gloved hand and then touch you??????

They should be changing them on each passenger.

[sabrina 1]

153. The issue isn't limited to these narrow concerns.

But since you asked, there is a huge risk from the scanners, a concern from when they were first introduced years ago, that was expressed by scientists and medical personnel. So to believe that this government cares about our security while they would expose men, women and children to cancer for profit, should dispel any notion that our health and well-being is of any concern to them.

As for the transmission of desease from fondling by strangers, I am not an expert on that, having never allowed any stranger to fondle me. Whatever risk there might be, I believe most of us who are not into being fondled or mauled by strangers, even government-approved stranger assault, would not until now, have been exposed to it, thankfully. I will leave that to experts on public health matters which I am not, and I presume neither are you, and when I find information on it, I will inform myself.

[MineralMan]

171. Actually, there's a very tiny risk from the scanners, far less than

the risk of flying for hours above 30,000 feet. However, I'm sure that some will find whatever things they can to point out as risks, and sometimes those risks will be overstated.

Nobody's being "fondled." It's a search. "Fondling" implies something else. Nobody's being "mauled," either. It's a search. That's bad enough, in reality, but the correct words make a difference. You will, of course, have whatever opinion you will have. I will have my own opinion. Both of us will, no doubt, express those opinions. Thank you for your response.

[sabrina 1]

191. If a stranger touches me in the manner in which these TSA agents

are touching travelers, I get to decide whether it is fondling or not. And until this threat is removed, I will not be flying anywhere, so my rights are already affected, to travel freely without harassment as a person who has committed no crime.

The correct words for me is when a stranger puts his hands on my body without my consent, or uses a threat, 'if you don't submit your freedom to travel will be removed, or as in the case of the blogger who attempted to leave the airport, 'you will be arrested' to get my consent.

You are not a woman, so please do not tell women what they perceive as fondling or not. You are not in a position to do so.

As for the danger of the machines, I will take the word of scientists and public health officials over those with no knowledge of this threat. Airline personnel and others who travel frequently ARE in danger of being exposed to dangerous rays, and some experts have stated that just once is more than enough to cause harm.

Did you believe them when they told the 9/11 first responders they were not in danger from the fumes they were exposed to also? Do you know how many of them have died and are dying since they placed their faith in the government back then?

[MineralMan]

240. Were you planning to fly somewhere and have cancelled your

plans? If not, then you have no dog in the hunt. If you were, then your boycott may have an impact.

I have not told any women or men what to do or how to perceive anything. I have merely said what I think. Everyone is always free to think as they please. Including me, and I will post what I think here. You may freely disagree with my posts. That's how it all works.

[sabrina 1]

244. Yes, I intended to fly to NY in December, but will take a train or drive

with friends instead. And yes, I will let the airlines know why I am not flying. You are free to express your opinions, and I am free to point why you are not qualified to tell a woman what she should consider fondling and what she should not. That is also how it works.

[MineralMan]

246. And so it goes. We all have opinions. I know the definition of

fondling. What is going on at these screenings does not meet that definition. You may have your own definition. I have fondled several women with whom I was intimate. I've never fondled a stranger. If I attempted that, it would not be classed as fondling. Fondling is a specific word with a specific meaning.

Words have specific meanings. Using them outside of those meanings is simply incorrect.

[sabrina 1]

248. I know what the dictionary definition of fondling is, and I know what the

definition of 'kiss', 'hug' and 'caress' mean. When these actions are between consenting people, they are positive. But if a stranger plants a kiss on a woman without her consent, that is no longer a positive action. Being caressed, fondled, kissed or hugged when it is unwelcome, is a crime, no matter how 'lovingly' it is done. All that is required to make it a crime, is that it is unwanted and that the person lets it be known it is unwanted. Which is why the ACLU has advised travelers that even if they feel compelled to accept the fondling of TSA agents, they are to state clearly in the presence of a witness, that they do not want it, then call the police, and have a lawyer's phone number with them.

Yes, words do have specific meanings, but abusers do not respect those meanings and will not hesitate to deliver an unwanted kiss or hug or caress or fondle regardless of how unwanted it may be.

[TicketyBoo]

256. I don't know about planes,

but my father was a coach cleaner on passenger trains, and they did clean the seats between trips. All it takes is Lysol spray.

[taught_me_patience]

136. Utter hogwash.

I hope you don't sit on one of those waiting area seats or an airline seat. How often are those disinfected?

[pipi_k]

9. Yeah, well that's your opinion...

and you're welcome to it.

But you may not know that there are people out there...myself being one of them...who are uncomfortable with ANY kind of touch...even touch in relatively neutral places.

If you feel more violated by having your luggage ransacked by strangers, then so be it.

But I don't think it's kind to tell people who react badly to physical touch that the issue is "sophomoric". For someone like myself, it's unpleasant at best, and, depending on where the touch happens, can cause nightmares.

[Bill McBlueState]

10. if it's Puritanism

that finally results in public pressure on the TSA, I'll take it. It's good to see travelers standing up for themselves, even if it's not for the precise reason I'd prefer.

[tularetom]

11. I don't care if somebody sees me naked

But I don't want somebody to do it just so I can get on a fucking airplane.

Or a train, if we let them get away with this. Or a city bus.

Or the mall. Or a sports arena or stadium.

Or my great granddaughter when she goes to school.

[lunatica]

12. People willing to give up all privacy rights are the ones who need to grow up

[avaistheone1]

Oh

[SammyWinstonJack]

31. +1

:thumbsup:

[fishwax]

121. +1

[liberal N proud]

13. I assume you are willing to have a total stranger grope you in public?

There is more at stake here than civil liberties, ones dignity is also being stolen as well.

When a man tells the agent he has a medical condition and they ignore him only to end up covering him in his own urine and not even apologize.

This latest indignity is much too far.

Sorry, you are wrong and either you don't fly or don't have problem being felt up by strangers.

With the next scare, you will be required to undergo, body cavity searches. Bend over!

[seabeyond]

19. he is just puritan. pee is a natural process of body. he needs to grow. up.

and the woman that had to pull out her prostheses because of breast cancer.... needs to grow. up.

i am so pissed at posters like OP that believe we all must become submissive and compliant with the standard old.... puritan bullshit.

[peace frog]

15. Just lie back and think of England

It will all be over soon. Until next time.

[Ted_White]

16. Fondling children and dehumanizing cancer survivor patients does not make you safe.

[Lost-in-FL]

18. There's probably a greater chance of a plane crashing due to a malfunction...

than from being blown up to pieces by a diluded psycho.

I am neither a puritan or a coward. If people is afraid of terrorist, then they need to stay home.

[seabeyond]

21. pilot/human error. 13k in four decades. just over a 100 hijackings (mostly not u.s.) in

four decades

[katnapped]

20. Awesome dood

Why not show us your genitalia then? Unless you have something to hide?

[bluedigger]

22. Are there any other reasonable standards which you would like to be the bellweather for?

Just let us know your personal tolerances for all of societies' commonalities, so we may comply with your obviously superior rationality.:shrug:

[avaistheone1]

62. ^5

Thank you.

[meow mix]

125. +rec

[Dappleganger]

23. An LEO cannot do this to you without probably cause.

I've got a few friends in law enforcement and they are telling me that based on the procedures that have been used they couldn't do this kind of personal search without probably cause. That's enough for me to know that they've gone too far and are encroaching upon our personal right to privacy. Who is to say that the TSA won't all of a sudden apply these same search procedures to sporting events and shopping malls?

My thoughts on this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGF1NP-FrCU

[kas125]

253. I don't agree - I think the line should have been drawn long ago

and that's what upsets me most about all the complaining now. Where has everyone been for the last ten years? If they'd all been as up in arms about listening to all our phone calls, reading all our emails, watching every web browsing session, etc. instead of continually saying I didn't do anything wrong and I have nothing to hide, then there wouldn't be anybody being felt up in airports today. This is just the latest in a long line of bullshit excuses for eroding our freedoms and to me, it's no surprise at all because America has let them do it a little at a time for years already.

[Uzybone]

24. for what its worth I agree with you

as do most normal people. On the internets though...youll get a shellacking.

[seabeyond]

26. someone doesnt like naked pictures or grope they are puritan? you agree? all of europe does not

allow this invasion. they are all puritan, too.

[Uzybone]

51. Well the Dutch do and they are more liberal than we are

[stevenleser]

159. Yes, I have no idea where that person is getting that. The French, UKers, Swiss and Italians all

have pretty aggressive security measures in their airports.

[sabrina 1]

234. I have never been groped in Italy, well not be security agents at the

airport anyhow. Britain has draconian surveillance and also has these machines. Big Surprise, the Brits have never been known for their respect for Democracy, former Empire, abuser of people around the globe, now a fallen Empire hanging on to the coat-tails of the latest oppressive Empire. Certainly not a country we would want to emulate. The people, however, ARE fighting back in Britain. They even have underground movements to take out surveillance cameras. However, that is probably not a good idea as this whole 'security' nonsense there and here is all about money. The broken cameras, the more money for the terror profiteers.

[treestar]

27. I agree.

No one says this about medical procedures. A mammogram or pelvic exam is much more invasive.

And if a plane went down they'd blame the government for not preventing it.

[seabeyond]

30. no "they" being me, would not blame the govt, understanding i cannot be safe in all ways.

all of europe does not allow this invasion of privacy. so all of europe are puritans?

[treestar]

37. I don't know what they have in Europe

for security.

But these scans would not freak them out if they had them.

[seabeyond]

48. no. you are wrong. if you are going to make a statement have you facts. or at least some

knowledge. they dont allow it. they laugh at us. they point finger at us. and the only in germany, they protested.

saying no.... is freaking out? really? that is all it takes to be defined as freaking out. a person saying no.

why not just use hysterical, along with puritism

[treestar]

208. They would laugh their asses off regarding the "naked pictures"

in the scans. We know that from common knowledge.

[LisaL]

38. A mammogram or a pelivic exam is not done in public.

A person can refuse a mammogram or a pelvic exam without facing an 11,000 $ fine.
Mammograms and pelvic exams usually aren't done on children.
And frankly, it is ludicrous to compare public groping (pardon me, pat downs) with medical procedures.

[polly7]

43. I worry about the children and survivors of assault. This goes against

everything children have been taught, or a survivor may be able to handle. Sad thinking they have to be emotionally battered this way just to get on a flight.

I should rephrase that ...... I worry about everyone who goes through it against their will ....... but, children and survivors most of all.

[hedgehog]

73. A uniformed officer doingf this in full view of other adults is not the same

as someone taking a child away to a hidden place and telling the child not to tell anyone.

[polly7]

77. The point is ............ that child has been taught that anyone, especially a

stranger ....... touching his or her private parts is wrong. It doesn't matter 'where' it happens.

[Odin2005]

102. I have a friend with cerebral palsy who is a rape surviror. She uses an electric wheelchair.

the wheelchair means that she can't go though the scanners. :grr:

[polly7]

107. Aw, that is so sad. I would hope they'd make allowances for cases

like hers but have read some things that make me believe they don't.

[lunatica]

46. My pelvic exams are done by doctors not minimum wage security people

But keep trying. Some argument will work eventually

[treestar]

216. Distinction without a difference

Both are trying to head off YOUR death. Both are doing something to prevent your DEATH.

What is this sudden snobbery about how much they get paid?

[TicketyBoo]

257. Again, this is doing NOTHING

to keep explosives off of airplanes. Suicide bombers will just put the explosives in a body cavity and blow themselves up in mid-flight.

This is just dumb, wrong-headed, and, ultimately, ineffective. It is all for nought.

[Lost-in-FL]

52. You don't see the difference, do you...

Airports are not hospitals...
TSA agents aren't doctors...

IF we had Radiologists looking at the scanned images and EMT's or NURSES doing the pat downs it would be another story.

But when you have someone patting you down, that cannot or does not know how to differenciate between a colostomy bag, a prostesis, urinary catheter from a bomb, we have a problem. IF someone have no freaking clue of what a medical device is to look like... how do you expect him/her to find a bomb?

[treestar]

215. Maybe but they are both trying to head off a death

Cancer not caught soon enough, bombs not caught before they detonate. Why can't cancer be compared to an airplane bomb? They both result in death.

[Lost-in-FL]

249. But would you like your mechanic operating or removing your infected appendix?

Doctors don't radiate a prostate when you have throat cancer, or give cold medication as chemotherapy. Simply put, you cannot have people with no freaking clue of what they are looking for (confusing Macbook air's with bombs), have no regards for your privacy (no attemps at even shielding the view or private conversations from others, being treated like a child in front of everyone), or have no knowledge of what even the most basic medical apparatus or prosthesis look like, touching on you like you have been under arrest. Airports are starting to look like freaking livestock markets where humanity has been abandoned.

As a healthcare worker I could be accused at anytime of battery or assault for what I have seen done to people by "some" TSA agents (some, because I have seen very helpful and pleasant people working in airports despite the bad apples). So no, I would not dare compare healthcare and airport security. I would not be surprised if those who go beyond their "call" during searches would be praised thus giving a green light to further abuses of power. Healthcare workers follow a code of ethics ("do no harm") that is enforced I don't think the TSA follow one as everyone is treated as we were guilty of a crime. Patient information and privacy is as Biden said "a big fucking deal" in healthcare. So much that I am not even allowed to retrieve MY OWN medical information or results of examinations I had in the past.

Have you heard of the images recorded by the police (when they were not supposed to do that) of people getting body scans? You would NOT see information like that coming out of a hospital and posted in the internet to be viewed by everyone on YouTube or Gizmodo.

Maybe you don't care to be patted down (I might be uncomfortable with it but... it is THEIR trauma not mine) or finding your scanned pictures in the internet but there are MANY americans that cherish their privacy and oppose being touched either because of religion or because of reasons that it is not my business or the TSA to know. Those check ups are being done mostly as a show of force. Terrorists don't need planes to accomplish mass murder and this added security measure is in my opinion too invasive and will only cause delays and resentment against the TSA. I think we have given up too many liberties already. it is time for them to come with a solutions that do not involve further violations of our dignity.

[TicketyBoo]

258. The TSA employees

are doing the terrorists' job -- terrorizing Americans. Maybe not everyone is terrorized by this, but a lot of people are.

Other people have mentioned the trauma this could cause rape victims, and think about what this means for people who have lived through child molestation?

This is just plain awful, not to mention ineffective at preventing bombers boarding planes.

[Lost-in-FL]

264. Ramen! nt

[CreekDog]

57. why are you comparing getting on a plane with a mammogram?

:wtf:

[treestar]

214. Because they are both preventative measures.

[CreekDog]

224. That's the post where you became a parody of yourself

Holy Moley! :rofl:

[Caretha]

147. Oh for God's sake

Stop comparing having a medical procedure with boarding a fucking plane!

[treestar]

213. There is a similarity

Medical procedures are for your greater good. So is plane security. Do you suppose your chance of dying of undetected cancer is not like your chances of dying from undetected terror plots? I can compare it because it is comparable.

[Caretha]

228. You are hopeless

This is theater and intrusively patting down, groping whatever isn't doing a damn thing to make you safer, but go ahead and think that all you want. I'm quite familiar with someone who is delusional and paranoid, and I know no matter what I say or do, they aren't going to get over their paranoia, so I honestly realize I can't show or make you see reality either.

[pecwae]

241. Of course no one says this about medical procedures.

That's the point! Medical procedures are MEDICAL carried out by trained MEDICAL personnel. How are you arriving at TSA = medical personnel??

Which is more important - protect the governments fragile feelings or upholding our constitutional rights?

[City Lights]

28. Unrec.

:eyes:

[Texasgal]

33. Classic Poop N' Swoop.

:eyes:

[madinmaryland]

36. Yeap. The old P-n-R Syndrome.

:eyes:

[Upton]

34. Agreed..

much ado about nothing. Some folks, for whatever reason, are just not comfortable with their own bodies.

It's just the latest outrage..

[madinmaryland]

66. So you don't mind a rent-a-cop groping your junk??

[Upton]

80. Actually..

it would depend upon who is doing the groping. And I'm not all that sure this is making anyone safer. However, I do agree with the OP's premise that much of the opposition has it's roots in puritan attitudes..

[seabeyond]

94. what about europe and canada laughing at us allowing us to experience this

and their unwillingness to experience? is it cause they too embrace american puritism?

[madinmaryland]

156. I realize you have not been touched in a very long time as you have commented

about in the sports forum, but for most of the rest of us, it is a violation of our personal space.

And regardless of what part of the world you live in, violating one's personal space is a violation. This has nothing to do with puritanicalism.

[nadinbrzezinski]

98. They are NOT rent a cops

Now if the GOP manages to privatize it, they will once again be rent a cops, paid one third of tsa...tell me just how much worst that will be?

[madinmaryland]

177. True, they are not rent-a-cops. They are full-time employees of the TSA.

In no way do I want to see them privatized, and I did not say or imply that.

I will say that when this whole TSA scheme was invented the employees at the time were just off the street with little background in security work. It has improved vastly over the last few years as the employees came up to speed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

189. There you go, but Wackenhut is licking chops

[SammyWinstonJack]

74. Yeah that's it and nothing more.

:eyes:

[seabeyond]

90. people that have been molested as children tend to throw their naked body out there more

often, because of being so messed up from sexual abuse at a young age. so you are telling me, these people are the ones healthy adn anyone that has a bet of self respect then they are "uncomfortable" with their bodies?

hm

[Lost-in-FL]

91. Lol!! nt

[saigon68]

39. Have your daughter's privates assaulted by simple minded thugs

Not me --not in amerika

I didn't fight for this shit

[Paladin]

42. I'll Agree With You To This Extent:

Given that the U.S.A. is now a country where the government has officially sanctioned and carried out the invasive torture of individuals on a regular basis---utilizing techniques for which WWII Axis military figures were found to be criminals---all this new-found outrage about the TSA is way late. Thanks once again, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush.....

[LeFleur1]

59. Luggage Searches?

Is all luggage searched before being loaded on planes?

You know sometimes when you agree with people, agree, agree, oops, disagree. The line has been crossed.
That's how I feel about this plane boarding debacle. I agree we should search cargo on all planes, trains, etc. Metal detectors or suspicious behavior searches, yes. But this latest debacle?
Where are the supporters of the Constitution? This is a violation of our right to privacy, pure and simple. I don't understand why there isn't a full fledged revolt against it. You wanna fight for something? Taking everyone's rights because some dipshit is nuttier than a fruitcake and wants to kill himself and everyone around him/her is not something I understand at all. BUT guns can be carried to political rallies. The whole damn country is turned upside down.

Maybe if the airlines begin to go broke again the government will stop this sh**. And for Obama to say that these types of "searches" are frustrating but necessary...I'll believe his tepid response when his he, his wife, his mother in law, and his daughter's go through the patting/squeezing lines or the scanners and then we see them on YouTube.

Unbelievable.

[enlightenment]

44. Actually, you're more of a Puritan than the folks who

object to being treated like criminals without cause.

The idea that Puritans objected to sex is an old example of history ill-taught. They liked it just fine - to the point that in some areas over 50% of first children born to a couple were 'nine-pound premmies' (conceived before marriage).

What Puritans actually were is closer to you - complacent in the face of authority. They maintained an extremely hierarchical and patriarchal authority structure that used illogical justifications to maintain control over the majority.

This issue isn't about sex. It is about personal autonomy, privacy, and self-respect. Obviously none of those things matter to you, but it hardly makes your opinion relevant enough to accuse others of being juvenile.

[Onlooker]

50. I think attitudes like yours cause victimization

Working with people who have been victims of rape or other forms of abuse tells me that have a tendency to magnify things like nudity and sex to such extremes that it makes the victims feel even worse. If we were more European in our sexual mores, people wouldn't be traumatized by such things as nudity or being touched, and they'd have an easier time dealing with sexual abuse. Personal autonomy, privacy, and self-respect are all well and good, and if we want to wage that battle, let's wage it where it really matters -- in the struggle for equality by women, gays, and other minorities; in decent wages for working people; in programs that protect kids. Winning the pat down issue won't change anything, except for people who blush easily.

[katnapped]

54. OH DAMN YOU DIDN'T JUST GO THERE!

So according to your thinking rape victims should "just get over it"?

WOW :wtf:

[Onlooker]

158. Can't you read?

I work with people who have been victims of sexual abuse. Often their first hurdle in recovery is coming to terms with a terrible embarrassment and the reality that a lot people look down upon them for being abused. Once the survivors can begin to deal with the sexual aspects of the crime, you still have the physical aspects of the crime and the trauma to contend with, but our Puritanism makes it that much more difficult to deal with the sexual aspects of the crime.

Your facile response tells me that you're not speaking from the heart, but rather by rote.

[polly7]

161. Bull* that's the first hurdle.

Getting back a sense of safety and being in control of their own body and mind is the first hurdle. 'Embarrassment', because of what others think of them, is probably near to the last.

[Onlooker]

176. You're wrong

Your first hurdle is comprised of many pieces. For any us, the very first step when dealing with someone who was a victim of sexual abuse is to treat them with dignity. It takes many months to help a person achieve a sense of safety. Once the shame and embarrassment lessens, they will be more open to talking about what happened.

[polly7]

179. And you're nuts.

Believe me ...... because I know personally what the 'first hurdle' is, and it sure as hell wasn't what anyone thought of me.

Unbelievable.

[Onlooker]

181. I do believe you

but for many survivors of sexual abuse the biggest issue is the breakdown of trust, which has quite a bit do do with what other people are thinking them. But, that's not true for everyone. I'm thinking mostly of those with PTSD.

[polly7]

184. You have no clue what you're talking about. n/t.

[polly7]

55. Easier time dealing with sexual abuse?

Sorry ...... go to any shelter and hear a few stories from women in the sex trade ...... who certainly are not bothered by nudity or touching, and are just as devastated as anyone else. Do you know anything about rape or sexual assault, the trauma of having no control, being powerless? Because that's what sexual abuse is all about. Control, rage, hate. Whether one is a puritan in their beliefs or not, has nothing to do with the devastation it leaves.

I can't believe you worked with victims. Did you actually tell them if they weren't so inhibited, they'd get over it easier?

[Onlooker]

164. Yes, I do

And the reality is that victims of sexual abuse often live in areas where they are further victimized by being teased or marginalized because of what happened to them. The national obsession with the shame of sex is not healing for victims of sexual abuse, but perhaps the mental health programs to which you devote your time are different than the inner-city one that I work in.

[polly7]

169. I don't devote my time to mental health programs, I've volunteered

at shelters housing women who've been abused and assaulted, including some who made a living selling sex. It has nothing to do with 'sex' and being obsessed with it. These women could care less what anyone thought of them.

[Onlooker]

178. That's not my experience

In one on one therapy, women and men talk very much about what people think of them, and what they think of themselves. In fact, the most common symptoms is a break down of trust, which is very much an issue about what people think of them.

[polly7]

180. 'Breakdown of trust' is much different than what you were saying. n/t.

[seabeyond]

170. shame of sex my fuckin ass. a nation of obsession with sex, in all ways

every friggin moment, of every day. tell me where the shame is, but the fundies of extremes and see where the obsession of sex is thru media.

i am amazed soemone so very in the know limits the vision of sexuality in the u.s. to only puritan when we are way beyond that. limited thinking.

[enlightenment]

60. Wow.

Typical reflex attack, lacking any form of logic and having nothing to do with my response. How very - sophomoric.

You certainly don't like having a mirror held to your own attitude, do you?

[Odin2005]

79. What a sick, disgusting post.

:puke:

[Dappleganger]

83. You couldn't be more wrong.

I guess you missed the German strip-down in protest of impending TSA-like laws there?

Unwanted touching is unwanted touching--it has nothing to do with puritanical views.

[seabeyond]

96. i think you are throwing out opinion as fact. i am tired of people telling me i am puritan

or this nation is puritan because i dont go along with your agenda.

[Odin2005]

97. *APPLAUSE*

:applause:

[TriMera]

105. You really don't see hypocracy in your statement?

You can't talk about LGBT equality with regards to what's going on here. One of the victimized groups that you are downplaying are trans-gendered people. Think about people who are finally dealing with serious life-long body image issues and suddenly they are subjected to this crap, and in a very public way. Can you even imagine the damage that could do, emotionally? I guess they are just being Puritanical. :grr:

Oh, and if you want to see the German reaction...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZSEf_4F3jk&has_verified=1

[Onlooker]

187. But that's sort of my point

If we didn't treat nudity as perverse yet sacrosanct, it wouldn't be so embarrassing. Just as people are able today to talk about birth control, ED, and so on, it would be better for everyone if we weren't so obsessed about these things. That said, I suppose you're right about pre-op transgendered people. I hadn't thought of that.

[TheKentuckian]

230. Why the hell should my nudity or clothing be dictated to give surrender monkeys

an illusion of security.

We have a right to self determination, freedom of expression, as well as to be secure in my person and property unless there is reason for suspicion at the least.

Being comfortable with the human body and/or sexuality has nothing to do with basic human rights.

[nadinbrzezinski]

110. Wow! Have you like ever dealt with actual rape victims?

Oh my

[seabeyond]

114. if a rape victim felt better about naked body, and not sexually oppressed, wouldnt be bothered

by the rape

didnt you know

the poster makes absolutely no sense, making up things as he/she goes

[Onlooker]

162. Wow, blinded by your own ignorance

That's not what I said at all.

[seabeyond]

165. no. someone who professes to be "educated" yet decides what all of our problems are

ignoring the real issue that we have with the naked scans and gropes.

[Onlooker]

160. Yes, I work with them

If you worked with such victims, you would know that in their own communities they are often looked down upon and taunted with questions like, "How did you let that happen to you?" The way we sanctify sexuality in our society makes abuse that much worse for the survivor. First the survivor needs to deal with the embarrassment and ostracism that comes with abuse, before they can deal with the physical abuse and the symptoms of trauma. I suspect that you limit yourself to a more enlightened community that doesn't have the insensitivities to which I have now exposed your tender ears. Unfortunately, the survivors of such abuse often live in rough, insensitive parts of town.

[Pithlet]

115. This is one of the worst things I've ever seen posted here. Ever.

And I've been here since 2001. Wow.

[CreekDog]

231. look at 160

it goes on like this...

[mentalsolstice]

116. I can't believe you work with rape victims...no way!

I do work with rape victims, and accompany them when they have their rape kit done...your statement makes no sense whatsoever. Bullshit!

[Onlooker]

168. Do you think our national obsession with sex is helpful to victims of rape?

Do you address their issues of shame and embarrassment? Or the taunts they face? I work with them one on one as a therapist and hear the stories of what it's like to live in their communities after they have been abused. We don't help them with their feelings of humiliation by saying that a mere pat down is humiliating.

[mentalsolstice]

192. If you really have this attitude, I would suggest you step away...

from doing this line of work, or else seek out some better education on the matter. I know you would not be able to hold such an attitude and work for my local SANE/Rape Response organization.

Rape and sexual abuse is about control, nothing else! The feeling survivors have about what happened to them is about that loss of control. I've never come across a survivor who felt guilty or embarrassed about the "naughty sex aspect." Instead they had feelings about what they could have done about preventing that loss of control. We always assure them that each case is individual, and the important thing is they survived. The perp made the decision to rob her of control, and only he alone could have stopped himself from committing a crime.

So no, the PTSD that a rape survivor may experience has nothing to with "ooohh, my body and sexual contact is naughty." It's about losing control (again) over who and how her body is being touched.

[Onlooker]

199. I agree with everything you're saying

Sexual abuse is about control, but to help the survivors you have to build trust and, frankly, I think it's best to let victims of such abuse know about the history of rape, how feminists in the 1970s took away the shame to make it something that could be reported and talked about. It's best to try to find power in their lives. But, when we say pat downs are practically rape, it simply reaffirms for the survivors that society thinks what happened to them makes them worthless. Think of it this way: When it's argued that rapists should get the sentences similar to murder, we are in effect saying to victims of rape that you're as good as dead because you were raped.

[polly7]

202. I'm quite sure these victims know the history of rape and don't need to be

lectured on it. 'Enhanced' pat-downs, aka groping genitals and breasts, may very well bring up the same feelings of powerlessness and panic the survivor already experienced. It's the unwanted touch and fear of it that causes the memories and panic. So yes, to them it may be like reliving the rape. Your last line makes no sense at all. Rape can destroy the soul, especially for those who've been abused for periods of time. They may 'feel' as good as dead if they've come out of it with depression and / or PTSD. You don't seem to understand enough to support anyone who's been through this.

[Onlooker]

204. I guess we disagree

Your view that rape destroys the soul is where we disagree. I believe these people always have a soul, even in complex trauma, and those of us who want to help them must help them embrace that soul and empower it, even in a society that in subtle ways trivializes rape by turning things like pat downs into forms of sexual abuse. If you work with people who have suffered in this way, try not to forget that their souls are still there.

[polly7]

205. Well, I'm just considering those who've not been able to live a life

without drugs, self-harm, life-long depression / PTSD / OCD and all the other little gems. Embrace and empower the soul by humiliating them further for being too hung up on the sex / nudity .... that's just so unreal it's hard to take you seriously. You're the one trivializing rape. What is it about not having control of your own body that you don't understand? Being touched by strangers against your will IS a form of 'mental' rape, all over again. When one of these people panics, I hope they don't get hurt for it, because it will happen. imo.

:thumbsdown:

[mentalsolstice]

206. I still say you need to step away from counseling rape survivors

Puritan attitudes have nothing to do with how a survivor internalizes and relives her experiences. I daresay that rape survivors in a country like France, where attitudes about nudity and sex are very liberal, would experience the TSA pat-downs and other unwanted touching in much the same way a woman in the USA does. BTW, I've gone through body searches much more detailed than the TSA, I had no problem with it. However, I can understand where others would not want this loss of control visited upon them.

And to suggest more lesser sentences for perps and molestors, because we want survivors to think what happened to them wasn't "that" bad...well that's worthy of a thread of its own. Gag, I can't believe I'm even discussing this with a self-described rape counselor.

[Onlooker]

212. This is a political discussion

I can understand why it's an issue, but I think the degree to which people are focused on in is what's absurd. Pat downs are a minor issue at best. There are vastly more important issues of civil liberties in my opinion.

No, I'm not suggesting a lesser sentence for perps, but we have to deal with the fact that when we equate rape with death, we send a terrible message to the survivors. I'm not sure what the answer is.

But, you know, this is a political forum, so the way one approaches clients is to meet them where they're at. I find that shame and trust are often problems, and there are many studies that support that.

[mentalsolstice]

221. Maybe it's minor to you

However, to proclaim yourself a rape counselor, and not understand that to a rape survivor, the loss of control over who touches her body and how, is probably at the top of her list of civil liberty issues...I doubt she gives a rats ass about what is happening with her luggage, as you seem to.

Again, slowly...the feelings that survivor experiences has to do with having someone doing something to her body without her consent or ability to control the situation. How she feels about unwanted touching is going to be vastly different from how you or I do...except that some of us in this thread are able to put ourselves in another person's shoes and remove ourselves from our own experiences.

[Onlooker]

229. In conclusion

I work with many people who have been victims of all sorts of abuse, but sadly sexual abuse is quite common. I do understand your point, but lament the fact that our Puritanical values tend to shame and marginalize people further, something that you choose to feed into. From a political perspective, I disagree with you. From a therapeutic perspective, should I have a client who might go on a plane, I will counsel him or her to look at alternative modes of transportation, but the people I work with do not have that kind of money. Perhaps you need to put yourself in another person's shoes and remove yourself from your own experiences. Not everyone is of means and lives in enlightened educated communities.

[polly7]

232. Maybe 'your' puritanical values shame and marginalize these people.

I feel bad for those you counsel. How humiliating to have their trauma trivialized by someone telling them they'd get over it quicker if they, society, whoever ...... wasn't so puritanical. They don't give a * about your values or anyone else's, they're trying to regain some sense of control and safety.

[Onlooker]

238. I find your comments unsophisticated

I don't think you even understand what I'm saying, so I won't bother anymore.

[polly7]

239. I find most of your comments bizzare. You don't seem to be able to

accept the idea that an assault victim above all else needs to regain a sense of control and security, and that being embarrassed by someone else's personal inhibitions when it comes to sex and nudity, (as you stated,) plays very little role in recovery. You want to make it the 'first hurdle' for them to get over, when they really have so many other more important things to deal with. Why?

[mentalsolstice]

235. Wow, you get better all the time

I work with survivors in Birmingham, AL, not exactly a place known for its wealth. Many women I've seen are homeless or in shelters...on the other hand we also have college students come in...but you love to assume much don't you, especially about things you are hopelessly uninformed of. I have the feeling that in spite of the beating you have received on this thread you still don't get it. I am certainly neither a Puritan nor someone that further victimizes or marginalizes people. I'm all for empowerment. However, I understand that certain people may have involuntary reactions (PTSD) to situations where they perceive a loss of control.

Who else are you going to advise to not travel? What happens when pat downs and screenings come to the bus, train, subway?

[Onlooker]

236. I think you're missing my point altogether

In a less Puritanical society, I believe people are less afraid. We live in a very paranoid society that only exacerbates PTSD. I'm lamenting the political landscape in which we live, and it's my feeling that when we feed into paranoia it's not helpful. That said, the fact is we are a paranoid society, and I must help people find ways to cope within that context. For instance, those who travel by train or bus should try to avoid rush hours and busy lines. As I'm sure you know, with or without pat downs, those with PTSD have a hard time using mass transit. If we start having pat downs on buses or trains, I would object, unless there have been repeated terrorist attacks on buses and trains, which I don't think would be good for those with PTSD or anyone else for that matter. I obviously don't express my political views to clients, though when exploring the oppressiveness of shame, it's often worth pointing out the progress we've made.

[mentalsolstice]

250. You keep digging yourself in a hole

You suggest that I feed into Puritanical views and further stigmatize and victimize...Your suggestion that sexual assault survivors can no longer partake in air travel, whereas they could have a year ago, without calling up memories of a loss of control over their bodies...that's not stigmatizing them?

What about a person with a disability...are you going to tell them to not travel by air? Because their rights to dignity and privacy are also being compromised...

In many instances, air travel is the only way to respond in an emergency...to tell certain protected groups they no longer can expect that right...not good!

I guess you don't understand the "slippery slope." Sexual assault survivors, persons with disabilities, children, the elderly, racial/religious minorities, etc., they have to give up their right to travel a certain way...and then what else are we going to expect them to give up for "the greater good."

I've been through more invasive bodily searches than what the TSA is doing. I understood it was part of my chosen profession to represent my clients. I've had to squat before a mirror, show what was in my panties, shake out my breasts...I've done it all, except for the full strip/bodily cavity search. However, having had that experience, I understand where a lesser search can be especially traumatizing for a sexual assault survivor, person with a disability, elderly person, etc., and just to go through a mode of travel that has been common for 50+ years. This is not where I want my country going. Legally and morally, we're on a very slippery slope.

eta: ashamedly I left out GLBTQ persons in being possibly discriminated against...oh, I bet we'll be seeing a lot there...so I guess they need to take the bus as well?

[Matariki]

122. There is NO WAY you work with victims of rape and abuse.

And in the remote possibility that you actually do, there is NO WAY you actually listen to a word they say.

I'm really disgusted by the things you've posted in this thread.

[Onlooker]

172. Man, I feel I have to respond to everyone

When you sit one on one with inner city victims of physical or sexual abuse, you hear about the day to day shame and embarrassment they experience, even taunts or ostracization from friends and people in their communities. When we treat a pat down as practically a form of rape it only further shames the survivors of abuse.

[polly7]

183. Do you live in Iran? n/t.

[bluedigger]

175. "they'd have an easier time dealing with sexual abuse"

I wanted to ignore this. Truly I did, as so many others have already pointed out your insensitivity. But I can't. I'll just add this.

There is a time for acceptance and recovery for abuse after the fact, but there is never a good time for resignation to potential future abuse. I can only surmise that your first name must be "Passive", Onlooker.

[AnArmyVeteran]

My Dad always said, "the first one can come anytime, but the rest take 9 months"

Unrelated but interesting: I heard a statistic that showed 1 in 10 babies born were not from the husband. I thought that was high but who knows. A lot of women might be fooling around.

[enlightenment]

78. Always interesting!

It was less of an issue before western societies got caught up in the concept of primogeniture.

[AnArmyVeteran]

252. Yeah, as possessions were amassed control over those possessions became very important.

So to pass down and keep wealth, laws were enacted so children could retain their parent's wealth even though they were deadbeats, useless and nothing more than village idiots. Each of the Sam Walton offspring merely had to squirm out of there momma's womb to get 20 billion apiece. The Koch brothers would both be washing windshields on street corners if not for billions dumped in their lazy, deranged and pompous laps.

The right-wing even longs to have a ruling class full of deadbeat rich idiots. They actually worship them, believing anyone with massive wealth earned their riches. And those on the right are too damned ignorant and stupid to realize they are mindlessly supporting the very people who seek to destroy their jobs, their way of life and even the health of their families.

[Barack_America]

127. This is one of the best posts I've ever read on DU.

Seriously.

Succinct, informative and a direct rebuttal of the OP.

[Liberal Veteran]

47. So essentially, your argument is "Is if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear?"

Can you please tell us less-evolved types when we should feel our privacy is invaded enough since we are too stupid to figure it out for ourselves?

[Greyhound]

53. Yes. Now where have we heard this argument before?

Every time the authoritarians commit another outrage, these defenders pop up to tell us how stupid we are to object to "what is clearly in our best interests".

I'm really sick of this and them.

[katnapped]

56. Hey come on CLAP LOUDER! n/t

[whatchamacallit]

63. Ha, you're not safer

Not in the least:crazy:

[Nye Bevan]

64. OK. We'll believe you if you post a naked picture of yourself. (nt)

[Lost-in-FL]

69. ewwwwww! lol. nt

[katnapped]

70. 47 minutes since he posted and still no picture yet n/t

[fishwax]

68. you're right that nudity isn't sex, but it wouldn't follow that strip searches are no big deal

The issue of sex wouldn't be what's at issue in a strip search--the issue of power would.

I think your leap to puritanism is wholly unsubstantiated. Not wanting agents of the state to grope you isn't puritanism, whether the agent enjoys it or not. (Though I don't think TSA agents should be demonized in this discussion--from what I understand, most TSA agents aren't exactly thrilled about this.)

[Odin2005]

75. Fascism apologist BULLSHIT. This is about PRIVACY.

[Liberal Veteran]

82. Agreed. I feel like the Kabuki Dance required to get on a plane now...

...has lessened my enjoyment of flying to the point that I fucking hate something I used to love.

The capstone on that was the day after my father died, I got selected for secondary screening and put into a glass box and felt up without the benefit of dinner or a movie.

[TBF]

89. Yup, 4th amendment -

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The fascists have now thrown it under the bus along with everything else ...

[malaise]

85. In my case it's as simple as

I hate strangers touching me.

[Matariki]

86. Before making sophomoric arguments, you should educate yourself.

It's a very valid concern to want to stop the erosions of privacy rights. This is a clear violation of the constitution and at the rate we've been going you have to ask yourself "what's next?"

Here's one very valid reason why people are 'caught up' in this issue, btw:

http://wewontfly.com/sexual-assault-survivor-molestation-not-accpetable

<snip>
The gravity of sex crime is such that, it often takes people years to even say the word (assault or rape). Normally after another trauma, car accident, death of a loved one etc…..then the sexual-sins come back to haunt them. Many triggers cause the victim to feel, all of the sudden, out of control like they did while they were being abused. This leads to, in varying degrees: panic attacks (i.e., high blood pressure, sweating, nausea, diarrhea, inability to concentrate, absolute fidgetiness, non-functioning, etc.).

Many assault victims suffer, when their memories are triggered (especially by inappropriate touch by a person perceived by the past victim, to be in a place of power).

There are pretty universal triggers for the onset of these symptoms (although individuals do vary) this one however goes for everybody. Being fondled by someone, in the areas you were always taught were “bad touch” spots, by a person in power (power being key). Breast twists, buttocks felt up, and yes, your pants pulled up until they can reach your crotch, down your inner thighs, you get the picture.

Molestation over the clothes of people, past victims or not, is not acceptable. If you were not wearing a TSA badge, you would be in prison!

[CrispyQ]

92. While I think this is a gross invasion of our privacy & personal space,

I'm more alarmed that there was no outrage about the government reading emails & tapping phones without a warrant & the ability to break into people's houses without a warrant. Where was the outrage when those things were being implemented? Yes, there was lots of outrage on DU, but in mainstream America, not so much. Even now, how many people care about those things?

My fave bumper sticker of all time:

[Pithlet]

101. That's not true.

There has been outrage over those things as well. Plenty of people have been angry over those things as well, and not just on DU.

[pipi_k]

104. Maybe the problem there was...

People weren't being exposed to it actually happening.

It's much easier to be outraged over something we can witness than something we didn't see happen.


My opinion, anyway

:shrug:

[TicketyBoo]

259. I agree.

That's absolutely the case. Spy on me, and it's likely that I am not aware of it.

Grab my crotch, and it gets my attention.

[nadinbrzezinski]

139. I did far more against the unpatriotic act than just a sticker

And quite frankly I am shocked I am not on that no fly list...

The IRS harassment was fun though.

[HopeHoops]

95. Oh boy. Where to start. Well, Onlooker, get used to the fascism you seem comfortable with.

We have this obscure and little known thing in the U.S. Constitution called the Fourth Amendment. Most wingnuts are only familiar with the Second Amendment but don't know the exact wording, but that's another issue. They may not "impede" your freedom, but acceptance of it is voluntary submission to erosion of your freedom. I'll walk naked down the street if I feel like it and might get arrested (although I haven't yet). It isn't about who sees what or getting "touched". It is about our rights as U.S. citizens and the gradual elimination of our rights that PNAC has been after for many years now. Aren't you even a little curious as to why former TSA head Chertoff is making a fortune off of these scanners (made in Malaysia, by the way - not the USA)?

It isn't sophomoric - it is fundamental to what our country was founded upon. "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin.

[nadinbrzezinski]

100. Read my sig

Willing frog

[WinkyDink]

111. DO YOU WEAR A COLOSTOMY OR UROSTOMY BAG? You'd better hope you never fly with one:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40291856/ns/travel-news

[Gin]

118. females who wear panty liners will not get cleared by the scanner

and will be patted down for an suspected item in the groin....I equate this to being frisked and the crime was buying a ticket to fly.

[WinkyDink]

163. I think the term used SHOULD be "frisked," as that is precisely what is being done.

[seabeyond]

167. yet cops say this is beyond what they are allowed to do. nt

[Gin]

210. are you serious? what are the cops allowed to do?

[TheKentuckian]

117. What is sophomoric is your gross misunderstanding of the serious concerns here.

These searches DO impede your freedoms. Just because you happen to like the choices made for you does not mean you had a choice.

We have every right to be secure in our persons and possessions.

[Arctic Dave]

119. And the Douche-nozzle Post of the Year Award goes to...

Flame bait in the morning.

[alcibiades_mystery]

120. Totally agree...I'm completely flummoxed by the DU response on this

Which includes, among other stupidities, accusing the TSA employees of child molestation.

People are off the fucking wall.

[whatchamacallit]

124. Lay on down man

I'm sure you'll be cool with the next little "frustrating inconvenience" too.

[rainlillie]

128. LOL! I swear I was thinking the same thing.

[whatchamacallit]

131. I know, it's all so funny huh

:eyes:

[rainlillie]

134. LOL! It is funny for people to make reckless comments saying TSA workers are molesting kids

in front of their parents at the airport.

[whatchamacallit]

141. Wasn't a claim I made

you have kids? How about pride?

[rainlillie]

143. I have kids and commonsense If I were opposed to my kids being pat down

guess what? I wouldn't consent to it. It seems so easy to just refuse and walk away. It's not that complicated.

[whatchamacallit]

145. Kinda surprised you're not opposed

different strokes...

[TicketyBoo]

263. Not complicated, but expensive.

I've read that a $10,000-$11,000 fine applies if you try to "just refuse and walk away."

[TicketyBoo]

261. Check it out.

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/politics/it-would-be-sexual-molestation.html

[Name removed]

132. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TicketyBoo]

260. You DID see this, didn't you?

http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/politics/it-would-be-sexual-molestation.html

[rainlillie]

126. I agree with you.

[DainBramaged]

130. Forcing young children through the scanners and forcing pat downs on them

is not only sophomoric but disgusting. Common sense should apply, but as with the TSA, common sense doesn't matter on DU either.

Too bad you think that giving up our freedoms to be safe is more important than those freedoms themselves.

I also guess it's OK with you that our emails, text messages and phone calls are screened without permission so YOU can feel safe?


What's next, they can search my house without cause so that YOU can feel safe?


:puke:

[taught_me_patience]

133. I agree that it's been blown way out of proportion on DU

People are acting like it's the end of the fourth amendment as we know it. I'm not happy about it... but I ain't going to stop flying because of it.

[laughingliberal]

142. No. The end of the 4th amendment as we knew it happened years ago. This is just the next installment

Can't wait to see what's next.

[sarcasmo]

146. Guess you don't mind giving up you're 4th amendment rights. OBEY!

[TexasObserver]

149. The opinion in the original post is sophomoric. This matters.

I invite you to spend a few years studying the issue of civil liberties in our country, so you can understand why this is more important than whether one's genitals are seen by someone.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

152. LOL. maybe your luggage is more private to you, but my boobs are more private to me,

inane argument

[varelse]

155. As a victim of childhood sexual abuse, I have different feelings about this than you do.

Being touched by strangers (or even friends, if we're honest) *at all* is problematic for me. Your reality is shaped by your experience - it is not a universal reality, but a personal one.

[bluestate10]

174. Right.

It is instructive that some of the same people decrying the pat-downs by the TSA say that the Israeli method is better. Having been through the Israeli method numerous time, I can say that it is not better and is more intrusive to many passengers. The Israeli method involves physical searches of every item in a passenger's luggage, if the passenger gets flagged during rotating interviews either because the passenger is randomly selected or the passenger gets flustered by the questions. Searches are not done unless a passenger gets "flagged" during rotating interviews by rather inexperienced Israeli security people, I have passed every visit without a search. I also know from having observed, that a trained, patient, and determined terrorist can rather easily defeat the Israeli system and blow a plane leaving that country's only international airport out of the sky. US and european airports are more inviting targets for the most seasoned, hardened terrorists, mostly because terrorists gain more refute among their circles by destroying something in the West or by causing general chaos and fear across Western airports.

[Tsiyu]

193. Nudity is not the issue here

I'm not a prude and I have no vain illusions about my bod.

This is about more than "sex."

This is about a man brought to tears before his flight because the dumbass TSA workers dislodged his urostomy bag and spilled urine all over him. Sexy?

This is about a breast cancer survivor having to remove her prosthesis. Is that an aversion to sex or merely an aversion to forcing sick people to suffer repeated indignities every time they fly?

This is about children ( and 13 is still a child) - who are taught not to allow strangers to touch them or remove their clothes - having to submit to having strangers feel up their genitals and remove their clothing if they like. Is that about puritanical attitudes or more about healthy boundaries we are supposed to teach our children?

"Yes, son. They think you might be a terrorist." Great Constitution Lesson there - kids: you are each assumed to be a deadly, dangerous person unless we can touch your penis!

This is about people traumatized by sexual abuse forced to undergo invasive fondling, which can be extremely detrimental to their mental health and feelings of security. Is that about sex to you, or is that about a society that SHOULD equate freedom and liberty with freedom from being further traumatized when one has been a victim?



How selfish and callous some have become! And how rapidly they try to humilate anyone who isn't facing exactly the same challenges they are!

I can't be so callous, sorry. I was on a "list" for years, which amazed my family when they could check in at the curb but I had to always "step inside and answer some questions." I've been through many airport screenings and pat downs. NEVER was I groped or fondled in the way they are doing it now, when i flew out of Amsterdam, London, LA, Atlanta.....

Maybe I won't fly any more, but i sure as hell can hate this for the people who will suffer such a wasteful, degrading unconstitutional attack on their persons, merely to travel.

[TK421]

218. Nudity is an issue to some...what happened to right of privacy?

has that been completely thrown out the fucking window? Especially if its some stranger viewing the insides of something you take pains to cover, with clothing, like most of us do? Why do any of us wear clothing to begin with? Why don't any of us walk around naked?

This is fucking ridiculous

[TK421]

217. I think your user-name is ironic pointing to this particular topic...but carry on, please n/t

[jemelanson]

219. Ben Franklin said it best.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Benjamin Franklin, Historical Review of Pennsylvania, 1759

[coyote]

223. Irrational Fear

Submitting to a virtual strip search or pat down because 4 planes out of 200 million have been hijacked it the last 10 years. So you have 1 in 50,000,000 chance of your plane being hijacked in the next 10 years.

You have better odds of:
Contracting the human version of mad cow disease 1 in 40,000,000.
Dying from a mountain lion attack in California 1 in 32,000,000
Dying from a part falling off an airplane 1 in 10,000,000
Legal execution
Contact with hot tap water, food poisoning, choking on food, murder, drowning in the bathtub, slipping in the shower are all more likely ways of dying than a terrorist hijacking/bombing on a plane.

You are more likely to be an astronaut, win an Olympic medal, be elected president, get away with murder, date a supermodel, be a pro athlete, win an academy award, or have a NY Times best seller.

[CreekDog]

233. I'll take the advice of a rape counselor who says touching one's stuff worse than their bodies

I'll take that opinion for what it's worth --which is extremely little.

[laughingliberal]

242. The civil liberties are the issue. nt

[Shining Jack]

243. Please bend over.

This will not impede your freedom in any way.

[ProudDad]

245. It is ALL about Civil Liberties

and the fact that the "war on terra(tm)" is BULLSHIT designed to solidify the "Permanent War Economy(tm)" here in police state Corporate States of Amerika...

As for "sex", this has nothing to do with the sex act -- it's a sexual crime just like rape or molestation because of the power relationship...

Or are you going to say we get what we deserve because we want to fly somewhere?

[Jamastiene]

251. I regret that I only have one Unrec

that I can give this OP.

I would hate to think of what rape and sexual abuse victims go through in your office.

[underseasurveyor]

255. So sayeth the sheep

Baaaa.

I can't WAIT to see what you're willing to give up or put up with next.

[TicketyBoo]

262. This much I'll say…

…if I were ever unfortunate enough to be the victim of rape, I sure as hell wouldn't want YOU "counseling" me!

[Evoman]

265. This is one of the stupidest fucking posts ever.

I'm no fucking puritan. I've got no problem showing people my wang, and I sure don't have problems getting my wang touched.

WHEN I FUCKING WANT YOU TO.

But I sure as hell don't want some asshole who I don't know feeling me up. It's not about being puritanical....it's about having boundaries. You don't touch me without my permission, you don't come into my home without my permission, and you don't keep me somewhere I don't want to be without my permission. That's the contract I make with the world.

And if someone breaks my contract, I break them.

[Evoman]

266. That's also why I'm not going to fly to the states anymore.

Because in order to fly, I've got two choices....show my wang, or get it felt up. And I can't do either without serious repercussions to TSA dick wad who does it, and to me when I get sent to jail. And know who I blame for not being able to travel....cowards who accept this bullshit and will bend over without protest. Fuck you and fuck the TSA.